http://dailycaller.com/2013/11/14/watch-this-high-school-seniors-epic-takedown-of-common-core-video/

oh wow. Impassioned plea indeed! Would have been better if he didn't read his entire speech; but the message is loud and clear.

Just clicked here and oh my! That kid is from my old high school.

Because of Common Core, these parents pulled their kids out of math class for an hour a day for home instruction.

KTVU News

I saw somewhere that they (unsure who "they" are, exactly) are having a "ditch day" today to protest Common Core. I gather that it was something they wanted to go viral, though it may have only been one area right now.

It was, IMO, a classic example of a speech designed to manipulate through emotion. And that young man is a classic example of what is wrong with American education: too much stuff and too little substance.

That's what I found disturbing... I haven't had time to look into yet but a co-worker and I were wondering if that were true.. It isn't?

Bingo, Val.

I ran across this criticism of this movement courtesy of a rather annoyed Arne Duncan, and frankly, I laughed out loud.

Arne Duncan: White Suburban Moms upset that Common Core shows their kids aren't brilliant.




Yes, yes, yes.

Criticism about the implementation is one thing. But most of these parents ranting and raving about Common Core are just mad that their precious snowflakes don't look so good now that actual standards are involved.

I personally have some concerns about CC-- I think that you'd have to be a little crazy the OTHER direction not to-- but they aren't because I think that the standards are: a) too rigid, or b) too high. Nor are my concerns based upon the idea that there should NOT be national curricular standards, which I think are an awesome idea. I'm more worried about the corporate players that are involved in the implementation phase of things, developing and copyrighting curriculum, testing-testing-testing, etc, with no free market to regulate quality.


The comments on this op-ed are particularly biting/insightful. I highly recommend those, too.

Well, guess I'll delete most of what I was about to post. Val has summarized it succinctly.

But here are some of my additional thoughts on the general topic:
Having grown up in a military family it was sad to see kids coming from other school systems being held back a year because where their dad was stationed had standards almost a grade behind my school's standards. Having a target that works from state to state makes sense to me. At some point having a clear content collection across topics that shows how a typical college bound student can get a sufficiently rich education so that the professors don't go off whining about the quality of incoming students makes sense. Personally, I'm a little concerned that there isn't an identified basic skill track that parallels the common core's college bound track, but that's a different topic.

It is most emphatically NOT true. It was a blatant baldfaced lie.

The math standards committee was heavily composed of mathematicians. It was headed by this guy (William McCallum), head of the math department at the University of Arizona. Look at his CV (link on the left) if you doubt his math credentials. The co-chair is a professor of math and physics at Bennington College. Then there are Hung-Hsi Wu, a professor emeritus of mathematics at UC Berkeley and Roger Howe, a mathematician at Yale.

The list of committee members is listed here. It's composed of mathematicians and educators.

I know an astrophysicist at San Jose State who told me that one of his colleagues was involved in writing the science standards. Etc.

These standards are serious and were written by people who know their subjects. Finally, we get a meaningful and serious attempt at fixing the schools in this country, and the idiots willfully ignorant people out there are doing everything they can to undermine it. My biggest fears about the Common Core are that the schools and the textbook companies won't be up for them.

Ahh thank you! I will be sharing that info with the co-worker that sent me this... That was what gave us some pause.

Could someone please explain why this video exists?

I totally agree, I felt the same way when watching it.

Ditto for me.


My other big concern is how districts implement Common Core; we've already seen some school districts argue that higher standards mean they no longer need to provide gifted programming or allow subject acceleration for gifted students who need it.

In south africa we have had a national curriculum for some years. It doesn't work really. Here we see the standards continually being dropped in order to help more kids to pass. Of course here we also have the historical legacy of apartheid and everyone trying to desperately right the wrongs of the past.

What it has led to now: Majority of kids now wualify for university entrance. Most of these kids require financial aid to go. Most of them cannot cope with university level work and it is having a three fold effect at a tertiary and market level:
1. University levels are dropping now to accommodate the mass average
2. University degrees here are shifting from 3 to 4 years in an attempt to build in a bridging year - there are compulsory subjects in English, essay writing, reading comprehension etc. for first year students REGARDLESS of school leaving exam results.
3. Kids leave school totally unprepared for working life even if they choose not to study further.

I have several friends who lecture at universities and they are all saying the same things - the more our education standards become nationalised (common) across the country the less we have to show for it.

A new curriculum (again) was implemented in recent years - having read through all the documents during our decision to homeschool I realised that there are major gaps and discriminatory jumps in subject matter. It is only going to drop our national standard to the lowest common denominator. Already we have an anti- anything different policy. Private and govt schools don't do acceleration, not by subject or grade without a drastic, major song and dance all round. As one principal said to me "we don't do gifted here". Now it's getting to where we have govt schools hiking fees to be in a position to hire more teachers to try sneak in extra learning. Problem is with our new national curriculum teachers time in a school day is dictated right down to how many minutes should be spent doing what each day (including recess time!)

We even had one of our own dept of education ladies get fired because she stood up and said that the education non-whites received under apartheid laws was BETTER than what the kids are getting today.

of course, at the moment I am totally anti all formalised schooling as even our only gifted school in the country failed my boys. but honestly for me a national (common) core in a country the size of the USA seems not only a monumental undertaking but a questionable one too. If it doesn't work in small countries, how will it work in the land of the brave and the free?

Thank you for sharing your BTDT experience with a nationalized curriculum. Cui Bono?

It is my understanding this video exists because the 1st amendment to the Constitution of the USA protects each individual's right to free speech. (link- http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html) In this video, high school senior Ethan Young is exercising his right to free speech in addressing his local school board. This is a form of educational advocacy. He posted his video to youtube and it has been further distributed by others. (link- )

Hilarious, but you cannot possibly think that answers my question.

Some have found it odd that the Common Core official website does not seem to list or credit those involved in the development of standards. This does not provide transparency in government. For example, the link provided by the poster above is from Arizona, it is not from Common Core.

Bringing up the floor for those who've not been learning at even minimal levels for a variety of reasons may be but one aspect of education reform. Raising the ceiling for those who've not been learning at their challenge levels due to benign neglect in the classroom is another important aspect of education reform, and one which unfortunately may remain largely unaddressed by Common Core.

That is a fairly comprehensive explanation as to why this video exists. What aspects remain unaddressed? What further explanation do you require? If you could be more specific in your request, that may help in tailoring an answer which may best meet your needs. Or perhaps your question was rhetorical? ...facetious? Might that be why you find the answer provided to be hilarious... possibly you are mocking? Nonetheless, the answer provides a foundational background as to free speech and educational advocacy.

For those unable to view the link, TN Student Speaks Out on Common Core, Teacher Evaluations, and Educational Data () 5:21... here is an unofficial transcript. It is by sentence with one-minute intervals marked for reference if someone wants to find a particular statement in its context. This may also make it easier for posters to discuss any particular areas of disagreement, concern, or supply additional information they may have to share regarding any specific point this student made. In viewing the video again, I'm seeing this as a potentially powerful college application letter, distinguishing this young man for his writing, presentation skills, and commitment to teachers and the art of teaching and learning.

1. In a mere 5 minutes I hope to provide insightful comments about a variety of educational topics.
2. I sincerely hope you disprove the research I compiled.
3. Here’s the history of the Common Core:
4. In 2009, The National Governor’s Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers partnered with Achieve Inc, a non-profit that received millions in funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
5. Thus the initiative seemed to spring from States when in reality it was contrived by an insular group of testing executives with only two academic content specialists.
6. Neither specialist approved the final standards and the English consultant Dr. Sandra Stotsky publicly stated that she felt the standards left students with an empty skills set, lacking literary knowledge.
7. While educators and administrators were later included in the validation committee and feedback groups they did not play a role in the actual drafting of the standards.
8. The product is a quote "rigorous preparation for career and college" and yet many educators agree that rigorous is a buzzword.
9. These standards aren’t rigorous, just different, designed for the industrial model of school. (1:00)
10. Nevertheless, Common Core emerged.
11. Keep in mind the specific standards were never voted upon by Congress, the Department of Education, State, or Local governments.
12. Yet their implementation was approved by 49 States and Territories.
13. The President essentially bribed States into implementation via Race To The Top, offering 4.35 billion taxpayer dollars to participating States, 500 million dollars of which went to Tennessee.
14. And much like No Child Left Behind, the program promises national testing and a one-size-fits-all education because, hey, it worked really well the first time.
15. While I do admire some aspects of the Core such as fewer standards and an emphasis on application and writing, it’s not going to fix our academic deficit.
16. If nothing else, these Standards are a glowing conflict of interest.
17. And they lack the research they allegedly received.
18. And most importantly, the Standards illustrate a mistrust of teachers, something I believe this county has already felt for a while.
19. I’ve been fortunate to have incredible educators that opened my eyes to the joy of learning.
20. And I love them like my family, I respect them entirely. (2:00)
21. Which is why it frustrates me to review the team in its evaluation systems.
22. These subjective anxiety-producers do more to damage a teacher’s self-esteem than you realize.
23. Erroneous evaluation, erroneous evaluation coupled with strategic compensation presents a punitive model that as a student is like watching your teacher jump through flaming hoops to try to earn a score.
24. I’ve forgot the nature of a classroom: A teacher cannot be evaluated without his students (cough) excuse me, as a… because as a craft teaching is an interaction.
25. Thus how can you expect to gauge a teacher’s success with no control for students’ participation or interest?
26. I stand before you because I care about education, but also because I care, I want to support my teachers.
27. Just as they fought for my academic achievement, so I want to fight for their ability to teach.
28. This relationship is at the heart of instruction, yet there will never be a system by which it is accurately measured.
29. But I want to take a step back; We can argue the details ad infinitum, yet I observe a much broader issue with education today. (3:02)
30. Standards-based education is ruining the way we teach and learn.
31. Yes, I’ve already been told by legislators and administrators, “Ethan, that’s just the way things work.”
32. But why? I’m going to answer that question: its bureaucratic convenience.
33. It works with nuclear reactors, it works with business models, why can’t it work with students?
34. I mean how convenient, calculating who knows what and who needs what.
35. I mean why don’t we just manufacture robots instead of students… they last longer and they always do what they’re told.
36. But education is unlike every other bureaucratic institute in our government.
37. The task of teaching is never quantifiable.
38. If everything I learn in high school is a measurable objective, I haven’t learned anything. I’d like to repeat that. If everything I learn in high school is a measurable objective, I have not learned anything.
39. Creativity, appreciation, inquisitiveness… these are impossible to scale but they’re the purpose of education… why our teachers teach, why I choose to learn. (3:59)
40. And today we find ourselves in a nation that produces workers; Everything is career and college preparation.
41. Somewhere our Founding Fathers are turning in their graves, pleading, screaming, and trying to say to us that we teach to free minds… we teach to inspire… we teach to equip… the careers will come naturally.
42. I know we’re just one city in a huge system that excitedly embraces numbers, but ask any of these teachers, ask any of my peers, and ask yourselves: Haven’t we gone too far with data? (applause)
43. I attended tonight’s meeting to share my critiques but as Benjamin Franklin quipped, “Any fool can criticize, condemn, and complain… and most fools do!”
44. The problems I cite are very real and I ask only that you hear them out, investigate them, and do not dismiss them as another fool’s criticisms.
45. I’ll close with a quote of Jane L. Stanford that Dr. McIntyre shared in a recent speech: “You have my entire confidence in your ability to do conscientious work to the very best advantage to the students. That they be considered paramount to all and everything else.” (5:00)
46. We’re capable of fixing education and I commit myself to that task.
47. But you cannot ignore me, my teachers, or the truth: We need change but not Common Core high stakes evaluations or more robots. Thank you. (applause)

My state (MN) adopted language arts but not math, saying the state's standards are already higher than common core. You wouldn't guess it by looking at my kids' math though!

I wonder if there is any data anywhere showing which states have the best performance in math/reading. So how does MN compare for math with its own standards, which they say are already higher than Common Core?

PSAT statistics probably come closest to this, because there is no superscoring or anything to muddy the waters.

Take a look at what the "cut" scores are-- but unfortunately, they aren't parsed into verbal versus math-- it's a composite value.


Still--- if you look at just Massachusetts and Mississippi, you can see that there is quite a spread of expectations and performance by the time kids reach high school.

As I understand it, the precipitating event was NY parents calling out the system on the mis-match of the test and the curriculum being taught. You may have recently shared a similar concern of toxic educational practices regarding curriculum which doesn't seem to support the content that is evaluated by assessments?

In NY, Spring 2013 standardized testing was that for Common Core, while students were being taught with unrelated curriculum and content. Some have said the Common Core standardized tests were not more rigorous per se, just different, and may have made an example of how poorly students (as well as their teachers, schools, districts, and States) will fare if they do not follow Common Core and "teach to the test".

Meanwhile on the Official Blog of the U.S. Department of Education, "Homeroom", Arne Duncan issued a bit of an apology for his earlier statements, calling it "some clumsy phrasing that I regret... I singled out one group of parents". (link- http://www.ed.gov/blog/2013/11/high-standards-for-all-schools-and-students-everywhere)

Having read the transcript, I couldn't get this old movie quote out of my head, especially the second sentence:


It's bad enough he's conflating CCSS with test-based teacher evaluations, but I'm pretty sure the I saw the Founding Fathers turning in their graves when he implied that the Department of Education should be voting on things.

In that regard, he's accidentally highlighting a problem predating Common Core, where only 24% of high school seniors scored at "proficient" or above in civics: story

Let me give an analogy. If I saw a video of a student giving an impassioned plea to the school board to not teach evolution because it will turn all the kids into bank robbers and serial killers, then I might ask "why does this video exist?"

I wouldn't be looking for an answer like "because its existence is not precluded by the laws of physics".

Maybe I should ask, in whose agenda is this student a pawn, and why?

This may be... and yet according to the FAQ on the Common Core website, "common assessments that will be aligned to the standards and replace existing end of year state assessments. These assessments will be available in the 2014-2015 school year."

It was my understanding (and I may wrong) that these new assessments may be used for more than gauging student readiness for career/college... but may also be used to evaluate teacher efficacy?

I know I saw somewhere data at one point showing MN and Massachusets (and a couple other states) to be the highest performers. I'll look for it again. An international math test? With any test, it would have to be controlled for race, socioeconomic status, etc. to get a true picture of how the curriculum is working. States with a large percentage of high income white people (or Asians?) will do best.
My brother says that everyone in TX in his kids' school finds the standardized tests to be extremely easy. He was shocked when I told him that something like 40 percent of kids aren't considered proficient in math here. Well, the test is harder. So let's say we wanted to move to a different state. How do we figure out what schools or districts would be comparable to our own? We can't, because the state tests are completely different.

Found it! You can click on states and get scores.

Snort!

+1.

This was precisely the question I asked myself.

Yes, but...you also have to consider the test. A lot of these tests are watered down. For example, look at these sample questions from Massachusetts (grade 4). Question 1 is at the level of 2nd or 3rd grade. And COPYING (not plotting) a number line (question 3)? And adding labels, which proves that students recognize that 51 1/2 in a table is the same as 51 1/2 on a number line? The hardest part of that one is a basic subtraction problem in part c. That's just ridiculous.

Alternatively, I've dug reasonably deep into the K-8 CC math standards and find them to be on solid mathematical ground. Fourth grade students learn to plot fractions and equivalent fractions on number lines. They add and subtract fractions and use a number line to see how things fit together. They begin the rudiments of proofs in mathematics.

Everything is explained in a mathematically correct way. It all builds logically. There is no memorization of algorithms.

This student citing his own authentic experience which leads him to form a viewpoint which you many not share does not make him a "pawn". While participants on gifted forums often decry labels, and other practices which may seem to judge an individual as "less than", seeking instead to raise awareness and serve needs which others may not see... let us also carefully consider the needs each person takes time to share with us, rather than claim these needs do not exist or do not create vulnerability for negative impact.

If you would like to share your own personal anecdote and experiences which lead you to draw a different conclusion, that would be received open-mindedly.

I have to say, the more I dig into the Common Core Standards, the more questions I have. There are impassioned people on both sides of the fence, but I see many, many more angry parents against them. Many cite the abusiveness of the standards. One father invited Arne Duncan to come to his house and watch as his 12 year old son cried over his math homework and called himself stupid because he couldn't solve a math problem that took his tutor, a math professor, twenty minutes to solve.

It's easy for me to be fairly unaffected because, while the math is proving to challenging for the first time for ds11, though he is grade-skipped and in compacted math so maybe the challenge is the missed material, the rest is fine. I think if I had a student whose gifts were not so academic I might be looking at these standards and expectations, particularly those of the early years, abusive as well.

In a perfect world, we would have the curriculum meet a variety of abilities without frustrating and turning off students. I just don't know if this is the answer...I'm still digging in and trying to push past the lobbyists for a clearer view of what the CCS are. And while I like some things so far, the explanations of why things work mathematically for instance, the jury is still out, I guess.

I'm continuing to explore Common Core as well. The official website is here... (link- http://www.corestandards.org/). Meanwhile there is much written ABOUT Common Core from other sources. For example, in writing about Common Core, other sources state CCSS is a floor, not a ceiling, however I have not found anything in the CCSS official website which promotes, endorses, encourages, allows, acknowledges, or mentions the possibility of teaching beyond the CCSS for pupils demonstrating readiness and ability. Due to the absence of such statement, the CCSS appears to be one-size-fits-all and that may be a concern for the healthy development of children needing additional academic challenge.

If I understand correctly, States signed on before the CCSS was written... or in some cases while CCSS was in the process of being written but was not complete. Due to the timing, States could not consider the content or impact of CCSS, prior to signing on.

His information on the history of CCSS, who participated, and how much research went into them, has nothing whatsoever to do with his authentic experience. He's regurgitating information he has received from elsewhere... information that is largely incorrect.

That may be, and yet he states that he compiled research. This would be his authentic experience. He also discusses his positive experience with teachers, and the impact as a student of witnessing the current teacher evaluation process. Seeming to exhibit a "growth mindset", not a fixed mindset, he states "I sincerely hope you disprove the research I compiled."

Therefore if posters on this forum have other facts to add to, refute, or correct his statements... please do share them...

I have sympathy for students who are struggling with this stuff. However, many or most of them are struggling because what they were taught before was bad or wrong, NOT because the Common Core is abusive. The Common Core isn't the problem. Poor math instruction --- a near-universal problem in this country --- is the problem.

As others have said, I'm very concerned that the textbook manufacturers don't have the expertise necessary to produce books with proper CC material (perhaps they simply won't pay for it). And I'm just as concerned that many members of the teacher corps don't understand the CC material.

But again, these problems aren't the CC's fault. We have to start somewhere, and people will be unhappy for a while, but if we can manage to get some good textbooks and upgrade the skills of the teachers (or simply switch to hiring math specialists), things will improve drastically in this country.

Or, we could go back to Everyday Mathematics or to memorizing algorithms and wondering why so many students fail math placement exams in college.

This sounds like a curriculum problem, not a standards problem. The standard says a child in grade X should be able to solve problem ABC. It does not necessarily say what strategies a child should be taught in order to solve it. That's a choice left to states, school districts, teachers, and curriculum developers. A great many math curriculi(?) out there do a wonderful job of taking simple operations and making them into unintelligible, overly complicated nonsense (particularly ones with the initials EM).

A good example of a bad math strategy we've talked about here recently is partial quotients as a substitute for long division. You won't find "partial quotients" anywhere in the standards.

This is why I referred to the PSAT as a universal benchmark there.

The cut scores for National Merit Scholar semi-finalists in each state are really telling. Same test, same age-cohort, and yet the 99.5th percentile in Massachusetts (thereby proving that I can, too spell it) is 230-something in any given year, and it's below 200 in Mississippi.

That speaks to a very different set of teaching standards, because the mean IQ levels estimated for the two states so do not account for the difference.

Well, okay-- but--

my OWN authentic experience suggests many, many things to me personally.

Many of my conclusions are subjective and have changed as I have become older, more sophisticated, more wise (at least I hope) and less naive and self-centered.

I've run into this precise impassioned hubris many times before. It's endemic in the population at 12-26 years old, honestly. The problem is that they can't know what they don't know.

I'll also add that a great many of my daughter's academic peers have NO idea how to authentically identify propogandized materials, how to do critical vetting of sources, etc. Not. a. clue.

So they're perfectly capable of placing a primary source from a named author and official agency on equal footing with an anecdote from a radicalized blogger or a corporate marketing ploy.

Like Val, I've spent significant time delving into the science (and math) standards in CC-- and there is a ton to love in there. Will parents and kids love it? Probably not, is my guess. It's distinctly devoid of fluff and edutainment opportunities, instead focused on developing the skills to acquire understanding by using a series of "big ideas" in order to generate DEEPER understanding rather than taking a hydroplane ride around the world. So to speak.

Is it fair to drop kids INTO CC when they've not experienced this kind of strategy before? No, probably not. I get why those families are feeling shellshocked and complaining. But like Val, I disagree with their conclusions about CC on that basis. It's essentially anecdata, not necessarily meaningful.

If I were going to ask for a better-designed curriculum, the subject-teams that worked on CC would be on my wishlist.

Do I agree with continued testing-frenzy? No, I don't. Frankly, I would have liked:

a) extensive teacher training for several YEARS prior to rollout,

b) non-copyrighted material so that publishers could actually USE the standards to create different types of materials to support them,

c) phased implementation-- starting with kids in K and 1. Modified implementation at grades 3-8, and phased modifications over the next four years for grades 9-12 (the same cohort currently in 8).

Yes, I agree with how they should have done it and I quite value your judgment as well as Val's.

But man, I feel for those kids that are being crushed right now and I do wish they could find a way to meet the standards without being so...standardized.

Random note that PSAT is targeted towards the college-bound and could suffer serious sampling skew if different states encourage different levels of involvement. I know some states offer their own scholarships based on scores.

Back to the original bit, he may have pulled the bulk of his material from the "Dr" (in quotes because I wasn't sure if EdD gets that honorific or not.) She seems to have a huge axe to grind. Her rhetoric is sprinkled with such gems as the idea that because the non-fiction language arts CC has 10 standards vs. 9 for fiction means less than half time would be spent on literature. On the one hand, what a tragic mistake if curriculum was derived from such a shirt-sighted equal apportionment; on the other hand, I'd gamble the average adult spends a vastly larger percentage of their reading on non-fiction. In a similar vein she pities the poor English teacher who learned drama, poetry, etc. and is now faced with non-fiction and no skills for teaching it?

Add me to the group of "the more I dig into the Common Core Standards, the more questions I have." And I did some research - the guy does not seem to be lying about the National Governor’s Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers partnering with Achieve, Inc., (a non-profit that gets funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation). Nor does he appear to be incorrect or lying about how the English consultant Sandra Stotsky feels about CC. He also does not appear to be lying about the “bribery” although you may disagree with his word usage. Honestly, whether I ultimately end up agreeing with the guy or not I think he did a pretty good job – I mean, he only had five minutes and he’s like 17 (?)

Anyway, I’m really enjoying the debate this has sparked here. I love hearing all of your opinions and viewpoints. I do not have much of an opinion … yet. BUT I am dismayed by my growing gut feeling that this is just another gimmick (or whatever you want to call it) and our children are the guinea pigs or the true “pawns,” if you will.
My son (8 years old) and I watched the video of the angry moms who pulled their kids out of school math. When the reporter showed the example math problem that was so hard for the girl, my son said “hmm that’s not hard for me, that’s actually the part I am starting to really like.” And I thought to myself that’s because that is the way his teacher is teaching him (he practices that in school all of the time this year). I, probably, as a student (and yes embarrassingly maybe even now) would find that method difficult … Most likely because I just wasn’t taught that way and found just solving math problems hard enough never mind making them up myself. (And, as an aside, I am not sure what math standards or curriculum I was taught to but I am horrible at math, started hating in 4th grade maybe? Maybe 3rd? And I am certain I was not taught well and I do have a higher IQ so I do believe I was capable but did need decent instruction, which I never really got.) So, I see how suddenly being expected to be able to do that method suddenly in middle school would be a problem and cause a panic. And I think to myself, “so, what will happen when my kids reach middle school will there be yet ANOTHER method/way that suddenly they have to be able to test to? Will they in a few years scrap this entire method/standards/curriculum whatever and suddenly have another one that teens will be scrambling to get up to speed on?” Then I think to myself, “well, I am just gonna keep getting my child tutored by the older gentlemen who taught math all his life and between that and the school he should be good no matter what happens.” But really, isn’t that kind of sad? What about those that don’t have that resource.

I am not an educator… I have no idea what the answer is, but it sort-of looks like total chaos out there right now in the education world and it’s a little scary because it’s our children it is affecting. Hopefully, it will all be okay and work out well!

Oh, this sounds like an intelligent plan/strategy! Where are the people like you in this mess?!?! We need more of this!

Madoosa, I have seen other statistics that indicate that there is no correlation between having higher standards and performance on these comparative exams. The problems in the US are not the standards as much as the number of kids that fail the existing standards in their state.

It is also my understanding that the main problem is in early childhood education, that there were no experts in this particular area in the development of the standards and that the standards for the earlier ages are inappropriate according to most experts in the field.

My solution to the crying over homework is to ban all homework until 9th grade (other than read each night or possibly review for content area test). There you go all work must be done at school...teachers have to help those not getting the work.

Oh yeah...and add daily recess.

I love when my kid cries over homework. That's how I know he's being challenged! I feel a little bad for the older kids, but not too bad because part of what you need to do in college is figure out how to learn on your own. This will be good college prep. If there are gaps they can just use google to teach themselves. Maybe google searching should be part of CC =}.

Maybe other kids can cry, shake it off, regroup and figure it out. My kids especially the one with anxiety and Asperger's can cry for hours stop try for a half hour and be a mess again for another couple of hours...throw up and then worry for another couple of hours.

Not exactly how I want to spend my evening.

School should be at school. After school should be time for exercise, seeing as there is no recess, arts, chores, and relaxing.

I would like to see some recent information to support this position, because it was my understanding that there was a lot of backlash against the standards for K-2 when they were first introduced in March 2010, and that the standards were subsequently revised based on those (quite legitimate, IMO) concerns.

Specifically, this criticism stated:


And if you look at the standards today, you can see that the K standards now say "Print many upper- and lowercase letters," and "Read emergent-reader texts with purpose and understanding," respectively. The quoted standards were moved to 1st grade, and the reading standard comes with the caveat that the material should be "grade level"... without defining what that means, so that's left to implementers to decide.

So far every criticism of early education in Common Core that I've seen, even those written fairly recently, refers directly or indirectly to that obsolete source.

I can respond to this by relaying what I've been told (by a teacher) is happening in my local school: kindergarteners are made to sit through a 90 minute ELA block half of which is a power point presentation. Toys are out, naps are out. This apparently is statewide, or at least I've seen this 90 minute block announced on other state school's websites.

I find it quite ridiculous. I can barely sit through a 90 minute presentation.

I've heard other stories such as developmentally inappropriate language on tests, but right now they're just stories.

But this is a problem with the school (or maybe a number of schools), not the Common Core. The standards don't say anything about PowePoint presentations or long classes in kindergarten.

Yes, a 90 minute class in Kindergarten is ridiculous. I'd actually like to see that. Can you send a link?

I don't think it's unreasonable to expect kindergartners to be able to write capital letters. I remember doing that at that age. All the other kids at my table could do it. I don't remember obvious struggling (which I do remember in reading class the next year).

I have a love/hate relationship with Common Core right now. Based on the Standards grading (as it's been slowly popping up online the last few days) DS5.3 who's quite advanced in math looks like any other kid who doesn't need any special attention because he's meeting the standards but for now the school is not admitting to him exceeding them (not on the report card at least yet he's exceeding on the individual assessments they took?), same for science which is his "thing" so that's where my hate part comes in. On the other hand, his grades in Language Arts as they are coming up are low and might support our worry about him possibly being dyslexic / dysgraphic. He's extremely verbal and can talk himself out of anything, use very advanced vocabulary and I honestly believe that if it wasn't for all the individual standards grading, the teacher would not had pick up on any issues because he can compensate for them so well. But overall, I want my kids to be TAUGHT ... not "taught to the standards" so I am quite sure we'll be withdrawing him from school after Thanksgiving and will be homeschooling.