Teachers help me out please...

[The Captain]

I've seen a lot in the news (and it's come up in other threads) the change in the education system that will be caused by "Common Core".

DD's school (private) sent home a letter explaining that the teaching plans/programs already adhered to many tennants of this and that the impact to the school of adoption would be minimal.

I've spent some time going through the standards as explained here:

www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy/RL/5

and can't understand why some folks are up in arms about them (http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/10/04/20759234-parents-teachers-join-pockets-of-rebellion-against-common-core?lite&ocid=msnhp&pos=4)

It seems to me to be a good thing to have consistent, well defined standards that are clear at each grade level.

Obviously I'm missing something, please - seriously - what am I missing?  I think this will force some kids to be left behind (who should have been held back already), does it clash with NCLB?  Is that the problem?

(BTW - have to call out this quote from a mom who choose to homeschool her kid rather than have him meet the core standards)

"You're gonna kill them is what you're gonna do," she said.

She is proud to be teaching out of a book that's almost a century old.  Yea, her kid will be able to compete in a global workforce

[973beachbum]

My kids have had their schools on the common core standards for at least 3 years.  I think I remember hearing that the state standards were about the same before so other than learning different "code numbers", can't remember what they are called, for listing what was taught it is pretty much the same.

I will add that I actually have no problem with teaching to the test as long as the test accurately reflects what they are supposed to have learned. 

[teen persuasion]

I read that article about the rebellion against the Common Core, and it confused me.  I've been trying to understand just what exactly Common Core IS for weeks, and I am still confused.  I read everything I find on it, I've been asking DH (a HS ELA teacher) and he can't articulate what it is. 

What DH does not like about CC is that the emphasis has been shifted from literature to non-fiction; I can't recall what the percentage is, but it is majority NF.

What I'm hearing from my HS kids is about the pre- and post-testing.  Each teacher has to create a multiple choice test on what they expect the students to know at the end of the course.  The kids have to take the test before beginning the coursework (waste of class time), and again at the end of the course; the scores are compared and hopefully show that their mastery of the topic has increased.  The teachers actually tell the students to "make pretty pictures" in the pre-test (it is a Scantron test), i.e. guess randomly so that scores improve at the post test.  DH does not like that each teacher makes their own test - should be standard for the course.

What I'm seeing in my ES child is that the constant push push push is going to backfire and turn kids off to reading and learning.  My kids LOVE to read (we call them book junkies).  DS5 is expected to read 15 minutes per day, 7 days a week, discuss it w/ an adult, and write 2 sentences about what he read (with very specific requirements:where, when, why, something, something, something else).  The detailed writing part makes him shut down and not even want to read.  

When I met w/ DS5's teacher at open house, she mentioned that all the CC requirements are just increasing the "stuff" that has to get forced into the school day, so they are trying to make subjects work triple and quadruple duty.  I've noticed that while DS5 understands the math concepts that he is covering, he keeps bringing home tests <80 that I need to sign (unacceptable), and the issue is the vocabulary portions of the test: product, factor, word form, expanded form, standard form, digit, place value.  Yeah, vocabulary tests have now been shifted from ELA to math class due to lack of time, and math is suffering.  He is 8 and in third grade.

My sister and I were discussing CC, and at her kids' school, apparently all grading will be on a 1-4 scale (like the ranking of the standardized tests that the kids take in grades 4 and 8: 1 is failing, 2 is failing, 3 is just ok but at least meets standards, 4 is excellent.  My nephews' school is interpreting 90's as 4, 80's as 3, 65-79 as 2, below 65 as 1.  My sister and other parents are objecting to the distribution of the grades, and the need for 2 "failing" ranks out of 4.

DH showed me a post from a disgruntled teacher to the Board of Regents about why she disliked CC.  She also saw that the pushing was turning off her third grader from learning.  The kids were supposed to infer the meaning of the word "boughten" from the text they were reading.  If the point of the new standards is to prepare our kids for the future work world, why are we frustrating them with archaic words that are generally considered "poor English"?  This is where I was confused by the article about the woman home schooling so she can use old spelling words and texts.  

I think that the change to CC is different in every state, since the states all had different standards before and now they are all supposed to be aligning them.  I just can't figure out what the Common Core actually IS.

[The Walk of the Penguin Mich]

What I'm seeing in my ES child is that the constant push push push is going to backfire and turn kids off to reading and learning. My kids LOVE to read (we call them book junkies). DS5 is expected to read 15 minutes per day, 7 days a week, discuss it w/ an adult, and write 2 sentences about what he read (with very specific requirements:where, when, why, something, something, something else). The detailed writing part makes him shut down and not even want to read.

I'd have to agree with this.  I read a LOT, there are probably 10+ books on my nightstand that I am waiting to read and usually read for about 30 min before turning out the light each night.  But if I was mandated to write a couple sentences or discuss it, it would take the joy out of it.

[justme]

What I'm hearing from my HS kids is about the pre- and post-testing. Each teacher has to create a multiple choice test on what they expect the students to know at the end of the course. The kids have to take the test before beginning the coursework (waste of class time), and again at the end of the course; the scores are compared and hopefully show that their mastery of the topic has increased.

Ugh, that's part of CC. I was doing that in my HS 10 years ago and it was ridiculous. It was an annoying waste of time. And then the teacher would have to spend the last week or so of the year teaching to that test because half that stuff was taught the last semester.

There were a few times I scored really well on the pre-tests. Pretty much a sign that I wasn't going to learn anything in the class all year...way to keep the brighter kids motivated.

[Deleted]

All common core is, is just what it implies.  A common core of knowledge that all kids should receive through their education.  It is a frame work of knowledge to which teachers can teach to in any way they see fit.  

It is less about standardized testing and more about understanding information.  Kids should know how to interpret and analyze things, not just recurgitate mulitple choice answers. 

[Formerly SK]

Oct 4, 2013 11:50:25 GMT -5 The Walk of the Penguin Mich said:

What I'm seeing in my ES child is that the constant push push push is going to backfire and turn kids off to reading and learning. My kids LOVE to read (we call them book junkies). DS5 is expected to read 15 minutes per day, 7 days a week, discuss it w/ an adult, and write 2 sentences about what he read (with very specific requirements:where, when, why, something, something, something else). The detailed writing part makes him shut down and not even want to read.

I'd have to agree with this.  I read a LOT, there are probably 10+ books on my nightstand that I am waiting to read and usually read for about 30 min before turning out the light each night.  But if I was mandated to write a couple sentences or discuss it, it would take the joy out of it.

I kinda see the other side.  I have a 2nd and 3rd grader, and I have them read 30 mins/night.  Many nights I have them read aloud to me, and when we get to the end of a chapter I ask them to summarize what happened and maybe give me an opinion of one of the plot twists.  The point is, I want to ensure they are actually understanding and interpreting what they are reading and not just sounding out the words.  I think this is a very important skill for early readers. 

As to OP's question, I don't have a problem with CC and I don't get the hysteria either.  I actually like that kids are now being directed towards non-fiction instead of endless essays about something that once happened to them.  Maybe we'll get a generation of kids who use data rather than emotions.

[teen persuasion]

Oct 4, 2013 12:08:29 GMT -5 ArchietheDragon said:

All common core is, is just what it implies.  A common core of knowledge that   It is a frame work of knowledge to which teachers can teach to in any way they see fit.  

It is less about standardized testing and more about understanding information.  Kids should know how to interpret and analyze things, not just recurgitate mulitple choice answers. 

I love your jokes, Archie!  That is one thing that CC is not.

[Deleted]

Oct 4, 2013 12:13:25 GMT -5 teen persuasion said:

Oct 4, 2013 12:08:29 GMT -5 ArchietheDragon said:

All common core is, is just what it implies.  A common core of knowledge that   It is a frame work of knowledge to which teachers can teach to in any way they see fit.  

It is less about standardized testing and more about understanding information.  Kids should know how to interpret and analyze things, not just recurgitate mulitple choice answers. 

I love your jokes, Archie!  That is one thing that CC is not.

It absolutely is.   It is not no child left behind which was an awful teach-to-the-test just to make sure kids passed and you got your funding.   There is nothing like that with CC.

[973beachbum]

teen persuasion my kids school use the 1-4 rubric for grading and now I love it.  The grading doesn't actuallly coorelate to failing or getting an A though.  A 1 isn't the same as saying someone is failing.  It simply means they are only beginning to grasp the subject on their grade level.  A 2 means they are getting close to grasping the grade level subject but are not there yet.  A 3 means they are working on grade level and grasped whatever subject they were doing.

A 4 would mean they were working above grade level and had grasped the concepts completely.  If a test is on grade level for the subject it just isn't possible to get a 4 on it even if they got a 100.  So my son has come home with tests that a 100% translated to a 3 and tests where a 90% translated to a 4.  the key is is the work at, above, or below grade level for that child. 

We were told the the purpose of the switch was to stop the ability for a student to get an A in math, for example, while doing work that is two grades lower than the grade they are in, or a student getting a C in a class doing work that is two grads above. 

[teen persuasion]

Oct 4, 2013 12:39:23 GMT -5 973beachbum said:

teen persuasion my kids school use the 1-4 rubric for grading and now I love it.  The grading doesn't actuallly coorelate to failing or getting an A though.  A 1 isn't the same as saying someone is failing.  It simply means they are only beginning to grasp the subject on their grade level.  A 2 means they are getting close to grasping the grade level subject but are not there yet.  A 3 means they are working on grade level and grasped whatever subject they were doing.

A 4 would mean they were working above grade level and had grasped the concepts completely.  If a test is on grade level for the subject it just isn't possible to get a 4 on it even if they got a 100.  So my son has come home with tests that a 100% translated to a 3 and tests where a 90% translated to a 4.  the key is is the work at, above, or below grade level for that child. 

We were told the the purpose of the switch was to stop the ability for a student to get an A in math, for example, while doing work that is two grades lower than the grade they are in, or a student getting a C in a class doing work that is two grads above. 

In the lower ES grades, they did this exact thing for my DS5, and I agree that I liked it in that I could see if he was learning the individual topics in an area (since it was broken down on his report card), not just A in math in general, and number grades aren't as well suited to pre-k, K, etc.  The kids weren't expected to be at 4 at the beginning of the year; grades (reflecting mastery) were expected to rise thru the year.  

My sister was talking about her 5th grader, however, and she seemed to be describing something different.  Grades of 1 & 2 were definitely failing and "We can't have that at our school".  There has been a lot of press about closing "failing" schools in her county.  

Maybe it is the same concept, but her kids' school didn't present it well to the parents.

[973beachbum]

They may have not presented it well or it may be that the school wasn't actually teaching what the CC/State felt was grade level work.  I know the biggest complaint I here is from parents of kids who are in remedial or special ed classes.  Their issue is the students should get an A if they work hard and this grading system just doesn't do that.  They get the grade based on the level of work they are doing period.  This system isn't nice.  A student who is in 5th grade, but struggling to read at a 4th grade level, won't get a 3 no matter how hard he works until he is reading at that 5th grade level. 

They also can't work up the numbers really ulless they actually caught up so to speak.  As the year goes on the work gets harder so you can't actually start with a 1 and make it to a 4 doing the same work.  Once you finish something they should be teaching someone harder that they would need to grasp in that grade.  Thruthfully it probably would be great if the students all started at a 3 and stayed there the whole year. 

My son is in 5th grads also and he started at a 3.  To me that meant that the class was teaching exaclty what they should be doing in 5th grade.  If it continues that way they should end the year completely ready to do the work in 6th grade.

[greeniis10]

Seems to me all the hub-bub about this is due to a lot of misunderstanding.  Not by anyone who's posted here, but I mean just look at the confusion noted above regarding the new 1 - 4 grading system: one person says XXX about it, another says YYY.

Also, I think it's more about change.  People are resistent to change, but it sounds like this is being presented in a negative way right off the bat.  I understand that it requires more work from the teachers (which I sympathize with) to change their teaching materials and make sure they comply with the new standards.  But the parents causing an uproar about it are the same ones (probably) who complain about everything when it comes to their kid!  You send your kids to school to get an education.  If you don't like what or how they are learning teach them a few things at home.  That's where it all starts anyway.  These complaining parents should put forth more effort doing something positive for their kids or the school instead of complaining about a change.

[Deleted]

What I do like: Emphasis on skills versus 'hoops'... 

Ie. my kids work to mastery. I had a really hard time trying to set up a 'grading system' this year so I could do a transcript for son. We work till we master skills 100%. But I can't give all 100s... Nor do I feel its right to always grade on first attempt # correct... Especially without adding all the 'fluff' that schools usually have to even out the grades... I don't see making up keeping a notebook, participation, extra credit, etc... Fluff.

Its also better to focus on broad skills rather than limited knowledge, which CC seems to do...

I also like the idea of generalizable expectations across the country... How much trouble on here did we have understanding what is Algebra.. 1, 2, 3, ... Is trig/analyt really pre-calc... Etc. 

However, there is still lots of regional interpretation and I think the way it's being implemented one places is really out of whack... 

[shanendoah]

I am a fan of common core, and none of the teachers I am friends with have a major problem with it in general, though some of them are not fans of the way their state or school district is choosing to implement it. But I think that is an important distinction. The common core itself is NOT prescriptive about how it should be taught. That does not mean that states and school districts aren't setting their own rules. But that's a problem to take up with your local school board, not the common core.
We do NOT have nationalized education. When I was in high school (in the 1990s), there were kids my same age in different states who were NOT learning about evolution. Hello! That's an issue. I think it very important to try and have some national standards as to what kids are supposed to learn at what grade levels. A 4th grade education in WA should be the same as a 4th grade education in LA, MT, CA, NY where ever. It doesn't have to be the exact same set of knowledge, but the skills should be the same.

teen persuasion - just some notes about the specific complaints you mentioned, because I like specifics.
Language is HUGELY important to math. My husband is taking his final year of upper division math this year for his BS, and it's pretty much all math without numbers. The intros to the math books he's currently reading focus a lot on the necessary precision of language when dealing with math. The words "product, factor, digit place value" all have VERY specific meaning in math and to understand math, you have to understand the language of math. Making sure students understand the meanings of math words in the context of doing math is NOT moving vocabulary to the math test, it is making sure kids have the very necessary language foundation to understand the math they are doing.
I actually find this extra interesting because C was mentioning just the other night how he thought DD (who is 10, in 4th grade) should be learning this stuff. It's not difficult or beyond a 4th graders understanding, and it would make math so much easier for the rest of her life.

As for figuring out what the word "boughten" means from context, it has NOTHING to do with the actual word, whether it's archaic or slang or whatever. It is about being able to figure out the meaning of any word from context. My first exposure to so many words was via reading and I had to figure out what they meant through context. Still, if I am reading something that uses slang I often have to use context to figure out the meaning of the word. I read speculative fiction and often the authors will make up words for every day things in order to create a more immersive experience. I have to be able to figure out what the word means from the context it is used in.
This isn't just related to reading and enjoying fiction. Industries often have their own language and use industry specific terms. I often have to figure out what a given word means from context when I am reading something industry specific. (Angel investors are different from venture capitalists, etc.)

My DD is NOT a reader, so much not a reader. Her school requires that she read 30 minutes a day, 5 days a week, and then write a paragraph about what she read in a journal. I LOVE that. She has also been told what level of books she is expected to be reading by the end of the year. Making them write about what they are reading is making sure that they actually understand. Reading isn't just about being able to sound out the words on the page, it is about understanding what it means. (It's why we test reading comprehension on everything.) Making kids write about what they are reading helps the teacher (and the parent) know if the child actually understands. (I will say that we are extra mean parents who also make her read 30 minutes a day, 7 days a week, for us, in addition to the reading for school. She doesn't have to write about that, but she does often have to read aloud to us, and if she asks us a question about what is going on, we make her go back an re-read or help her to understand that sometimes the author hasn't told you yet, so you just have to wait and see.)

We recently got her test scores from her 3rd grade common core tests. She scored solidly in the 3s. Given that she had had to repeat 3rd grade and that she had a huge transition in the middle of the testing (from her previous foster home to ours) we celebrated her good scores. She was surprised because she thought she had done badly. So we celebrated how well she did.
But then, there's my bias. I am not the parent of an academically high performing child. I am the parent of a child who sometimes struggles with grade level, not because she isn't smart but because she was not given the foundation for learning as toddler/pre-schooler. So I am a huge proponent of a school system that understands there needs to be that foundation to build on and is focused on giving my child that foundation and letting me know how she's doing related to that.

[teen persuasion]

though some of them are not fans of the way their state or school district is choosing to implement it

I think this is the larger problem.  All of my examples are about NYS Board of Regents policies, apparently.  NYS has had relatively high standards in the past, but the constant tinkering has the students walking on eggshells.  Every time one of the Math Regents is redesigned, a large proportion seem to fail it, since no one seems to know exactly what will be on the test until they take it.  They redesign the test to "fix" it, and repeat.

[cronewitch]

I haven't been in school for almost 50 years and don't have kids so don't know much about modern schooling. What I would have liked when I was in school was common teaching in every school on the same schedule. We moved often so would have a new school sometimes two or more times a year. One school might teach something in the fall and the next in the spring so you would get it twice or not at all. I missed out on some basic concepts like not knowing what a prime number was until college. Other things like the difference between Your and You're were never taught to me in school.

They should have one set of lesson plans taught on schedule since not all kids stay in one school district for 12 years. Teachers shouldn't need to do lesson plans but be given consistent plans. Then all the parents and home schools would know what the public school kids were learning.

I have been to about 16 schools so far but kids like migrant laborers or homeless might go to 6 a year. They should be able to go from reading Great Expectations in one classroom to Great Expectations in the new classroom not missing it or reading it twice. If they are traveling between schools they will know what they missed and can study on their own a few days.

[Sam_2.0]

Ahh, crone, that would make too much sense. And it would be communist. Would never fly.

[Deleted]

Oct 4, 2013 15:51:18 GMT -5 cronewitch said:

I haven't been in school for almost 50 years and don't have kids so don't know much about modern schooling. What I would have liked when I was in school was common teaching in every school on the same schedule. We moved often so would have a new school sometimes two or more times a year. One school might teach something in the fall and the next in the spring so you would get it twice or not at all. I missed out on some basic concepts like not knowing what a prime number was until college. Other things like the difference between Your and You're were never taught to me in school.

They should have one set of lesson plans taught on schedule since not all kids stay in one school district for 12 years. Teachers shouldn't need to do lesson plans but be given consistent plans. Then all the parents and home schools would know what the public school kids were learning.

I have been to about 16 schools so far but kids like migrant laborers or homeless might go to 6 a year. They should be able to go from reading Great Expectations in one classroom to Great Expectations in the new classroom not missing it or reading it twice. If they are traveling between schools they will know what they missed and can study on their own a few days.

I disagree.  Teachers need the ability to teach to the class they have.  Not every class learns the same way.  CC says to teachers "kids need to know how to be able to understand this concept by the end of grade 1.   Figure out a way to teach them that concept."

That gives all teachers a good idea about what all other teachers will be teaching their kids but leaves it up to the teachers to determine how to get there.

[shanendoah]

cronewitch - I'm with you. I would love a nationalized school system where all kids in the country got the same education and got it on the same schedule. An honors class in one state should be an honors class in another state, etc. I had problems when switching schools between states (that's a little more understandable) and had to take physical science 2 years in a row. I had problems again switching between high schools in the SAME district because one taught Geometry between the two years of Algebra and the other taught Geometry after the two years of Algebra.

A nationalized system would also hopefully mean that Texas wouldn't get to set the standard for text books and that our public schools would be free to teach actual science and not religion.

[hoops902]

::What I do like: Emphasis on skills versus 'hoops'... ::

The emphasis should never be taken away from HOOPS

[cronewitch]

I disagree. Teachers need the ability to teach to the class they have. Not every class learns the same way. CC says to teachers "kids need to know how to be able to understand this concept by the end of grade 1. Figure out a way to teach them that concept."

That would be ok if the teacher has the same students all year but not all students stay all year.

We have one school here just for homeless kids because the public schools aren't good for them. When parents are homeless, staying with friends or family or motels a week here and there the kids keep changing schools and since the schools aren't consistent don't receive a good education.

Also in communities with farms and orchards kids might show up for a season then move with the crops so could come in September and leave in October to go to the next state.

How can a teacher have the entire year to teach a concept when the students change schools? How do military families who change duty stations handle education?

[Deleted]

Oct 4, 2013 17:05:55 GMT -5 cronewitch said:

I disagree. Teachers need the ability to teach to the class they have. Not every class learns the same way. CC says to teachers "kids need to know how to be able to understand this concept by the end of grade 1. Figure out a way to teach them that concept."

That would be ok if the teacher has the same students all year but not all students stay all year.

We have one school here just for homeless kids because the public schools aren't good for them. When parents are homeless, staying with friends or family or motels a week here and there the kids keep changing schools and since the schools aren't consistent don't receive a good education.

Also in communities with farms and orchards kids might show up for a season then move with the crops so could come in September and leave in October to go to the next state.

How can a teacher have the entire year to teach a concept when the students change schools? How do military families who change duty stations handle education?

Not easy.  But the answer isn't to nationalize a lesson plan.   Localization is the key to better teaching. 

[Sum Dum Gai]

Military families used to go to DoD schools which did have the same curriculum at every base so they didn't have gaps when they'd move from base to base. All the ones stateside were closed so now they jump from public school to public school in the states and in and out of DoD schools overseas. A lot of military families make huge sacrifices career and family wise to keep the kids in one location once they start high school because changing districts during high school can be a total disaster.

Common core should be a huge boon to military families and anyone else that relocates often, if the kooks don't derail the whole thing.

[973beachbum]

Oct 4, 2013 20:50:23 GMT -5 ArchietheDragon said:

Oct 4, 2013 17:05:55 GMT -5 cronewitch said:

I disagree. Teachers need the ability to teach to the class they have. Not every class learns the same way. CC says to teachers "kids need to know how to be able to understand this concept by the end of grade 1. Figure out a way to teach them that concept."

That would be ok if the teacher has the same students all year but not all students stay all year.

We have one school here just for homeless kids because the public schools aren't good for them. When parents are homeless, staying with friends or family or motels a week here and there the kids keep changing schools and since the schools aren't consistent don't receive a good education.

Also in communities with farms and orchards kids might show up for a season then move with the crops so could come in September and leave in October to go to the next state.

How can a teacher have the entire year to teach a concept when the students change schools? How do military families who change duty stations handle education?

Not easy.  But the answer isn't to nationalize a lesson plan.   Localization is the key to better teaching. 

I think what you two are saying can be done together. A common core of standards that every student in the entire country would be based/graded against with individual districts and teachers basing exactly what they teach off that common core standards.  The problem now isn't that schools aren't trying to work with students to move up in their skills for things like LA or Math.  It is that each little fiefdom has their own set of standards as to what grade level work is.

I don't have any issue with a school having basic classes in HS for students who aren't at college prep, or honors, or AP level.  I have a BIG problem with a school teaching a basic class but calling it college prep or honors or even sadly AP.