Group items tagged

"Since the standards were first introduced, Common Core supporters have created amorphous platitudes and spin to market it. Even as more Americans like me "wise up," do not expect the Common Core-ites to give up. Think tanks have received millions from Gates to support it and education companies are making millions on new Core-aligned materials. There is big money being spent - and big money to be made - in the Common Core. So, expect that when the happy bus pulls into your town, you will hear the same old arguments. These arguments, which I call the Four Flimflams of the Common Core, go like this:"

Educators across the nation are working hard this summer to begin developing updated curricula that will fit into the new Common Core State Standards, which will be fully applied in 45 U.S. states (Texas, Alaska, Nebraska, Virginia, and Minnesota have opted out of statewide participation) by 2015. Yet despite the hubbub about the new standards, which were created as a means of better equipping students with the knowledge they need to be competitive in the modern world, many teachers still have a lot of unanswered questions about what Common Core will mean for them, their students, and their schools. Luckily, the Internet abounds with helpful resources that can explain the intricacies of Common Core, offer resources for curriculum development, and even let teachers keep up with the latest news on the subject. We've collected just a few of those great resources here, which are essential reads for any K-12 educator in a Common Core-adopting state.

At its annual meeting held in Saratoga Springs the weekend of March 23-25, the New York State Council for the Social Studies passed five resolutions condemning the national and state common core standards for marginalizing social studies. The resolutions charged that attention to math and reading left little time or money in K-12 classrooms for effective instruction in social studies, citizenship, and history. The Council demanded that the state develop a new set of core standards that emphasize the teaching of social studies, citizenship, and history. This action by the NYSCSS is one of a number of reasons to question whether the much ballyhooed national common core standards will deliver promised improvements in education.

The overarching Common Core vs. No Common Core and Core Knowledge vs. Balanced Literacy debates (see this New York Times article and this Learning Matters segment) have spawned another debate: fiction vs. non-fiction. I think this misses the point and causes their critics to unfairly tarnish "non-fiction" as a genre. My apprehensions about the Common Core Standards aside, just as I defended the lecture several posts ago, I feel compelled to defend non-fiction.

"The New York Regents are the masters of the non-response response.  The day after they published their recommendations entitled Adjustment Options to Common Core Implementation, this was the Newsday headline: Pullback on Common Core: Regents Delay Tougher NY Test Requirements for High School Students Until 2022. That headline on Tuesday came from the Regents' third recommendation: "Give students more time to meet the Common Core standards." That sounds impressive until you discover that nothing was pulled back at all."

The fundamental problem with Common Core, the latest educational miracle solution that is being promoted by the National Governors Association and Pearson Educational, the publishing conglomerate, is that it is conceptually backwards. Instead of motivating students to learn by presenting them with challenging questions and interesting content rooted in their interests and experiences, Common Core is a bore. It removes substance from learning. Skills are decontextualized, which means they taught and practiced divorced from meaning. Common Core offers students no reason to learn.

"Carol Burris, principal of South Side High School in Rockville Center, New York, explains her concerns about the Common Core. She previously wrote a book about how to implement the standards and now wishes she could retract it."

"I have thought long and hard about the Common Core standards. I have decided that I cannot support them. In this post, I will explain why."

"As the title of this post says, there are three things you must read if you want to understand the origins of Common Core."

The Common Core standards, if they separate the learning of skills from content and understanding, point teachers in the wrong direction.

After a decade of concerns and criticisms about the lack of rigorous national standards in the No Child Left Behind Act, we now have a set of ambitious standards for use nationwide - the Common Core State Standards. Since their formulation two years ago, these standards have been adopted by 45 states, were made a precondition for funding in the Race to the Top competition, and have begun to influence the development of new curricula and assessments. But early childhood education - concerned with children from birth to the end of third grade - seems nearly an afterthought in the standards. Not only do they end (or begin) at kindergarten, ignoring more than half of the early childhood age range, they simply don't fit what we know about young children's learning and development.

Feeling overwhelmed by the sheer volume of dense information out there about the Common Core State Standards (CCSS)? You're not alone. Here's Edutopia's guide to resources that will help you make sense of the initiative and join the conversation.

Last spring, when I was teaching at a small school in the Bronx, I caused an unnecessary ruckus by posting my thoughts about a presentation my staff received on the looming impacts of PARCC and Common Core implementation. The post was shared by Gotham Schools, in the Digest for Grassroots Education, and was disseminated to many UFT chapter leaders. I discovered soon afterward that my words were seriously concerning to a number of senior DOE employees, including, apparently, Chancellor Walcott and Deputy Chancellor Suransky.

"The latest issue of the AFT American Educator publication contains an article that presents "Myths of the Common Core" and responds to each one with "facts." Tim Farley, principal of the Ichabod Crane Elementary/Middle School in Valatie, New York, did not agree with the publication's definition of the facts. Here is his rebuttal"

"Diane Ravitch, the education historian who has become the leader of the movement against corporate-influenced school reform, gave this speech to the Modern Language Association on Jan. 11 about the past, present and future of the Common Core State Standards. Here's her speech"

"In this post, award-winning Principal Carol Burris of South Side High School in New York raises some new questions about the Common Core State Standards and curriculum being developed around them."

"Now we do have evidence. This is what we know: the Common Core tests cause a huge decline in test scores. Passing rates fell 30% in Kentucky and about the same in New York. What is worse is that the achievement gaps grew larger. As Carol Burris recently wrote, the test results were especially devastating for black and Latino children."

"In the following post, veteran educator Stan Karp explains why the problems surrounding the implementation of the Common Core are less about the substance of the standards and more about the context in which they were introduced. Karp taught English and journalism in Paterson, N.J., for 30 years and is an editor of Rethinking Schools magazine, where this appeared."

"There is no research telling us that Common Core testing standards will substantively improve kids' education. The only failure is on the part of those who set up this new curriculum."

"If anyone tells you that Common Core (CCSS) is a "state-led" effort, "developed by teachers," that person is either misinformed or attempting to deceive you. Mona McDermott of United Opt Out has mapped the organizations behind CCSS. She presents discussion of their interwoven involvements in this 9-minute youtube presentation. Once you view her work, you will no longer be vulnerable to the corporate- and government-endorsed message that CCSS is "grass roots." The endgame of CCSS is massive data acquisition."