New Common Core math curriculum a disaster

[Colleen27]

We know that real life examples of these hypothetical happen. But is this issue really a problem?

Or, in a more open ended question format, at what point does this issue become a problem? I mean, the school district I came up in (Rochester Community Schools) was/is affluent and largely homogeneous demographically speaking. Is it a problem that I, as a far from exemplary student, and every other student entering highschool with my class (100% graduation rate) graduated with a better command of the English language than the average graduate of our cross-town rivals in Waterford?

I know it's a problem for the Waterford students when they compete for seats in colleges and limited scholarships and grants to attend them. But is this a problem for our society as a whole? One worthy of all this effort and hassle? Or is this simply the natural order of things that some of us get great educations, some of us get good educations, and some of us get lousy educations; and none of us really get to decide for ourselves what we get.

I do think that is it a problem. People still want to believe in the American dream and the idea of a meritocracy, but with the quality of education one gets being primarily an accident of birth from start to finish - in the effectiveness of the school district one grows up in as well as in access to a higher education system that is unaffordable for an increasing share of the population - we're straying dangerously close to an inherited class system.

But I don't think Common Core is a solution. A new set of standards isn't going to give Detroit Public School students up-to-date textbooks that they don't have to share, it isn't going to ease classroom overcrowding, and it isn't going to encourage talented and caring teachers to choose DPS over Rochester or L'Anse Cruse (I'm an eastsider ). In fact, on that last point, NCLB and Common Core both discourage teachers from taking jobs in more challenging districts because they don't want to be the ones on the chopping block when the students fail to meet tested standards.

 

[Robbi]

I do think that is it a problem. People still want to believe in the American dream and the idea of a meritocracy, but with the quality of education one gets being primarily an accident of birth from start to finish - in the effectiveness of the school district one grows up in as well as in access to a higher education system that is unaffordable for an increasing share of the population - we're straying dangerously close to an inherited class system.

But I don't think Common Core is a solution. A new set of standards isn't going to give Detroit Public School students up-to-date textbooks that they don't have to share, it isn't going to ease classroom overcrowding, and it isn't going to encourage talented and caring teachers to choose DPS over Rochester or L'Anse Cruse (I'm an eastsider ). In fact, on that last point, NCLB and Common Core both discourage teachers from taking jobs in more challenging districts because they don't want to be the ones on the chopping block when the students fail to meet tested standards.

Exactly, I don't know how many remember in grade school history being taught that one of the benefits of the US as opposed to Communist/ Socialist countries was that all kids had the opportunity of college education. Programs like Common Core might deny kids who want to go college that education because the curriculum is too difficult. Only those kids who benefit from better schools or who are super bright will get into college/ university. Some kids who are so so high school students thrive in college.

 

[jodifla]

The more and more I read, it's less about the standards themselves, and much more about the implementation and testing.

Last year, my 5th grade son was given a 7th grade level text book on Science. He, and many other kids, totally turned off on the sub. They got little out of it as it was too abstract and the reading level above them. Somehow, pushing higher level skills way down to developmentally inappropriate ages is taking hold as part of this curriculum.


The real debacle will come in the 2014-2015 testing year, where most children in 40 plus states will be subject to these tests. State tests like the MEAP in MIchigan and the FCAT in Florida will be gone.

Most children will fail the tests. Even former strong students. I wonder how all the DISboard parents will feel about that?

 

[sam_gordon]

Last year, my 5th grade son was given a 7th grade level text book on Science. He, and many other kids, totally turned off on the sub. They got little out of it as it was too abstract and the reading level above them. Somehow, pushing higher level skills way down to developmentally inappropriate ages is taking hold as part of this curriculum.

This has been a very interesting discussion. Just something to think about spinning off the above comment... SHOULD what is now considered as "7th grade level" really be taught at the 5th grade level? In other words, who determines that fractions (for example) be taught in 3rd grade? Should it be taught in 1st (and built on as the grades progress)?

As far as the comments about many kids failing the tests, do you build the tests so easy (for lack of a better term) that everyone passes? What should the goal of the testing be?

I've heard people complaining about education, "teaching to the test", etc for the last decade. What I've never heard is the "light bulb" solution where everyone says "oh, yes, why didn't we think about that?".

 

[Robbi]

The more and more I read, it's less about the standards themselves, and much more about the implementation and testing.

Last year, my 5th grade son was given a 7th grade level text book on Science. He, and many other kids, totally turned off on the sub. They got little out of it as it was too abstract and the reading level above them. Somehow, pushing higher level skills way down to developmentally inappropriate ages is taking hold as part of this curriculum.


The real debacle will come in the 2014-2015 testing year, where most children in 40 plus states will be subject to these tests. State tests like the MEAP in MIchigan and the FCAT in Florida will be gone.

Most children will fail the tests. Even former strong students. I wonder how all the DISboard parents will feel about that?

It won't be pretty.

 

[justhat]

The more and more I read, it's less about the standards themselves, and much more about the implementation and testing.

Last year, my 5th grade son was given a 7th grade level text book on Science. He, and many other kids, totally turned off on the sub. They got little out of it as it was too abstract and the reading level above them. Somehow, pushing higher level skills way down to developmentally inappropriate ages is taking hold as part of this curriculum.


The real debacle will come in the 2014-2015 testing year, where most children in 40 plus states will be subject to these tests. State tests like the MEAP in MIchigan and the FCAT in Florida will be gone.

Most children will fail the tests. Even former strong students. I wonder how all the DISboard parents will feel about that?

I think saying most children will fail is a gross overgeneralization. Like I said, this is year 3 in our district and while we had a slight dip in test scores the first year (as kids are still taking the AZ aims test and it was the first year the teachers were using the new curriculum), they rebounded the following year to be back to where they were.

Sure it won't work for some kids, but nothing works for everyone. We haven't had any of the experiences that you have with such advanced material for young kids, so I think there is a lot of discrepancy between districts.


The math thing, because our school has Spanish immersion, which is now more popular than the regular classes, we have multi-age room where they blend the curriculum for science, social studies, and math. So far it is working well. And really Montessori classrooms have worked that way for years as they have success with it so I don't think it's all bad.

 

[Robbi]

Yesterday, I spoke to a very good friend who is a 5th grade English teacher. Her son is autistic and attends a charter school. The program is not a good one for him. She told me though that there are things she likes. For instance, before CC, in early September, in every school in the area from K- high school, teachers were either teaching or reviewing sentence structure. There's no reason junior and high school students should have to review sentence structure. By those grades, they should understand it.
I told her in the old days, that's how we were taught. One year, beginning grammar was taught. The next year, it was assumed we knew that and the teacher reviewed it a little but the focus might be on parts of speech- it may have been opposite as it's been 50 years.
The point being that the same subject matter was not taught year after year. It must have worked because a few years ago, I read that people like me who took the ACT in the 70s would add 7 points to the scores of that year.
Honestly though some of today's lessons astound me. This same woman and some of my daughter's friends never learned about Henry VIII.

 

[tvguy]

Apparently teachers like it. Only 8% dislike it.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/10/04/teachers-common-core-gates/2911923/

 

[jodifla]

Then they probably haven't actually started teaching it! The standards themselves seem to look ok. The devil is in the details. (Also note that survey was funded by Bill Gates, a huge instigator of Common Core.)

Read one mom's experience -- she's also a teacher. Then followed by hundreds of parents in the comments section with similar stories!!!


http://mrsmomblog.com/2013/10/02/how-common-core-is-slowly-changing-my-child/

A Letter to Commissioner King and the New York State Education Department:

I have played your game for the past two years. As an educator, I have created my teaching portfolio with enough evidence so I can prove that I am doing my job over the course of the school year. I am testing my students on material that they haven’t yet learned in September, and then re-testing them midway through the year, and then again at the end of the year to track and show their growth. Between those tests, I am giving formative assessments. I am taking pictures of myself at community events within my district to prove that I support my school district and the community. I am teaching using the state-generated modules that you have created and assumed would work on all students, despite learning style, learning ability, or native language. I am effectively proving that I am worthy of keeping my job and that my bachelors and masters degrees weren’t for naught. I have adapted, just as all teachers across the state have, because that’s what we do. We might not agree, we might shake our head at the amount of time creative instruction has turned into testing instruction, but we play the game.

...

No, sir, I’ll tell you what it does. It beats him down. It discourages him. It exhausts him. It makes him dread going to school and then lash out in anger at the nightly homework that is associated with these common core modules. It is turning him off of school and if this trend continues, he will be far from college and career ready because he will want nothing to do with college.

 

[kimmar067]

So my school district decided at the last minute to introduce a new math curriculum that is based around Common Core. Teachers took a crash course in it this summer and now it is being rolled out to 6th thru 12th graders..

....first Rule of thumb: 'pencil-pushers' have absolutely NO IDEA of what actually goes on in the classroom environment. [their motto usually is: "It looks good on paper."]

 

[kimmar067]

....I think that the biggest problem with 'Common Core' and the "No Child Left Behind' Act is that they are shooting for 100% proficiency, a lofty goal, to be sure. However, what, in the 'real world' is 100% effective? A winning sports team? The weather? Effectiveness of any given pharmeceutical? No. Nothing in life can ever really be deemed '100%' because it just doesn't exist. I'm not suggesting we do away with 'Common Core', per se, but I do realize that we should be more realistic about education too. There are just too many other factors that may influence a child's learning potential - specificially, home environment....

 

[luvsJack]

Yesterday, I spoke to a very good friend who is a 5th grade English teacher. Her son is autistic and attends a charter school. The program is not a good one for him. She told me though that there are things she likes. For instance, before CC, in early September, in every school in the area from K- high school, teachers were either teaching or reviewing sentence structure. There's no reason junior and high school students should have to review sentence structure. By those grades, they should understand it.
I told her in the old days, that's how we were taught. One year, beginning grammar was taught. The next year, it was assumed we knew that and the teacher reviewed it a little but the focus might be on parts of speech- it may have been opposite as it's been 50 years.
The point being that the same subject matter was not taught year after year. It must have worked because a few years ago, I read that people like me who took the ACT in the 70s would add 7 points to the scores of that year.
Honestly though some of today's lessons astound me. This same woman and some of my daughter's friends never learned about Henry VIII.

I don't know, I remember being in high school and wanting to throw my English book at someone who still didn't know subject and verbs. We went over it ever year. It was enough to make me feel like slamming my head against the wall. DD is feeling the same way this year with grammar.

And my class as well as dd's class still study literature. They don't always do Shakespeare, but will read several classics and current literature. Actually, I think the way they do it now makes reading the classics so much better; they actually learn how to understand it. We were just told "read this" and we all felt like we were missing something.

The adding points is a range of years. I took mine in 1984 (I graduated in 81 but didn't take it until 84). Made a 23-and can add points to that. My son took it in 2001 and made a 29. The difference in our ability to take the ACT hasn't changed a whole lot. DD will take it next year, so we will see.

 

[Robbi]

I don't know, I remember being in high school and wanting to throw my English book at someone who still didn't know subject and verbs. We went over it ever year. It was enough to make me feel like slamming my head against the wall. DD is feeling the same way this year with grammar.

And my class as well as dd's class still study literature. They don't always do Shakespeare, but will read several classics and current literature. Actually, I think the way they do it now makes reading the classics so much better; they actually learn how to understand it. We were just told "read this" and we all felt like we were missing something.

The adding points is a range of years. I took mine in 1984 (I graduated in 81 but didn't take it until 84). Made a 23-and can add points to that. My son took it in 2001 and made a 29. The difference in our ability to take the ACT hasn't changed a whole lot. DD will take it next year, so we will see.

I graduated in 1976. By high school, the only grammar we had was an advanced college level class.

We did literature by quarter and we were able to choose from an fairly extensive list what we wanted to study. For instance, one quarter I chose Shakespeare's Julius Caesar. The teacher would cover appropriate English concepts pertaining to the subject matter such as iambic pentameter in Antony's line, "I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him." It made English fun and interactive. Literature every year would be expected.

 

[luvsJack]

I graduated in 1976. By high school, the only grammar we had was an advanced college level class.

We did literature by quarter and we were able to choose from an fairly extensive list what we wanted to study. For instance, one quarter I chose Shakespeare's Julius Caesar. The teacher would cover appropriate English concepts pertaining to the subject matter such as iambic pentameter in Antony's line, "I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him." It made English fun and interactive. Literature every year would be expected.

Its still that way at dd's school and it was when I was there in 81.

When I was there an English class lasted all year--first half was grammar and the second half literature.

DD's classes only last a semester as they are on the block schedule. This year she takes Eng II and World Lit and will have grammar in Eng II due to the state test this year. Eng I, III and IV are all literature classes. They did so much more in Eng I with literature than we ever did in the 4 years. We did read Shakespeare every year and they haven't covered as much of that, but I don't really see that its a have to anyway; there is so much more out there.

As for the grammar, well, its on that blame test they have to take to graduate so, it has to be covered. Apparently not all of them quite got it before because dd has gotten very frustrated it the need of having to go over it again and again and again.

The issue with the not getting it, isn't the high school level class; the ball was dropped somewhere before they got to this level.

 

[sam_gordon]

The issue with the not getting it, isn't the high school level class; the ball was dropped somewhere before they got to this level.

Heaven forbid we should find out which kids "don't get it" though.

Sorry, luvsJack, this wasn't directed at you, but more to those who basically say "testing kids is bad".

 

[nugov2]

Again, this isn't a problem with the standards themselves, but rather how the State of New York is telling (suggesting, requiring? I don't know) districts to teach those standards.

If you look, here are the actual standards being addressed:

Reading: Literature
RL.1.3: Describe characters, settings, and major events in a story, using key details.
RL.1.6: Identify who is telling the story at various points in a text.

Reading: Informational Text
RI.1.1: Ask and answer questions about key details in a text.



The standards do NOT dictate that students know all of those things about Mesopotamia. The "Tell It Again! Read-Aloud Anthology" curriculum teaches those standards through the way described in the blog post. You can teach and assess all of those standards with Dr. Seuss books.

In the end, what the suggested resource is doing is killing two birds with one stone. It is introducing the students to early civilization while teaching the standards. The students shouldn't be expected to remember everything they heard about Mesopotamia in the stories that were read to them. But they should be expected to describe characters, identify the narrator, etc.

I have only read a little of this thread, but I have to agree that most of the problems are how Common Core is being implemented. Our district started last year and it was all good. What my K was doing compared to my older dd when she was in K was a full grade level ahead of what she did in K. He was thriving in the environment. It is still so new so it is hard to fully evaluate it, but I have to say our district so far is doing a stellar job. My dd who is in 3rd has also been doing great things. I think it will be several years until I can fully comment, but I like what I see so far. I have seen so much slamming of Common Core and I can't say I blame people by some of what I see being reported, but again I think it all boils down to the district/state way of adopting the program. I have friends in other districts(IL.) and nobody is unhappy so far. Our district has rolled out CC in all subjects.

 

[luvsJack]

Heaven forbid we should find out which kids "don't get it" though.

Sorry, luvsJack, this wasn't directed at you, but more to those who basically say "testing kids is bad".

I agree with you. Testing isn't a bad thing. Our high school tests show that, the problem, at least in our state, is in k-8. So much time is simply directed at how to take the test that the students do not learn the material.

The high school teachers in almost every subject area have the complaint that the students do not come in with the knowledge they need. (and I have to hand it to them, they work hard to get them where they need to be and cover the material for their grade level)

I think that they should be tested in subject areas in middle school just like in high school. And I think there should be accountability for the students as well as the teachers. The students need a "dog in the hunt" or they just don't care.

 

[nugov2]

Common Core is actually not a curriculum; it is a set of standards. The main reason we, as teachers, are told it is being implemented is so that all states have the same standards. This helps when kids move from district to district and also with standardized tests. The problem is with the math curriculum some districts are adopting.

We are in a district that does not tell us how to teach the CC standards. We have Unit plans that explain what standards we should focus on each quarter, and suggestions of activities and materials to use to teach them, but no particular curriculum. We do some cooperative activities in our classroom, but we also do individualized math.

I teach K and we are expected to teach what I consider beginning algebra. Example word problem--"Mikey had 4 cars. Jimmy gave him some more. Then he had 10. How many cars did Jimmy give him?" I think it is a little much, but then I am just a teacher.

I disagree. I do not think it is a little much at all. I am a teacher(though at home while my kids are young). As a pp stated I integrate learning into our everyday activities. I have 3 and so far my older 2 entered K able to read, write and had a strong grasp of mathematics(could add, subtract, solve basic word problems) all through games and fun at home. It is easily done if you spend time when you would be playing other things to have educational play time too. We have tons of fun board games that require you to think while having fun. Now my youngest is only just turned 3, but time will tell if our at home philosophy will have him entering school with the same foundation. It isn't drilled into their heads through lessons, but all through fun. I think as a country we do need to raise the bar on our academic standards and the earlier we start the better. Young minds can absorb so much!!

 

[jodifla]

I disagree. I do not think it is a little much at all. I am a teacher(though at home while my kids are young). As a pp stated I integrate learning into our everyday activities. I have 3 and so far my older 2 entered K able to read, write and had a strong grasp of mathematics(could add, subtract, solve basic word problems) all through games and fun at home. It is easily done if you spend time when you would be playing other things to have educational play time too. We have tons of fun board games that require you to think while having fun. Now my youngest is only just turned 3, but time will tell if our at home philosophy will have him entering school with the same foundation. It isn't drilled into their heads through lessons, but all through fun. I think as a country we do need to raise the bar on our academic standards and the earlier we start the better. Young minds can absorb so much!!

Here's what you are missing: SOME kids are ready for that. Many kids developmentally are not.

 

[Nette]

Heaven forbid we should find out which kids "don't get it" though.

Sorry, luvsJack, this wasn't directed at you, but more to those who basically say "testing kids is bad".

It's not so much that I think testing is bad, I think testing for the sake of evaluating schools and teachers is ludicrous. Unless the results for anyone school are GROSSLY off the bell curve, there isn't any way to really judge if a school is failing because of it's teachers. There are so many other factors involved. (Parental support, enough sleep, enough food... and all of those are lower in poorer neighborhoods.)

Testing kids and taking those results on an individual basis and comparing them against the norm is a great way to see where that student is at.

Rather than trying to get every kid at some unreasonable percentile why don't we focus on giving the kids everything we can to ensure they are primed to learn in school? Then teachers could go back to um, teaching!