1. What is the purpose of the college and career readiness standards?
The purpose of the college and career readiness it to keep the student's focus on what they are preparing for after high school. It helps the students have a more way of knowing what will be expected of them after high school.
2. What are the benefits and challenges of the shift to reading and writing non-fiction tests?
80% of what we read is informational text. After high shcool, when we are in college we are asked to read a peice of writing then write about what we read. We are not asked to write a story about ourselves. The students need to be independent in writing. They need to know how to source their documents as well as comprehend the documents of what they read correctly.
3. What are the benefits and challenges of having standards for Science, Social Studies, and technical subjects?
To endure more complex text is standards for Science, Social Studies, and technical subjects. Wether the document of reading consist of an owners manual or an essay.
Thursday, August 29, 2013
Tuesday, August 27, 2013
4. The Biggest Fallacy of the Common Core Standards
Summary:
The article questions the nation’s
major corporations and chambers of commerce by standards they swear by which
they very likely have never read. Also they ask, do we need national standards
to compare the performance of children in Mississippi to children in New York
and Iowa?
Across the nation, our schools are
suffering from budget cuts as the article states. Because of the cuts, there
are larger class sizes and fewer guidance counselors, social workers, teachers’
assistants, and librarians. As more
money is allocated to testing and accountability, less money is available for
the essential programs and services that all schools provide.
The article states at the end that
our priorities are confused.
Opinion:
When I think
about this situation with the Common Core I see positive things that could come
from it, but somehow the negative things seem to overcome the positive
ones. I agree with this article in some
areas such as the only reason states are agreeing to adopt the Common Core is
to earn millions of dollars in federal funds. I mean each state knows how to
regulate their schools districts I would assume. If they do not I agree with
having some of the same standards, but not all. Each state has their own
problems to work through and different ranking classes of income within the
schools districts. Like the article states about comparing Mississippi to New
York schools, why should they? Also why
should they stress these new standards if they have no evidence to prove it
works only fail? Think about it?
3. The Common Core's fundamental trouble
Summary:
Written by the editors of Rethinking
Schools is an organization that publishes a magazine that balances
classroom practice and educational theory and also addressing key policy
issues. Writers include teachers,
parents, and researchers. This
organization states that the Common Core, already hailed as the next big thing,
is being rushed into every school district in the country. There are many positive claims made about the
common core. For example, it represents a tighter set of smarter standards
focused on developing critical learning skills instead of mastering fragmented
bits of knowledge, or it requires more progressive, student-centered teaching
with strong elements of collaborative and reflective learning. You may also know that many creative, heroic
teachers are seeking ways to use this latest reform to serve their students
well.
You would like to believe these claims and
efforts can trump the more political uses of the Common Core project. But the
organization seems to say you cannot. For starters, the misnamed “Common Core
State Standards” are not state standards. They are national standards, created
by Gates-funded consultants for the National Governors Association (NGA). States were coerced into adopting the Common
Core by requirements attached to the federal race to the top grants, later, the
No Child Left Behind waivers. This is one of the reason many conservative
groups opposed to any federal role in education policy oppose the Common
Core.
The
Common Core standards have never been fully implemented and tested in real
schools anywhere. Of the 135 members on
the official Common Core review panels, few were classroom teachers or current
administrators. Parents were entirely missing.
Teachers were brought in after the fact to tweak the standards. The
standards are tied to assessments that are still in development and that must
be given on computers. The new Common Core tests will be considerably harder
than current state assessments, leading to sharp drops in scores and
proficiency rates.
NCLB’s
test scores, being a failure over the last decade, reflected the inequality
that exists all around our schools. NCLB
used gaps to label schools as failures without providing the resources or
support needed to eliminate them. The tests showed that millions of students
were not meeting existing standards. Yet the Common Core draws the conclusion
the solution was to have more challenging test. In the organizations belief,
this is wrong. The engine for this
potential disaster will be the tests, in this case the “next generation” Common
Core tests being developed by two federal funded, mulit-state consortia at a
cost of hundreds of millions of dollars. If, as proposed, the Common Core’s
“college and career ready” performances level becomes the standard for high
school graduation, it will push more kids out of high school than it prepare
for college. Reports from the first wave of testing from the Common Core tests
are already confirming these fears in New York schools. Students reported
feeling overstressed and underprepared.
The
organization feels unless we dismantle and defeat this larger effort, Common
Core implementation will become another stage in the demise of public
education. There has been too little conversation and too little democracy in
the development of the Common Core. We
see consultants and corporate entrepreneurs where there should be parents and
teachers, and more high-stakes testing where there should be none. Until that
changes, it will be hard to distinguish the next big thing.
Opinion:
The
editors of Rethinking Schools makes a brilliant point in my
opinion. The fact that teachers and
administrators have little say so over the Common Core alerts a big red flag to
mind. That alone needs to change, after
all teachers are the one that are hands on with the students every day. How can
the state standards not need more of their opinion rather than a government
official? It’s kind of crazy if you ask me.
Also
how can the Common Core possible think that college ready tests are better for
students with a high percentage of drop rates already? Not every person is
alike, especially if there are already results of fears from the test in New
York schools. The percentage of drop rates will only increase. People have their own paths they choose to
take, and not everyone’s path may lead them to college. My boyfriend for
instance works on the tow boats. He started out right after high school. He makes $60,000 a year now. As he continues
he will making over $100,000 a year by the time I graduate college to become a
teacher where I will be making between $30,000 to $40,000. He got his job with
only a high school diploma. This proves college is not for everyone.
The Common Core needs to take in
these considerations. This is the future of not only the children’s sake, but
the country’s as well.
-Brittneii Flynt
Thursday, August 22, 2013
2. How Teachers Are Integrating Tech Common Core- Brittneii
Summary:
Schools across the globe are disrupting the traditional education model through the incorporation of technology into instruction. The switch to the Common Core occurring at the same as this wave of educational technology is perfect. When each student has access to a device such as an iPad, they are connected to the world, and allows our students to explore a topic to a level of deep understanding that is required in the Common Core. The Common Core has standards based on the use of technology and for that reason alone, they are a step in the right direction. At the "core" of the common core is the belief that schools should teach content deeper rather than shallow and broad. With that said, a positive side to the change of the Common Core is that is allows educators to teach deeper and how to help students learn as opposed to remembering. Schools adjusting their curriculum in response to the Common Core must give serious consideration to the integration of technology into their instructional model. Not only will the integration of technology allow schools to meet the Common Core State Standards (CCSS), but more importantly it will provide for the deep learning required of our students.
Opinion:
The thought of how much our world has advanced overtime through technology is an overwhelming rush through my mind. It amazes me how greatly technology has succeeded over a little amount of time. My grandmother would have never thought of using an iPad for a lesson at school. As we realize how much our world is advancing, we also need to realize we must advance too and what better way than through our educational programs. Students start learning to work smart phones young as two years old. Technology is being integrated with our Common Core State Standards because of these advancements. It allows the students to become more involved with the lessons and helps them learn rather than just remembering. We need to keep in mind that technology will not slow down, but only continue to succeed overtime. This is important to our education, and is why I feel that CCSS should continue to integrate technology in the Common Core to better the future of our students.
Schools across the globe are disrupting the traditional education model through the incorporation of technology into instruction. The switch to the Common Core occurring at the same as this wave of educational technology is perfect. When each student has access to a device such as an iPad, they are connected to the world, and allows our students to explore a topic to a level of deep understanding that is required in the Common Core. The Common Core has standards based on the use of technology and for that reason alone, they are a step in the right direction. At the "core" of the common core is the belief that schools should teach content deeper rather than shallow and broad. With that said, a positive side to the change of the Common Core is that is allows educators to teach deeper and how to help students learn as opposed to remembering. Schools adjusting their curriculum in response to the Common Core must give serious consideration to the integration of technology into their instructional model. Not only will the integration of technology allow schools to meet the Common Core State Standards (CCSS), but more importantly it will provide for the deep learning required of our students.
Opinion:
The thought of how much our world has advanced overtime through technology is an overwhelming rush through my mind. It amazes me how greatly technology has succeeded over a little amount of time. My grandmother would have never thought of using an iPad for a lesson at school. As we realize how much our world is advancing, we also need to realize we must advance too and what better way than through our educational programs. Students start learning to work smart phones young as two years old. Technology is being integrated with our Common Core State Standards because of these advancements. It allows the students to become more involved with the lessons and helps them learn rather than just remembering. We need to keep in mind that technology will not slow down, but only continue to succeed overtime. This is important to our education, and is why I feel that CCSS should continue to integrate technology in the Common Core to better the future of our students.
Introduction
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)