[net-gold] The Contentious Common Core Controversy
- From: "David P. Dillard" <jwne@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: Net-Gold -- Educator Gold <Educator-Gold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Educator Gold <Educator-Gold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, net-gold@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, Net-Gold <Net-Gold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, NetGold <netgold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Net-Gold <net-gold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, K-12ADMINLIFE <K12ADMIN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, K12AdminLIFE <K12AdminLIFE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, MediaMentor <mediamentor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, NetGold <netgold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Net-Platinum <net-platinum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Sean Grigsby <myarchives1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Net-Gold <NetGold_general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Temple Gold Discussion Group <TEMPLE-GOLD@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Temple University Net-Gold Archive <net-gold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Health Lists -- Health Diet Fitness Recreation Sports Tourism <healthrecsport@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Health Diet Fitness Recreation Sports <healthrecsport@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, HEALTH-RECREATION-SPORTS-TOURISM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2013 15:12:18 -0500 (EST)
.
.
Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2013 10:37:30 -0800
From: Richard Hake <rrhake@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: Net-Gold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: AERA-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Net-Gold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Net-Gold] The Contentious Common Core Controversy
.
.
ABSTRACT: The Common Core State Standards (CCSS)
http://www.corestandards.org/> have engendered considerable
controversy - see e.g., "Resistance to Common Core standards growing"
[Strauss (2013)] at http://wapo.st/Y7kwdK>. Stimulated by Diane
Ravitch's (2013) admonition at http://bit.ly/XGpEpK> "to think
critically about the standards," I searched Google for "Common Core
State Standards" to obtain 3,010,000 hits at http://bit.ly/15QLBZR>
on 03 March 2013 10:15-0800. Careful consideration of all those leads
me to suggest the following sixteen as especially valuable:
.
.
ANTI- CCSS
.
1. "Eight problems with Common Core Standards" [Brady (2012)] at
http://wapo.st/15Z4kTg>.
.
2. "Engineering Good Math Tests"[Burkhardt (2012)] at http://bit.ly/VaJgpp>;
.
3. "How Common Core will change testing in schools" [Krashen (2012)]
at http://wapo.st/12bt9w5>;
.
4. "Debunking the Case for National Standards: One-Size-Fits-All
Mandates and Their Dangers" [Kohn (2010)] at http://bit.ly/Z0xoUV>;
.
5. "Do young kids need to learn a lot of facts?" [Miller &
Carlsson-Paige (2013)] at http://wapo.st/13oJVqW>.
.
6. "Whoo-Hoo! Occupy the Schools" [Ohanian (2013)] at http://bit.ly/XGs4oq>;
.
7. "Why I Cannot Support the Common Core Standards" [Ravitch (2013)] at
http://bit.ly/XGpEpK>;
.
8. "Do We Need a Common Core?" [Tampio (2012)] at http://huff.to/ZBaDb6>.
.
PRO-CCSS
.
9. "Creating a Comprehensive System for Evaluating and Supporting
Effective Teaching" [Darling-Hammond et al. (2012)] at
http://stanford.io/Wj1w1E>;
.
10. "Standards Worth Attaining" Finn (2012) at http://bit.ly/XHtS0k>;
.
11. "A Common Core Standards defense" [Hirsch (2013)] at
http://wapo.st/Y1gwvk>;
.
12. "What English classes should look like in Common Core era" [Jago (2013)] at
http://wapo.st/XdE2cM>;
.
13. "International Lessons About National Standards" [Schmidt,
Houang, & Shakrani (2009)] at http://bit.ly/xPjmJ4>.
.
14. "Seizing the Moment for Mathematics" [Schmidt (2012)] at
http://bit.ly/Z0BbS2>;
.
15. "On Naked Standards - And Free Curriculum" Tucker (2012) at
http://bit.ly/Y531xl>;
.
16. "The Case for National Standards" [Weingarten (2009)] at
http://wapo.st/XbIJ6K>.
.
For an earlier review of the pros and cons of the Common Core
Standards see "National Education Standards for the United States?"
[Hake (2009)] at http://bit.ly/Z0DMLK>. In a subsequent post I shall
discuss the "Next Generation Science Standards" (NGSS)
http://bit.ly/y1gJPx> and their relationship to the "Common Core
State Standards."
.
***************************************************
.
If you reply to this long (37 kB) post please don't hit the reply
button unless you prune the copy of this post that may appear in your
reply down to a few relevant lines, otherwise the entire already
archived post may be needlessly resent to subscribers.
.
The Common Core State Standards (CCSS)
http://www.corestandards.org/> have engendered considerable
controversy - see e.g., "Resistance to Common Core standards growing"
[Strauss (2013)] at http://wapo.st/Y7kwdK>. Stimulated by Diane
Ravitch's (2013) admonition at http://bit.ly/XGpEpK> "to think
critically about the standards," I searched Google for "Common Core
State Standards" to obtain 3,010,000 hits at http://bit.ly/15QLBZR>
on 03 March 2013 10:15-0800. Careful consideration of all those leads
me to suggest the following sixteen as especially valuable:
.
Careful consideration of all the above hits ;-) leads me to suggest
the sixteen references listed in the above ABSTRACT as especially
valuable.
.
For an earlier review of the pros and cons of the Common Core
Standards see "National Education Standards for the United States?"
[Hake (2009)] at http://bit.ly/Z0DMLK>. In a subsequent post I shall
discuss the "Next Generation Science Standards" (NGSS)
http://bit.ly/y1gJPx> and their relationship to the "Common Core
State Standards" (CCSS).
.
.
.
Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Links to Articles: http://bit.ly/a6M5y0>
Links to Socratic Dialogue Inducing (SDI) Labs: http://bit.ly/9nGd3M>
Academia: http://bit.ly/a8ixxm>
Blog: http://bit.ly/9yGsXh>
GooglePlus: http://bit.ly/KwZ6mE>
Google Scholar http://bit.ly/Wz2FP3>
Twitter: http://bit.ly/juvd52>
Facebook: http://on.fb.me/XI7EKm>
.
.
.
"I have come to the conclusion that the Common Core standards effort
is fundamentally flawed by the process with which they have been
foisted upon the nation. . . . . They were developed by an
organization called Achieve and the National Governors Association
both of which were generously funded by the Gates Foundation. . . . .
Their creation was neither grassroots nor did it emanate from the
states. . . . . . it was well understood by states that they would
not be eligible for Race to the Top funding unless they adopted the
Common Core standards. . . . . "
- Diane Ravitch (2013) at http://bit.ly/XGpEpK>
.
"The countries that consistently outperform the United States on
international assessments all have national standards, with core
curriculum, assessments and time for professional development for
teachers based on those standards. . . . . Should fate, as determined
by a student's Zip code, dictate how much algebra he or she is
taught? . . . . Education is a local issue, but there is a body of
knowledge about what children should know and be able to do that
should guide decisions about curriculum and testing."
- Randi Weingarten (2009), president of the American Federation of
.
Teachers at http://wapo.st/XbIJ6K>.
.
"So much orchestrated attention is being showered on the Common Core
Standards, the main reason for poor student performance is being
ignored - a level of childhood poverty the consequences of which no
amount of schooling can effectively counter."
- Marion Brady (2012) at http://wapo.st/15Z4kTg>.
.
.
.
REFERENCES [All URLs shortened by http://bit.ly/> and accessed on 03
March 2013.]
.
.
.
Achieve. 2010. "Achieving the Promise of the Common Core State
Standards, online as a 389 kB pdf at http://bit.ly/15mfznp>: "The
K-12 Common Core State Standards (CCSS) represent a major advance in
standards for Mathematics and English Language Arts. They are
grounded in evidence about what it takes for high school graduates to
be ready for college and careers and build on the finest state and
international standards. They also provide a clear and focused
progression of learning from kindergarten to high school graduation
that will give teachers, administrators, parents, and students the
information they need for student success. Importantly, they were
developed by and for states in a voluntary effort led by the National
Governors Association (NGA) http://bit.ly/15lUJ7M> and the Council
of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) http://bit.ly/VfQMzy>.
Achieve was a partner in their development and strongly encourages
states to adopt the standards and fully implement them."
.
Berliner, D.C. 2009. "Poverty and Potential: Out-of-School Factors
and School Success." Education and Public Interest Center (Univ. of
Colorado) and Education Policy Research Unit, (Arizona State
University); online as a 729 kB pdf at http://bit.ly/fqiCUA>. In his
abstract Berliner states: "This brief details six Out of School
Factors (OSFs) common among the poor that significantly affect the
health and learning opportunities of children, and accordingly limit
what schools can accomplish *on their own*: (1) low birth-weight and
non-genetic prenatal influences on children; (2) inadequate medical,
dental, and vision care, often a result of inadequate or no medical
insurance; (3) food insecurity; (4) environmental pollutants; (5)
family relations and family stress; and (6) neighborhood
characteristics. These OSFs are related to a host of poverty-induced
physical, sociological, and psychological problems that children
often bring to school, ranging from neurological damage and attention
disorders to excessive absenteeism, linguistic underdevelopment, and
oppositional behavior."
.
Brady, M. 2012. "Eight problems with Common Core Standards," in
Valerie Strauss' "Answer Sheet," Washington Post, 21 August; online
at http://wapo.st/15Z4kTg>. Note especially Brady's crucial problem
#4: "So much orchestrated attention is being showered on the Common
Core Standards, the main reason for poor student performance is being
ignored-a level of childhood poverty the consequences of which no
amount of schooling can effectively counter" - see e.g., Berliner
(2009), Duncan & Murnane (2011), Kristof (2013), Marder (2012),
Neuman & Celano (2012), and my 14 blog entries on the overriding
influence of poverty on children's educational achievement at
http://bit.ly/UW8Xpg>.
.
Burkhardt, H. 2012. "Engineering Good Math Tests," Education Week, 2
Oct., online to subscribers at http://bit.ly/VaJgpp> or free (along
with other articles on "Math and the Common Core") to those who
supply their postal and email addresses at http://bit.ly/13X7iUc>.
Burkhardt wrote: "There are worrying signs that the actual
common-core assessments will be too close to 'business as usual,'
albeit computerized. If so, most U.S. students and future citizens
will be condemned to further mediocrity in mathematics."
.
Darling-Hammond, L., assisted by C. Cook, A. Jaquith, & M. Hamilton.
2012, "Creating a Comprehensive System for Evaluating and Supporting
Effective Teaching," online as an 872 kB pdf at
http://stanford.io/Wj1w1E>. They write: "The Common Core State
Standards (CCSS), which most states have recently adopted, are one
effort to achieve a more common vision of educational purpose. The
CCSS seek to provide 'fewer, clearer, and higher' expectations for
learning across the grade levels in English language arts and
mathematics. These standards are intended to provide guidance for
understanding how students learn in a progressive fashion along skill
strands, as well as what should be taught to enable them to be both
college- and career- ready by the end of high school."
.
Duncan, G.J. & R. Murnane, eds. 2011. "Whither Opportunity? Rising
Inequality, Schools, and Children's Life Chances." Russell Sage
Foundation, publisher's information at http://bit.ly/nCkmKv>.
Amazon.com information at http://amzn.to/r3MrCh>.
.
Finn, C.E. 2012. "Standards Worth Attaining" Education Experts Blog,
National Journal, 27 Feb., online at http://bit.ly/XHtS0k>. Chester
Finn http://bit.ly/Y53LCD> wrote: "Nobody ever said--or should have
said--that better standards per se will boost student achievement or
school performance. Huge challenges await any (serious) academic
standards on the implementation, assessment, and accountability
fronts. But it's a bunch better to have standards worth attaining,
rigorous standards set forth with enough specificity and clarity (and
content) to provide real guidance to curriculum designers, classroom
teachers, test developers and more."
.
Hake, R.R. 2009. "National Education Standards for the United
States?"; online on the OPEN archives of AERA-L at
http://bit.ly/Z0DMLK>. Post of 9 Jun 2009 14:44:42-0700. The
abstract and link to the complete post were transmitted to various
discussion lists and are on my blog "Hake's Ed Stuff" at
http://bit.ly/ZB06fU>.
.
Hake, R.R. 2012. "8+1 Science: A New Concept in Science Education,"
online on the OPEN AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/ION0Vl>. Also on
my blog "Hake'sEdStuff" at http://bit.ly/It6q2A> with a provision
for comments.
.
Hirsch, E.D. 2013. "A Common Core Standards defense," in Valerie
Strauss' "Answer Sheet," Washington Post, 31 Jan.; online at
http://wapo.st/Y1gwvk>. E. D. Hirsch, Jr. http://bit.ly/YL9yNf>
wrote (my insertion of URLs): "Earlier this week Edward Miller and
Nancy Carlsson-Paige (2013) raised some thought-provoking critiques
of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS). While I don't know whether
early childhood educators were involved in the standards writing
process, I do know that many early educators are pleased with the
result. As someone who has studied how to best use the early years to
close achievement gaps and give all children an opportunity to live
happy, productive, engaged lives, I am also a supporter of the CCSS.
. . . . . . . . . The biggest problem with their criticism of CCSS is
that they don't offer anything different or better than what we have
now. They call for a rejection of the CCSS because of various
perceived faults. But then they call for what, exactly? As far as I
can see, they want more of the pre-CCSS status quo. Unfortunately,
the status quo isn't working. The reading scores of 17-year-olds on
the National Assessment of Educational Progress
http://1.usa.gov/WksdCO> constitute the single most accurate
indicator of the effectiveness of our schooling, and as we look at
the low reading scores of 17-year-olds http://1.usa.gov/XdQTM4> over
the past few decades of reform, we see no real movement."
.
Jago, C. 2013. "What English classes should look like in Common Core
era," in Valerie Strauss' "Answer Sheet," Washington Post, 10 Jan.;
online at http://wapo.st/XdE2cM>. Carol Jago is the past president
of the National Council of Teachers of English
http://bit.ly/Y2UIiN>. She wrote: "The claim that the Common Core
State Standards have abolished the teaching of literature makes for a
great headline. Who wouldn't get hot and bothered over the idea that
high school students will no longer be reading 'Romeo and Juliet,'
'The Crucible,' and 'Invisible Man' I would be up in arms, too.
Fortunately, nothing in the standards supports this claim." See also
the cogent response by Diana Senechal (2013).
.
Kohn, A. 2004. "Test Today, Privatize Tomorrow: Using Accountability
to 'Reform' Public Schools to Death," Phi Delta Kappan, April; online
at http://bit.ly/Wku4Yw>.
.
Kohn, A. 2010. "Debunking the Case for National Standards:
One-Size-Fits-All Mandates and Their Dangers" Education Week, 14 Jan;
online at http://bit.ly/Z0xoUV>. Alfie Kohn http://bit.ly/YEkewT>
wrote: "By the time the century ended, many of us thought we had hit
bottom - until the floor gave way and we found ourselves in a
basement we didn't know existed. I'm referring, of course, to what
should have been called the Many Children Left Behind Act, which
requires every state to test every student every year, judging
students and schools almost exclusively by their scores on those
tests, and hurting the schools that need the most help. Ludicrously
unrealistic proficiency targets suggest that the law was actually
intended to sabotage rather than improve public education - see Kohn
(2004)). Today we survey the wreckage. Talented teachers have
abandoned the profession after having been turned into glorified
test-prep technicians. Low-income teenagers have been forced out of
school by do-or-die graduation exams. Countless inventive learning
activities have been eliminated in favor of prefabricated lessons
pegged to numbingly specific state standards. And now we're informed
that what we really need . . . is to standardize this whole operation
from coast to coast. Have we lost our minds? Because we're certainly
in the process of losing our children's minds. To politicians,
corporate CEOs, or companies that produce standardized tests, this
prescription may seem to make sense. (Notice that this is exactly
the cast of characters leading the initiative for national
standards.) But if you spend your days with real kids in real
classrooms, you're more likely to find yourself wondering how much
longer those kids -- and the institution of public education -- can
survive this accountability fad."
.
Krashen, S. 2012. "How Common Core will change testing in schools,"
in Valerie Strauss' "Answer Sheet," Washington Post, July; online at
http://wapo.st/12bt9w5>. Stephen Krashen http://bit.ly/Ui9xm1>
wrote (my insertion of URLs): "At first glance, the assessments now
being developed to accompany the Common Core standards do not appear
to be much more than we already have, at least in terms of
subject-matter covered and grade level. According to the
organizations working on developing standards and tests (PARCC and
SBEC). . . . . [[PARCC = Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for
College and Careers http://bit.ly/13rDtjk>; SBEC = State Board for
Educator Certification (Texas) http://bit.ly/ZNdtgT> ]]. . . . . ,
as is the case with NCLB there will be summative end-of-the-year
tests in grades 3 through 8 and once in high school and these
additions: Writing is added as a component of language arts, and
voluntary interim testing will be offered through the academic year.
There is reason to suspect there will be a lot more. As Jim Crawford
has stated, "With standards come tests; with more standards, more
tests" (letter submitted to the New York Times, July 17, 2012).
PARCC accepts this, urging the development of an accountability
system that covers P-20 (pre-school through college), and "that
supports the full implementation of the common standards" (PARCC: On
the Road to Implementation: Achieving the Promise of the Common Core
Standards, 2010, Achieve, Inc. p. 4).
.
Kristof, N.D. 2013. "For Obama's New Term, Start Here." New York
Times OP-ED, 23 Jan, online at http://nyti.ms/WnEhU2>. Kristof
wrote: "Something is profoundly wrong when we can point to
2-year-olds in this country and make a plausible bet about their
long-term outcomes - not based on their brains and capabilities, but
on their ZIP codes. President Obama spoke movingly in his second
Inaugural Address of making equality a practice as well as a
principle. So, Mr. President, how about using your second term to
tackle this most fundamental inequality?"
.
Marder, M. 2012. "Failure of U.S. Public Secondary Schools in
Mathematics," Journal of Scholarship and Practice 9(1): 8-25; the
entire issue is online as a 2.7 MB pdf at http://bit.ly/KPitWM>,
scroll down to page 8. Marder wrote: "The collection of nationwide
data do point to a primary cause of school failure, but it is
poverty, not teacher quality. As the concentration of low-income
children increases in a school, the challenges to teachers and
administrators increase so that ultimately the educational quality of
the school suffers. Challenges include students moving from one
school to another within the school year, frequency of illness, lack
of stable supportive homes with quiet places to study, concentration
of students who are angry or disobedient, probability of students
disappearing from school altogether, and difficulty of attracting and
retaining strong teachers. Most people who see the connection between
poverty and educational outcomes are confident that low-income
students in a sufficiently supportive environment will learn as much
in a school year as students in well-off communities."
.
Miller, E. & N. Carlsson-Paige. 2013. "Do young kids need to learn a
lot of facts?" in Valerie Strauss' "Answer Sheet," Washington Post,
29 Jan.; online at http://wapo.st/13oJVqW>. They wrote: "Recent
critiques of the Common Core Standards by Marion Brady (2012) and
John T. Spencer (2012) have noted that the process for creating the
new K-12 standards involved too little research, public dialogue, or
input from educators. Nowhere was this more startlingly true than in
the case of the early childhood standards-those imposed on
kindergarten through grade 3. We reviewed the makeup of the
committees that wrote and reviewed the Common Core Standards. In all,
there were 135 people on those panels. Not a single one of them was a
K-3 classroom teacher or early childhood professional. It appears
that early childhood teachers and child development experts were
excluded from the K-3 standards-writing process.
When the standards were first revealed in March 2010, many early
childhood educators and researchers were shocked. 'The people who
wrote these standards do not appear to have any background in child
development or early childhood education,' wrote Stephanie Feeney of
the University of Hawaii, chair of the Advocacy Committee of the
National Association of Early Childhood Teacher Educators." See the
response by E.D. Hirsch (2013).
.
Neuman, S.B. & D.C. Celano. 2012. "Giving Our Children a Fighting
ChancePoverty, Literacy, and the Development of Information Capital,"
Teachers College Press, publishers information at
http://bit.ly/ZVCsil>. Amazon.com information at
http://amzn.to/VVml0G>, note the searchable "Look Inside" feature.
The publisher states: "This is a compelling, eye-opening portrait of
two communities in Philadelphia with drastically different economic
resources. Over the course of their 10-year investigation, the
authors of this important new work came to understand that this
disparity between affluence and poverty has created a *knowledge gap*
- far more important than mere achievement scores - with serious
implications for students' economic prosperity and social mobility.
At the heart of this knowledge gap is the limited ability of students
from poor communities to develop *information capital.* This moving
book takes you into the communities in question to meet the students
and their families, and by doing so provides powerful insights into
the role that literacy can play in giving low-income students a
fighting chance."
.
Ohanian, S. 2013. "Whoo-Hoo! Occupy the Schools," Daily Censored, 19
Feb; online at http://bit.ly/XGs4oq>. Susan Ohanian, longtime
teacher, winner of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE)
"Orwell Award" http://bit.ly/Z4N4Xk> for "outstanding contributions
to the critical analysis of public discourse," and author of "One
Size Fits Few: The Folly of Educational
Standards"http://amzn.to/ZNvtYK>, bashes the "Standardistos"
generally at http://bit.ly/Xe7P56> and the Common Core specifically
at http://bit.ly/YEUFMj>. She wrote: "In response to a poverty rate
that tops 90% in many urban and rural schools -and 1.6 million
homeless children-many in schools with no libraries-education
reformers at the White House, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation,
and the National Governors Association call for a radical, untried
curriculum overhaul and two versions of nonstop national testing to
measure whether teachers are producing workers for the Global
Economy."
.
Ravitch, D. 2013. "Why I Cannot Support the Common Core Standards,"
Diane Ravitch's blog 26 Feb., online at http://bit.ly/XGpEpK>.
Ravitch wrote: "I have come to the conclusion that the Common Core
standards effort is fundamentally flawed by the process with which
they have been foisted upon the nation. The Common Core standards
have been adopted in 46 states and the District of Columbia without
any field test. They are being imposed on the children of this nation
despite the fact that no one has any idea how they will affect
students, teachers, or schools.. . . . . President Obama and
Secretary Duncan often say that the Common Core standards were
developed by the states and voluntarily adopted by them. This is not
true. They were developed by an organization called Achieve . . . . .
. .[[http://bit.ly/WkjC39>]]. . . . . and the National Governors
Association. . . . . . .[[http://bit.ly/15lUJ7M>]]. . . . ., both of
which were generously funded by the Gates Foundation. . . . .
.[[http://bit.ly/Vf07aD>]]. . . . .. There was minimal public
engagement in the development of the Common Core. Their creation was
neither grassroots nor did it emanate from the states. In fact, it
was well understood by states that they would not be eligible for
Race to the Top funding ($4.35 billion) unless they adopted the
Common Core standards. . . . . "
.
Schmidt, W.H., R. Houang, & S. Shakrani. 2009. "International Lessons
About National Standards," online as a 1.8 MB pdf at
http://bit.ly/xPjmJ4>., foreword by Chester E. Finn, Jr., Michael J.
Petrilli, and Amber M. Winkler. See also "Bill Schmidt's 'Tale of Two
Countries' " [Viadero (2009)].
.
Schmidt, W., G. Leroi, S. Billinge, L. Lederman, A. Champagne, R.
Hake, P. Heron, L. McDermott, F. Myers, R. Otto, J. Pasachoff, C.
Pennypacker, & P. Williams. 2011. "Towards Coherence in Science
Instruction: A Framework for Science Literacy," online as a 1.7 MB
pdf at http://bit.ly/VXgzLK>.
.
Schmidt, W.H. 2012. "Seizing the Moment for Mathematics," Education
Week, 18 July, online to subscribers at http://bit.ly/Z0BbS2> or
free (along with other articles on "Math and the Common Core") to
those who supply their postal and email addresses at
http://bit.ly/13X7iUc>. Schmidt wrote: "For years now it has been
clear that the U.S. mathematics curriculum is a mile wide and an inch
deep, and that the fragmented quality of mathematics instruction is
related to our low ranking on international assessments. Nearly a
generation after the first Trends in International Mathematics and
Science Study, the nation's governors and chief state school
officers, in concert with other stakeholders, have fashioned the
Common Core State Standards for mathematics that may finally give
American students the high-quality standards they deserve." See also
Schmidt & McKnight (2012).
.
Schmidt, W. & C. McKnight. 2012. "Inequality for All: The Challenge
of Unequal Opportunity in American Schools." Teachers College Press,
publisher's information at http://bit.ly/Y5MHK5>. Amazon.com
information at http://amzn.to/13wVkoT>, note the searchable "Look
Inside" feature. The publisher states: " 'Inequality for All' makes
an important contribution to current debates about economic
inequalities and the growing achievement gap, particularly in
mathematics and science education. The authors argue that the
greatest source of variation in opportunity to learn is not between
local communities, or even schools, but between classrooms. They zero
in on one of the core elements of schooling - coverage of subject
matter content - and examine how such opportunities are distributed
across the millions of school children in the United States. Drawing
on data from the third TIMMS international study of curriculum and
achievement, as well as a six-district study of over 500 schools
across the United States, they point to Common Core State Standards
as being a key step in creating a more level playing field for all
students." See also Schmidt et al. (2011) and Hake (2012).
.
Senechal, D. 2013. "Literature Courses and the Common Core," blog
entry of 11 Jan., online at http://bit.ly/13qTcPp>. Senechal wrote:
"I applaud [Jago's] ideas, yet I have some qualms as well. First, if
the point is to introduce students to compelling literature, then
shouldn't curriculum and courses take precedence over standards? A
curriculum specifies the actual literature; standards do not. A
curriculum need not be uniform across schools, districts, and
states-but it holds more meaning and coherence than generic standards
do. . . . . . Second, the standards bring a spate of new assessments
that we have not yet seen or tried. What happens if the tests
conflict with good curricula? Will teachers come under pressure to
defer to the tests? Will the technology companies start hawking
software that supposedly helps students boost their scores? Will
teachers be expected to use it? . . . . .Third, how will schools
foster the sort of environment that Jago envisions (and that I
support), where students come to class eager to discuss the texts?
Many students will do this right away. Others will resist at first
but will eventually come around. Still others will resist for a long
time-maybe all the way through school."
.
Spencer, J.T. 2012. "Common Core reading pros and cons," in Valerie
Strauss' "Answer Sheet," Washington Post, 4 Dec; online at
http://wapo.st/XFXsql>. Spencer's final thought is: "I don't think
the standards are all that different. . . . .[[from present
standards]] . . . in reading and writing. Some of them ask for more
text evidence or critical thinking. However, isn't that what good
teachers do anyway? Thus, while I see some pros and cons to the
standards, I really don't think they will lead to a seismic shift in
how we teach our content."
.
Strauss, V. 2013. "Resistance to Common Core standards growing," in
Valerie Strauss' "Answer Sheet," Washington Post, 26 Feb.; online at
http://wapo.st/Y7kwdK>.
.
Tampio, N. 2012. "Do We Need a Common Core?" Huffington Post, 7 May;
online at http://huff.to/ZBaDb6>. Nicholas Tampio, Assistant
Professor of Political Science, Fordham University, wrote: "In
February, my son's class was selected to pilot a reading program
designed to satisfy the Common Core criteria. The teacher started
dedicating two hours a day to packaged lesson plans. Rather than
giving the students free work choice, in which they build with blocks
or paint, the students must sit on the floor while the teacher
lectures at them. Rather than tailoring the curriculum to each child,
she hands students books from a narrow, predetermined list. Parent
volunteers now have a smaller role to play in the classroom, and the
school district is about to cut funding for kindergarten aides. The
class, in short, has gone from one where teachers, aides, parents,
and students work hard to create a rewarding educational experience,
to one where the teachers and students use materials designed by a
major publishing house.
.
Tucker, M.S. 2012. "On Naked Standards-And Free Curriculum," National
Journal, 28 Feb., online at http://bit.ly/Y531xl>. Marc Tucker
http://bit.ly/13mObHy> wrote: "Everything I have learned from almost
a quarter century of study of highly successful national education
systems suggests that standards by themselves are a very weak reed on
which to depend to improve student performance. It is only when
well-wrought standards are used to inform the development of a
national instructional system that we observe very powerful effects.
Such systems include curriculum frameworks, curriculum (including
carefully crafted syllabi), high quality examinations based directly
on the curriculum to be implemented in the schools and training of
the teachers to teach the courses well. If the Common Core State
Standards fail, it will be because we have implemented only part of
the winning formula, not because we have been barking up the wrong
tree."
.
Viadero wrote (slightly edited): "[Schmidt et al. (2009, pp. 11-13)]
tell 'a tale of two countries.' The two countries in this bedtime
story are the United States and Germany, both of which in 1996 found
their students scoring in the middle of the pack on international
tests in mathematics. Both countries have similar education systems,
according to Schmidt. Germany places much of the control over what
gets taught in schools in the hands of its 16 federal states, just as
the U.S. cedes that authority to its 50 states. The Germans took the
bad news as a wake-up call to go to work on setting national
standards for what their students ought to learn in school. . . . .
The happy ending: By 2003, the nation had signed off on curricular
standards for foreign languages, German, math, and science in grades
4, 9, 10, and 12, as well as a set of tests closely aligned with
them. It's not that the U.S. hadn't made similar sorts of efforts
over the same time period, though. Policymakers here advocated
voluntary national tests and national groups developed voluntary
national standards. But, in the end, 'in Washington,' Schmidt et al.
said, 'they did not end up getting past the fear of federal control
over the local system.' Now, 12 years later, the call for national
standards is being renewed in the U.S. And this time around, two
organizations - the Council of Chief State School Officers - and the
National Governors Association-are leading the drive to develop
common academic standards."
.
Weingarten, R. 2009. "The Case for National Standards," Washington
Post, 16 February; online at http://wapo.st/XbIJ6K>. Randi
Weingarten is president of the American Federation of Teachers
http://bit.ly/15UiLry>. She wrote: "The countries that consistently
outperform the United States on international assessments all have
national standards, with core curriculum, assessments and time for
professional development for teachers based on those standards. Here
in the United States, students in Massachusetts, which has been
recognized for setting high standards, scored on a par with the
highest-performing countries in both math and science on a recent
international assessment. After Minnesota adopted rigorous math
standards, students there ranked fifth in the world on the
mathematics portion of that assessment. Academic standards for
students in the rest of the country, unfortunately, are a mixed bag..
. . . . . . Should fate, as determined by a student's Zip code,
dictate how much algebra he or she is taught? Such a system isn't
practical: Modern American society is highly mobile. And it's just
not right -- every child attending U.S. public schools should be
taught to high standards, regardless of where he or she lives. . . .
. Education is a local issue, but there is a body of knowledge about
what children should know and be able to do that should guide
decisions about curriculum and testing. I propose that a broad-based
group -- made up of educators, elected officials, community leaders,
and experts in pedagogy and particular content -- come together to
take the best academic standards and make them available as a
national model. Teachers then would need the professional
development, and the teaching and learning conditions, to make the
standards more than mere words."
.
.
Other related posts:
- » [net-gold] The Contentious Common Core Controversy - David P. Dillard
