Common Core.... someone please explain

[jodifla]

You got a source for that 35%? I posted about Ky's latest test results up thread, and the far majority of schools were above 50%, with many above 75%.

Sent from my Kindle Fire using DISBoards

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/stat..._tests_released_by_kentucky.html?r=1470956912

High School math is 37.9 percent (I was off 2.9 percent), DOWN from when they started Common Core testing 3 years ago. (40 percent).

Hardly a raging success.

Middle School math tested at 44.8 percent, up from a 40.6 percent from 3 years ago, a paltry 4 percent jump -- and we haven't seen if Kentucky pulled New York's stunt, which was to change the cut scores to goose the numbers.

So that means that more than half of middle-schoolers and high-schoolers are failures at math in Kentucky according to the dictates of Common Core.

 

[sam_gordon]

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/state_edwatch/2014/10/third-year_scores_from_common-core_tests_released_by_kentucky.html?r=1470956912

High School math is 37.9 percent (I was off 2.9 percent), DOWN from when they started Common Core testing 3 years ago. (40 percent).

Hardly a raging success.

Middle School math tested at 44.8 percent, up from a 40.6 percent from 3 years ago, a paltry 4 percent jump -- and we haven't seen if Kentucky pulled New York's stunt, which was to change the cut scores to goose the numbers.

So that means that more than half of middle-schoolers and high-schoolers are failures at math in Kentucky according to the dictates of Common Core.

Of course, you did read those numbers are from how many kids scored distinguished or proficient in the end of course test for Alegebra II, right? It's not results from the CC tests.

Sent from my Kindle Fire using DISBoards

 

[jodifla]

Sounds like Kentucky's problem, because like I said, we've been teaching this way the whole time I've been teaching and never had an issue. I have several teacher friends all over the place, all over the grades-no issues.

...And did you read what I said? I said maybe someone is doing it wrong. We teach all the basics along with the concepts. It's not common core's fault if your teachers are unqualified to teach it. Time for your state to step up their certification standards.

So basically, you have done no research on this. Because the testing numbers are almost identically abysmal in ALL the other states that have done Common Core testing, including New York, North Carolina, and Utah.

 

[jodifla]

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/58455197-78/core-standards-utah-students.html.csp

Low test scores may add to Utah debate over teaching math

This month, Utah is preparing to send parents their students’ results from statewide tests aligned to the Core for the first time — news many expect will fuel debate over the controversial standards and how Utah teaches math. In some grades, preliminary results showed, 1 in 3 children is proficient. T

 

[TAX GUY]

As mentioned, it seems to be a district/school issue based on how it's delivered. For me, that means private school at all costs. If common core is supposed to be a set of standards and will fluctuate from school to school, then what's the benefit? Isn't the "old school" way the same principal? Teach to a certain way and sorry for those that don't "get it"? To me this all sounds like a bunch of hooey! Trying to expand on certain methods is fine but why not also have the options of the old ways? I had and still have multiple ways of doing math (by hand and not just on machines). Does that mean the ways I know and will help my son are wrong? Because there's a push for ONLY the "new way"?

 

[jodifla]

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/feat...ting-florida-utah-worries-20141004-story.html

Utah students took their state's new Common Core tests this spring, and they struggled so badly that a majority of the schools could end up graded D or F.

 

[sam_gordon]

Let's add a new question to mix...

Using Kentucky's scores (http://www.kentucky.com/2013/09/27/2846116/view-the-top-bottom-10-elementary.html), why did Greathouse Shryock Traditional score 83% while Blackberry Elementary scored 24%? The tests are the same. Could it have something to do with teachers and what lesson plans they're using?

 

[jodifla]

Let's add a new question to mix...

Using Kentucky's scores (http://www.kentucky.com/2013/09/27/2846116/view-the-top-bottom-10-elementary.html), why did Greathouse Shryock Traditional score 83% while Blackberry Elementary scored 24%? The tests are the same. Could it have something to do with teachers and what lesson plans they're using?

Maybe. It also likely has to do with poverty, race and disability.

When you dive into those subgroups in the Kentucky test scores, you will see very low proficiency rates. And Common Core in part was designed to help these groups -- the very groups it is now failing miserably.


(Also, I notice you dive back into elementary schools, and avoid the high school and middle school scores.)

 

[Suger Mag]

As mentioned, it seems to be a district/school issue based on how it's delivered. For me, that means private school at all costs. If common core is supposed to be a set of standards and will fluctuate from school to school, then what's the benefit? Isn't the "old school" way the same principal? Teach to a certain way and sorry for those that don't "get it"? To me this all sounds like a bunch of hooey! Trying to expand on certain methods is fine but why not also have the options of the old ways? I had and still have multiple ways of doing math (by hand and not just on machines). Does that mean the ways I know and will help my son are wrong? Because there's a push for ONLY the "new way"?

It appears to me you want to combine several things under common core heading as well as compare how it is being implemented in Mass to how it is being implemented in Florida... that is comparing apples and oranges. I am also from Mass, and I speak from having had had kids in both private and public schools. My son (19) did k-12 in only private. My daughter (13) did k-6 in private, and is now in a public charter school (chinese language immersion model).

To understand common core you need to understand the following:

1) 'Common Core Standards' is simply a list of common standards or specific learning goals that are supposed to be taught.... students by grade 5 no matter where in the country should have been taught curriculum goals XY and Z...how those goals are taught is up to discretion of the school or the district etc.

2) 'Common Core Curriculum Packages' There are lots of companies that are jumping on the bandwagon and selling packaged curriculums (lesson plans, assignments, tests etc.), Pearson is the biggest at this time. Some of those curriculums are coming under fire because they are reportedly flawed, hastily assempbled, clunky full of mistakes etc.

I do not mind common core standards, I think it is perfectly acceptable to have a set of common standards that students should learn during their schooling. I DO NOT like the packaged curriculums. Any school that does this is in my mind being lazy.

At my daughter's public school they teach the standards and have created their own curriculum that incorperates those standards. They are highly perfoming in math and sciences in all state assessments. You need to find out what your potential schools are doing with common core... are they baking the cake from scratch using the recipie suggested (creating their own curriculums)... or are they opening up a box and pouring it into a pan and calling it homemade (buying a premade curriculum package from Pearson et. al.)?

Be careful with assuming private can do no wrong. Yu have to do your homework there too. I was a private school baby and always figured you get what you pay for right? We sent my son through totally private schools, however we made the decision to swich to a public school for my daughter because of math. We had the same crappy, unqualified and uncertified private school math teacher 2 years in a row (5 and 6th grades) at our very exspensive private school. My daughter went from being a good math student to a poorly performing student who now has a math phobia. I tried working with the school and after a year of private tutoring ( at $40/hr... their solution) the situation was worse. My husband and I made the decision to see if we could get in on the lottery for the charter public school (where he happened to work) and we made it in... pulled her from private and have never looked back. She has made great strides in math, recieved lots of services (all free) and we are soooooooo happy we decided to jump ship. In addition to a strong curriculum in regular subjects, she gets 2 hours of chinese language a day!

Be careful because it is not always getting what you paid for with private. They do not have to have a certified teacher with an advanced degree.... too many of our private school teachers were first year college grads with a shiny new BA/BS in english... or biology... or history.... and no teaching ability or experience.

 

[TAX GUY]

It appears to me you want to combine several things under common core heading as well as compare how it is being implemented in Mass to how it is being implemented in Florida... that is comparing apples and oranges. I am also from Mass, and I speak from having had had kids in both private and public schools. My son (19) did k-12 in only private. My daughter (13) did k-6 in private, and is now in a public charter school (chinese language immersion model).

To understand common core you need to understand the following:

1) 'Common Core Standards' is simply a list of common standards or specific learning goals that are supposed to be taught.... students by grade 5 no matter where in the country should have been taught curriculum goals XY and Z...how those goals are taught is up to discretion of the school or the district etc.

2) 'Common Core Curriculum Packages' There are lots of companies that are jumping on the bandwagon and selling packaged curriculums (lesson plans, assignments, tests etc.), Pearson is the biggest at this time. Some of those curriculums are coming under fire because they are reportedly flawed, hastily assempbled, clunky full of mistakes etc.

I do not mind common core standards, I think it is perfectly acceptable to have a set of common standards that students should learn during their schooling. I DO NOT like the packaged curriculums. Any school that does this is in my mind being lazy.

At my daughter's public school they teach the standards and have created their own curriculum that incorperates those standards. They are highly perfoming in math and sciences in all state assessments. You need to find out what your potential schools are doing with common core... are they baking the cake from scratch using the recipie suggested (creating their own curriculums)... or are they opening up a box and pouring it into a pan and calling it homemade (buying a premade curriculum package from Pearson et. al.)?

Be careful with assuming private can do no wrong. Yu have to do your homework there too. I was a private school baby and always figured you get what you pay for right? We sent my son through totally private schools, however we made the decision to swich to a public school for my daughter because of math. We had the same crappy, unqualified and uncertified private school math teacher 2 years in a row (5 and 6th grades) at our very exspensive private school. My daughter went from being a good math student to a poorly performing student who now has a math phobia. I tried working with the school and after a year of private tutoring ( at $40/hr... their solution) the situation was worse. My husband and I made the decision to see if we could get in on the lottery for the charter public school (where he happened to work) and we made it in... pulled her from private and have never looked back. She has made great strides in math, recieved lots of services (all free) and we are soooooooo happy we decided to jump ship. In addition to a strong curriculum in regular subjects, she gets 2 hours of chinese language a day!

Be careful because it is not always getting what you paid for with private. They do not have to have a certified teacher with an advanced degree.... too many of our private school teachers were first year college grads with a shiny new BA/BS in english... or biology... or history.... and no teaching ability or experience.

I agree and never once thought private could do no wrong. My issue is with what I'm reading here AND with what I'm hearing about our local public school (similar horror stories as to what is here). It doesn't appear that the local teachers have a good grasp on the standards and that's reflecting through the students (many are team mates with my son).

There are a few Charter Schools near us as well but like you probably know, getting in is difficult (if its a good school). Even at that, one of my sons class mates was in a lottery from kindergarten and was finally picked last year. He went and after only half the school year, he was withdrawn and was back in private. I have no idea why other than "it wasn't at all what they thought". One of the other local charter schools has a LONGGGGGG waiting list and is more on the arts focused side (my son has ZERO arts ability or interest).

Anyway, my decisions will and are based on what's available to US locally. My intentions were to better understand how and what Common Core was. I've gotten plenty of feed back here and locally. Because it's an introduction of "new" methods and with what seems like "out with the old" and that's it..... I can't for myself grasp all the processes and methods so I can't even help if needed. That leaves it ALL on the teachers. If the teachers aren't able to teach it (locally), then what? At least with staying in private, for now, I shouldn't have to worry about implementing of the "core standards" and still staying focused on the old school methods, of which I can also help him if h needs it.

 

[sam_gordon]

Maybe. It also likely has to do with poverty, race and disability.

When you dive into those subgroups in the Kentucky test scores, you will see very low proficiency rates. And Common Core in part was designed to help these groups -- the very groups it is now failing miserably.


(Also, I notice you dive back into elementary schools, and avoid the high school and middle school scores.)

Look at my previous post. The high school "scores" you posted are from end of course tests for Alegebra II. As far as middle schools, it's a increase over the last two years.

I also noticed you "avoided" the following quotes in the article you linked to...

"The numbers show, without a doubt, that we are making progress," said Kentucky Education Commissioner Terry Holliday in a statement accompanying the release of the scores.

You may remember that Holliday had mixed reviews of Kentucky's scores on the second year of common-core tests a year ago, saying that the scores did not go up as much as the state anticipated.

Today, more kids are not only graduating from high school in Kentucky, but they are graduating prepared for college and for careers because they are mastering these higher standards," said Chris Minnich, the executive director of the Council of Chief State School Officers, which along with the National Governors Association oversaw the development of the common core.

BTW, the graduation rate in Kentucky went up from 86.1% from the 2012-13 school year to 87.4% in the 2013-14 school year. (http://applications.education.ky.gov/SRC/DeliveryTargetByState.aspx. So I'm sure you'll say Minnich is biased, but his statement is true.

 

[mom2rtk]

Sorry. Wrong thread.

 

[alicat8]

So basically, you have done no research on this. Because the testing numbers are almost identically abysmal in ALL the other states that have done Common Core testing, including New York, North Carolina, and Utah.

I don't need to do research on other state's test scores for 2 reasons: 1. They have no impact on how I run my classroom. 2. I've been teaching long enough to know that standardized tests are (and always have been) virtually invalid and meaningless.

 

[Lolsmum]

Let's be honest here. Many, many people do not really get math, especially beyond arithmetic, and that has been the case for a long time. Students have been taught to memorise facts and how to add, but often truly did not understand what they were doing. Some kids just get it, and have no problem understand that multiplication is "really just fast adding" to quote my 8 year old who totally gets it. He's never bothered to memorise his 12 times tables, despite being tested on them, because he gets that n times 12 is the same thing as 2n + 10n. He hasn't been introduced to the notation to understand what I typed yet, but the concept was obvious to him. Our school is teaching math in a similar way to the "awful" CC methods and honestly, more and more of them are starting to get it. Kids who understand what is really going on, rather than just following an algorithm, are the ones who go on to get algebra, calculus and other higher math. Don't we want more kids to get it, rather than hating math and giving up on it by algebra or geometry?

 

[CPT Tripss]

Let's add a new question to mix...

Using Kentucky's scores (http://www.kentucky.com/2013/09/27/2846116/view-the-top-bottom-10-elementary.html), why did Greathouse Shryock Traditional score 83% while Blackberry Elementary scored 24%? The tests are the same. Could it have something to do with teachers and what lesson plans they're using?

Maybe. It also likely has to do with poverty, race and disability.

When you dive into those subgroups in the Kentucky test scores, you will see very low proficiency rates. And Common Core in part was designed to help these groups -- the very groups it is now failing miserably.


(Also, I notice you dive back into elementary schools, and avoid the high school and middle school scores.)

Staying with the two elementary schools, a basic ZIP search reveals that the highest ranked school has a median income of $47.2 K while the lowest ranked school has a median income of $13.5 K (in the bottom 10% nationally). Not surprising as there are bunches of studies that demonstrate high correlation between standardized test results and median income.

 

[jodifla]

Of course, you did read those numbers are from how many kids scored distinguished or proficient in the end of course test for Alegebra II, right? It's not results from the CC tests.

Sent from my Kindle Fire using DISBoards

So, they aren't teaching Algebra II and English under Common Core, and testing the students that way? K-Prep is a Common Core aligned test.

Also, a 1.3 percent jump in graduation rates is hardly something to write home about. And if they start making the Common Core test a prerequisite to graduation, the graduation rates will plummet. At least 10 states do this.

In fact, the Carnegie Corporation predicts that high school dropout rates will double to 30 percent over a 6-year cohort, and that graduation rates will fall to 53 percent in a 4 year cohort. And they are a pro-Common Core group.

It is detailed in this report: http://carnegie.org/fileadmin/Media/Programs/Opportunity_by_design/Opportunity_By_Design_FINAL.pdf

And here's a report that details that KPREP is showing grade inflation results:

Are Kentucky’s Common Core aligned KPREP School Assessment results starting to inflate?

http://www.bipps.org/kentuckys-common-core-aligned-kprep-school-assessment-results-starting-inflate/

"Again, these additional graphs show evidence that KPREP may be getting inflated in comparison to the state’s NAEP performances.

Unfortunately, we won’t get another report from the NAEP until late 2015. Furthermore, it is uncertain if the NAEP will be changed due to pressure from the Common Core State Standards. However, at present the disparities between available NAEP data and the KPREP is obviously becoming a concern. Are we really making much progress? I think it may be too soon to tell, but KPREP may be experiencing the same sort of inflation issues that ultimately doomed the KIRIS and CATS assessments that preceded it in Kentucky."

 

[arminnie]

I have no problem with there being common standards for what is taught by grade.

But as a math major I find the math stuff to just be stupid. I of course understand it but I think it clouds the minds of those who are not really into math.

I think one of the most horrible injustices is that we let people think that math is something "hard - and no one can understand it". Common core seems to emphasize that way of thinking.

Math is very straightforward and should be easy to comprehend if taught right. Common core fails terrible with this.

 

[Colleen27]

Let's be honest here. Many, many people do not really get math, especially beyond arithmetic, and that has been the case for a long time. Students have been taught to memorise facts and how to add, but often truly did not understand what they were doing. Some kids just get it, and have no problem understand that multiplication is "really just fast adding" to quote my 8 year old who totally gets it. He's never bothered to memorise his 12 times tables, despite being tested on them, because he gets that n times 12 is the same thing as 2n + 10n. He hasn't been introduced to the notation to understand what I typed yet, but the concept was obvious to him. Our school is teaching math in a similar way to the "awful" CC methods and honestly, more and more of them are starting to get it. Kids who understand what is really going on, rather than just following an algorithm, are the ones who go on to get algebra, calculus and other higher math. Don't we want more kids to get it, rather than hating math and giving up on it by algebra or geometry?

First, I'm not sure that everyone needs to "get it" at a level that will carry them through to calculus or other higher math. That's a level of competency that relatively few people need even in our modern, post-industrial economy and yet we act like it is a national tragedy that not every student will go on to calculus by age 18.

Second, I'm not sure that common core is really helping more kids get it. (And yes, to the defenders, this is an implementation issue). Because one of the key points of the common core math standards is to be able to explain one's reasoning and critique the reasoning of others beginning in kindergarten, math has become much more literacy-based than it ever was in the past. If you aren't good at reading and writing, even in early elem where some variation in ability is normal, you won't be good in math... the one subject that has historically been the refuge of bright kids who struggled with written language for whatever reason.

We're creating a very one-size-fits-all model of education - recommended course sequences for selective college admissions as the new HS graduation requirements, crowding out technical and vocational education in the name of college prep for all, a math curriculum that hinges on language skills, leaving no refuge for those kids who are good at math and bad at English (which describes many of the engineers and computer science guys I know), etc. But what happens to the kids who don't fit that mold?

 

[nugov2]

Let's be honest here. Many, many people do not really get math, especially beyond arithmetic, and that has been the case for a long time. Students have been taught to memorise facts and how to add, but often truly did not understand what they were doing. Some kids just get it, and have no problem understand that multiplication is "really just fast adding" to quote my 8 year old who totally gets it. He's never bothered to memorise his 12 times tables, despite being tested on them, because he gets that n times 12 is the same thing as 2n + 10n. He hasn't been introduced to the notation to understand what I typed yet, but the concept was obvious to him. Our school is teaching math in a similar way to the "awful" CC methods and honestly, more and more of them are starting to get it. Kids who understand what is really going on, rather than just following an algorithm, are the ones who go on to get algebra, calculus and other higher math. Don't we want more kids to get it, rather than hating math and giving up on it by algebra or geometry?

My dd just brought home a lesson taught in a new way. My dd got it, but dh and I both had to teach ourselves this new method on solving word problems. Honestly I thought it was great and really broke down a word problem into a very understandable system. It took dh and I a few times to catch on and at first I was unsure, but once I got it I thought it made a lot of sense. Now I will say they do not teach math in only one way. They still memorize math facts and usually the teacher will introduce multiple ways to solve certain problems. I know some say we are in a "bubble" and doomed for failure with testing, but I would bet our students will continue to excel because of amazing teachers and administrators who work long hard hours to make sure our students are getting the best education. I don't care if our test scores dip b/c at the end of the day they mean very little, but I wouldn't be surprised if our students are right back where we were in the upper 90th percentile within a few years. Good teachers = good results and we are lucky to be in a district to have them. I also don't think that minimal growth is a failure. It is going to take time for districts that had low standards to catch up.

I just don't buy into the idea that CC is some awful the sky is falling scenario. It is an eye opener to the state of education in america and how the standards for what teachers and administrators should be capable of doing need to be raised. We obviously have too many teachers and administrators who have no business teaching our children. The lessons being taught are disgusting and ANYONE who thinks that is OK to teach in their classroom should be gone along with the administrator who approved it. If your classroom teacher is utilizing these awful methods...possibly suggest they get a pinterest account and start researching all the great lessons out there that align with the CC standards and ditch the script. They are or should be completely capable of thinking up their own lessons and their own words. Prompts and curriculum in a box need to go along with any administrator and teacher who thinks using them is OK.

 

[nugov2]

First, I'm not sure that everyone needs to "get it" at a level that will carry them through to calculus or other higher math. That's a level of competency that relatively few people need even in our modern, post-industrial economy and yet we act like it is a national tragedy that not every student will go on to calculus by age 18.

Second, I'm not sure that common core is really helping more kids get it. (And yes, to the defenders, this is an implementation issue). Because one of the key points of the common core math standards is to be able to explain one's reasoning and critique the reasoning of others beginning in kindergarten, math has become much more literacy-based than it ever was in the past. If you aren't good at reading and writing, even in early elem where some variation in ability is normal, you won't be good in math... the one subject that has historically been the refuge of bright kids who struggled with written language for whatever reason.

We're creating a very one-size-fits-all model of education - recommended course sequences for selective college admissions as the new HS graduation requirements, crowding out technical and vocational education in the name of college prep for all, a math curriculum that hinges on language skills, leaving no refuge for those kids who are good at math and bad at English (which describes many of the engineers and computer science guys I know), etc. But what happens to the kids who don't fit that mold?

Show me a CC lesson that requires a K student to do that requires them to have a firm grasp on language skills that is unreasonable? Yes math does require some written explanation(based on grade), but I have not seen anything change in my 2nd graders math in the last 2 years since CC roll out that is require him to much more proficient with language skills than when my dd was in that grade. I would bet almost anything if you do post a lesson, I can find one that is appropriate and acceptable to match that standard. Again, I think that is all implementation. You don't have to fit a mold anymore now than before CC...at least in my experience over the last 2 years with my kids and in our district.