Originally Posted by Val
Fads like whole language reading, math with no right answers, and goofy tricks for solving problems are the norm. With so few subject experts teaching, there's a lot of susceptibility to these fads. The Common Core fixes a lot of that because the standards were developed by experts.
It has been said that to the degree that Common Core is a set of standards, representing the floor or minimum of what students need to know in each grade level, it does not preclude the method by which a standard/outcome is taught/learned; To the degree which Common Core may dictate the method by which an outcome/standard is taught/learned, it may be considered a curriculum.

Originally Posted by Val
... the rollout has been imperfect. However, the schools are as much to blame for this problem as anyone. It's not like someone came along and gave them a month to get ready. The change was scheduled and announced THREE YEARS ago... They all had plenty of time to look at this stuff and get ready... how many parents have... approached their school boards in 2010 or 2011 to ask how their schools were getting ready for the CC rollout...
It is my understanding that there may be an ongoing disconnect between those in positions to sign their States on to Common Core, and those responsible for implementing it. While those signing on may have found the possibility of Race To The Top funding and waiver from NCLB to be positive incentives, it is my understanding that for many districts the Race To The Top dollars did not materialize, districts found themselves with the expense of updating systems to track more data points, some found an analysis of their current standards was deemed more rigorous therefore no change to curriculum/textbooks was deemed necessary, and others decided it may be fiscally wise to see what form the new standardized tests may take before making changes as the student performance on the new standardized tests was to be the system by which students/teachers/schools/districts would be evaluated... possibly focusing more resources on the bottom performers than even NCLB did. Combined with union rules and the expense of hiring subs to free teachers to attend CCS meetings, some have expressed that this timeframe was inadequate/rushed. With CCS standardized assessments reportedly in play in NY in Spring 2013 mis-matched to curriculum, and these new assessments now being implemented in other States, the difference between the sales/marketing and the reality/implementation may be becoming more apparent.

These possible discrepancies and lack of transparency have re-mobilized parents, teachers, and administrators to take a second look at what they are implementing and why.

Originally Posted by DAD22
... understanding similar triangles is a prerequisite for understanding the slope of a line? I don't buy that. I don't believe that everyone comes to an understanding of the slope of a line in the same way. A geometrically minded person might envision triangles. An arithmetically minded person may be happy to understand it as a ratio. Someone with cycling experience may imagine hills of different grades...

One of the things my sister-in-law is dealing with is asking high school students who are currently learning English to explain all their math steps. It seems that CC is injecting more english into math class, and in doing so, they are inhibiting these students in the single area where they used to be uninhibited...

... I make use of mathematical properties daily that I can't recall the names of... I've commented before that I see mathematics as its own language, and offering a written explanation of a mathematical concept is asking for an unnecessary translation.

Personally, I don't see anything wrong with students demonstrating mastery by solving numerous varied problems on a theme. What goes on in their heads is their own business, and their ability to relate that to others is an issue wholly distinct from mathematical mastery.
Agreed! smile

Originally Posted by KADmom
In our district, there seems to be a huge drive to make the numbers look better, and that is accomplished by teaching everyone the same way and assume everyone is on the same level. How will they accomplish this quickly and impressively? By keeping the ones who could soar, the AIG kids, down so the gap is essentially closed.
I'm sorry this is happening, and it is becoming a common refrain. The softening of the national economy to a veritable game of musical chairs in employment in many career areas has possibly exacerbated the situation. As unpalatable as this may seem, the only known cure may be living debt-free and within one's means... from families to governments at every level, including school districts, States, and our Federal Government. Meanwhile, students may be well-served without additional cost if allowed to attend classes at their appropriate challenge level of readiness and ability in each subject, regardless of grade level or chronological age.