Common Core's Communist Programming Exposed: Chinese Immigrant Speaks Out

[Nbadan]

Be happy to admit I know little about it, but that is easy to remedy. Feel free to help me out. Good or bad, I have no real opinion as of yet, although given the caliber of morons railing against some of it, I can't say I am impressed by the criticisms so far.

common core sets up common learning standards at each grade level....so that any student can move from one part of the country, state, or city, to another and not miss a beat..

[TeyshaBlue]

Common core epitomizes one-size-fits-all.

[boutons_deux]

Common core epitomizes one-size-fits-all.

don't be a coward, speak up with your alternative

[Nbadan]

Common core epitomizes one-size-fits-all.

That would be no child left behind.....common core merely sets up common standards, not how they should be taught....

[TeyshaBlue]

I have thought long and hard about the Common Core standards.

I have decided that I cannot support them.

In this post, I will explain why.

I have long advocated for voluntary national standards, believing that it would be helpful to states and districts to have general guidelines about what students should know and be able to do as they progress through school.

Such standards, I believe, should be voluntary, not imposed by the federal government; before implemented widely, they should be thoroughly tested to see how they work in real classrooms; and they should be free of any mandates that tell teachers how to teach because there are many ways to be a good teacher, not just one. I envision standards not as a demand for compliance by teachers, but as an aspiration defining what states and districts are expected to do. They should serve as a promise that schools will provide all students the opportunity and resources to learn reading and mathematics, the sciences, the arts, history, literature, civics, geography, and physical education, taught by well-qualified teachers, in schools led by experienced and competent educators.

​For the past two years, I have steadfastly insisted that I was neither for nor against the Common Core standards. I was agnostic. I wanted to see how they worked in practice. I wanted to know, based on evidence, whether or not they improve education and whether they reduce or increase the achievement gaps among different racial and ethnic groups.

After much deliberation, I have come to the conclusion that I can’t wait five or ten years to find out whether test scores go up or down, whether or not schools improve, and whether the kids now far behind are worse off than they are today.

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. We are a nation of guinea pigs, almost all trying an unknown new program at the same time.

Maybe the standards will be great. Maybe they will be a disaster. Maybe they will improve achievement. Maybe they will widen the achievement gaps between haves and have-nots. Maybe they will cause the children who now struggle to give up altogether. Would the Federal Drug Administration approve the use of a drug with no trials, no concern for possible harm or unintended consequences?

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 and the National Governors Association, both of which were generously funded by the Gates Foundation. 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. Federal law prohibits the U.S. Department of Education from prescribing any curriculum, but in this case the Department figured out a clever way to evade the letter of the law. Forty-six states and the District of Columbia signed on, not because the Common Core standards were better than their own, but because they wanted a share of the federal cash. In some cases, the Common Core standards really were better than the state standards, but in Massachusetts, for example, the state standards were superior and well tested but were ditched anyway and replaced with the Common Core. The former Texas State Commissioner of Education, Robert Scott, has stated for the record that he was urged to adopt the Common Core standards before they were written.

The flap over fiction vs. informational text further undermined my confidence in the standards. There is no reason for national standards to tell teachers what percentage of their time should be devoted to literature or information. Both can develop the ability to think critically. The claim that the writers of the standards picked their arbitrary ratios because NAEP has similar ratios makes no sense. NAEP gives specifications to test-developers, not to classroom teachers.

I must say too that it was offensive when Joel Klein and Condoleeza Rice issued a report declaring that our nation’s public schools were so terrible that they were a “very grave threat to our national security.” Their antidote to this allegedly desperate situation: the untried Common Core standards plus charters and vouchers.

Another reason I cannot support the Common Core standards is that I am worried that they will cause a precipitous decline in test scores, based on arbitrary cut scores, and this will have a disparate impact on students who are English language learners, students with disabilities, and students who are poor and low-performing. A principal in the Mid-West told me that his school piloted the Common Core assessments and the failure rate rocketed upwards, especially among the students with the highest needs. He said the exams looked like AP exams and were beyond the reach of many students.

When Kentucky piloted the Common Core, proficiency rates dropped by 30 percent. The Chancellor of the New York Board of Regents has already warned that the state should expect a sharp drop in test scores.

What is the purpose of raising the bar so high that many more students fail?

Rick Hess opined that reformers were confident that the Common Core would cause so much dissatisfaction among suburban parents that they would flee their public schools and embrace the reformers’ ideas (charters and vouchers). Rick was appropriately doubtful that suburban parents could be frightened so easily.

Jeb Bush, at a conference of business leaders, confidently predicted that the high failure rates sure to be caused by Common Core would bring about “a rude awakening.” Why so much glee at the prospect of higher failure rates?.

I recently asked a friend who is a strong supporter of the standards why he was so confident that the standards would succeed, absent any real-world validation. His answer: “People I trust say so.” That’s not good enough for me.

Now that David Coleman, the architect of the Common Core standards, has become president of the College Board, we can expect that the SAT will be aligned to the standards. No one will escape their reach, whether they attend public or private school.

Is there not something unseemly about placing the fate and the future of American education in the hands of one man?

I hope for the sake of the nation that the Common Core standards are great and wonderful. I wish they were voluntary, not mandatory. I wish we knew more about how they will affect our most vulnerable students.

But since I do not know the answer to any of the questions that trouble me, I cannot support the Common Core standards.

I will continue to watch and listen. While I cannot support the Common Core standards, I will remain open to new evidence. If the standards help kids, I will say so. If they hurt them, I will say so. I will listen to their advocates and to their critics.

I will encourage my allies to think critically about the standards, to pay attention to how they affect students, and to insist, at least, that they do no harm.
dianeravitch.net/2013/02/26/why-i-cannot-support-the-common-core-standards/

[TeyshaBlue]

That would be no child left behind.....common core merely sets up common standards, not how they should be taught....

Common core defines the curriculum. Not much else you can do when you're straight jacketed by design.

[Nbadan]

Staying with something, even though results show it's not working is stupid too...not saying that common core will cure the nation's education system, not at all, but it replaces a system that hasn't worked for decades...

[Nbadan]

Common core defines the curriculum. Not much else you can do when you're straight jacketed by design.

Well, these are minimum standards....it's up to local school districts if they decide they want to push the envelope of standards...

[Nbadan]

Ultimately though, my feeling is that magnet schools are the way to go...

[m>s]

I have thought long and hard about the Common Core standards.

I have decided that I cannot support them.

In this post, I will explain why.

I have long advocated for voluntary national standards, believing that it would be helpful to states and districts to have general guidelines about what students should know and be able to do as they progress through school.

Such standards, I believe, should be voluntary, not imposed by the federal government; before implemented widely, they should be thoroughly tested to see how they work in real classrooms; and they should be free of any mandates that tell teachers how to teach because there are many ways to be a good teacher, not just one. I envision standards not as a demand for compliance by teachers, but as an aspiration defining what states and districts are expected to do. They should serve as a promise that schools will provide all students the opportunity and resources to learn reading and mathematics, the sciences, the arts, history, literature, civics, geography, and physical education, taught by well-qualified teachers, in schools led by experienced and competent educators.

​For the past two years, I have steadfastly insisted that I was neither for nor against the Common Core standards. I was agnostic. I wanted to see how they worked in practice. I wanted to know, based on evidence, whether or not they improve education and whether they reduce or increase the achievement gaps among different racial and ethnic groups.

After much deliberation, I have come to the conclusion that I can’t wait five or ten years to find out whether test scores go up or down, whether or not schools improve, and whether the kids now far behind are worse off than they are today.

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. We are a nation of guinea pigs, almost all trying an unknown new program at the same time.

Maybe the standards will be great. Maybe they will be a disaster. Maybe they will improve achievement. Maybe they will widen the achievement gaps between haves and have-nots. Maybe they will cause the children who now struggle to give up altogether. Would the Federal Drug Administration approve the use of a drug with no trials, no concern for possible harm or unintended consequences?

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 and the National Governors Association, both of which were generously funded by the Gates Foundation. 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. Federal law prohibits the U.S. Department of Education from prescribing any curriculum, but in this case the Department figured out a clever way to evade the letter of the law. Forty-six states and the District of Columbia signed on, not because the Common Core standards were better than their own, but because they wanted a share of the federal cash. In some cases, the Common Core standards really were better than the state standards, but in Massachusetts, for example, the state standards were superior and well tested but were ditched anyway and replaced with the Common Core. The former Texas State Commissioner of Education, Robert Scott, has stated for the record that he was urged to adopt the Common Core standards before they were written.

The flap over fiction vs. informational text further undermined my confidence in the standards. There is no reason for national standards to tell teachers what percentage of their time should be devoted to literature or information. Both can develop the ability to think critically. The claim that the writers of the standards picked their arbitrary ratios because NAEP has similar ratios makes no sense. NAEP gives specifications to test-developers, not to classroom teachers.

I must say too that it was offensive when Joel Klein and Condoleeza Rice issued a report declaring that our nation’s public schools were so terrible that they were a “very grave threat to our national security.” Their antidote to this allegedly desperate situation: the untried Common Core standards plus charters and vouchers.

Another reason I cannot support the Common Core standards is that I am worried that they will cause a precipitous decline in test scores, based on arbitrary cut scores, and this will have a disparate impact on students who are English language learners, students with disabilities, and students who are poor and low-performing. A principal in the Mid-West told me that his school piloted the Common Core assessments and the failure rate rocketed upwards, especially among the students with the highest needs. He said the exams looked like AP exams and were beyond the reach of many students.

When Kentucky piloted the Common Core, proficiency rates dropped by 30 percent. The Chancellor of the New York Board of Regents has already warned that the state should expect a sharp drop in test scores.

What is the purpose of raising the bar so high that many more students fail?

Rick Hess opined that reformers were confident that the Common Core would cause so much dissatisfaction among suburban parents that they would flee their public schools and embrace the reformers’ ideas (charters and vouchers). Rick was appropriately doubtful that suburban parents could be frightened so easily.

Jeb Bush, at a conference of business leaders, confidently predicted that the high failure rates sure to be caused by Common Core would bring about “a rude awakening.” Why so much glee at the prospect of higher failure rates?.

I recently asked a friend who is a strong supporter of the standards why he was so confident that the standards would succeed, absent any real-world validation. His answer: “People I trust say so.” That’s not good enough for me.

Now that David Coleman, the architect of the Common Core standards, has become president of the College Board, we can expect that the SAT will be aligned to the standards. No one will escape their reach, whether they attend public or private school.

Is there not something unseemly about placing the fate and the future of American education in the hands of one man?

I hope for the sake of the nation that the Common Core standards are great and wonderful. I wish they were voluntary, not mandatory. I wish we knew more about how they will affect our most vulnerable students.

But since I do not know the answer to any of the questions that trouble me, I cannot support the Common Core standards.

I will continue to watch and listen. While I cannot support the Common Core standards, I will remain open to new evidence. If the standards help kids, I will say so. If they hurt them, I will say so. I will listen to their advocates and to their critics.

I will encourage my allies to think critically about the standards, to pay attention to how they affect students, and to insist, at least, that they do no harm.
dianeravitch.net/2013/02/26/why-i-cannot-support-the-common-core-standards/

are you Diane ravitch?

[boutons_deux]

What CC subjects would you allow the anti-govt secessionists drop and still give their students the OPPORTUNITY to meet CC's level of knowledge and competence?

"For grades K-8, grade-by-grade standards exist in English language arts/literacy and mathematics.

For grades 9-12, the standards are grouped into grade bands of 9-10 grade standards and 11-12 grade standards.While the standards set grade-specific goals, they do not define how the standards should be taught or which materials should be used to support students.

States and districts recognize that there will need to be a range of supports in place to ensure that all students, including those with special needs and English language learners, can master the standards. It is up to the states to define the full range of supports appropriate for these students.

No set of grade-specific standards can fully reflect the great variety of abilities, needs, learning rates, and achievement levels of students in any given classroom.

( aka ONE SIZE FITS ALL! )

Importantly, the standards provide clear signposts along the way to the goal of college and career readiness for all students."

http://www.corestandards.org/read-the-standards/

http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy/

http://www.corestandards.org/Math/

That's really, really fundamental, general stuff, IF one isn't a Repug/redneck/conservative/Christian absolutely, vehemently, Confederate-ly BIASED and REVOLTING against anything and everything from the Federal govt (and contrary to the Fox/Repug LIES and HATE, CC is not FROM the Feds).

Do you allow total curriculum freewheeling at the district level, at the school level?, or do you let a state FORCE TOP-DOWN standards and curriculum on all schools in its state?

eg, in already-bottom-of-the-education-pile, high-dumb-teacher-churn TX' case, it's clear SBOE is peopled by Christian supremacist, anti-science, anti-education Taliban and right-wing anti-historical extremists with a ed up PRAVDA AGENDA of indoctrination, not general education.

Scott Walker "teacher" qualification: "teachers don't need formal education, teachers can be people who had a career doin sumpin"

[boutons_deux]

All this redstate/VRWC/Repug/Fox/Christian BULL about Common Core is REALLY their strategy of destroying public education and teacher unions as source of Dem funding, so taxpayer $Ts are distributed to for-profit private schools.

Note that non-profit charters are often housed in taxpayer-funded facilities, others lease facilities from for-profit landlords, and outsource the bulk of their operations to for-profit contractors.

iow, "non-profit" charter school is a LIE.

You People are really, really intent on ing up the country for profit.

[TeyshaBlue]

are you Diane ravitch?

Did you miss the link at the end?

lol UTA

[TeyshaBlue]

All this redstate/VRWC/Repug/Fox/Christian BULL about Common Core is REALLY their strategy of destroying public education and teacher unions as source of Dem funding, so taxpayer $Ts are distributed to for-profit private schools.

Note that non-profit charters are often housed in taxpayer-funded facilities, others lease facilities from for-profit landlords, and outsource the bulk of their operations to for-profit contractors.

iow, "non-profit" charter school is a LIE.

You People are really, really intent on ing up the country for profit.

Youre a ing loon. Do you not remember the last thread about this? Of course not.

[TeyshaBlue]

Ultimately though, my feeling is that magnet schools are the way to go...

This.

[m>s]

Did you miss the link at the end?

lol UTA

Nice edit homie

[TeyshaBlue]

There from the beginning, UTA.

[angrydude]

It's ironic that advocates of Common Core say it's designed to improve education so we can compete with those damn smart asian kids.

You want to know how those asians got so good at math and science?

They memorize hardcore. So much so that their creativity is stunted. Basically the complete opposite of common core.

[RandomGuy]

I have thought long and hard about the Common Core standards.

I have decided that I cannot support them.

In this post, I will explain why.

I have long advocated for voluntary national standards, believing that it would be helpful to states and districts to have general guidelines about what students should know and be able to do as they progress through school.

Such standards, I believe, should be voluntary, not imposed by the federal government; before implemented widely, they should be thoroughly tested to see how they work in real classrooms; and they should be free of any mandates that tell teachers how to teach because there are many ways to be a good teacher, not just one. I envision standards not as a demand for compliance by teachers, but as an aspiration defining what states and districts are expected to do. They should serve as a promise that schools will provide all students the opportunity and resources to learn reading and mathematics, the sciences, the arts, history, literature, civics, geography, and physical education, taught by well-qualified teachers, in schools led by experienced and competent educators.

​For the past two years, I have steadfastly insisted that I was neither for nor against the Common Core standards. I was agnostic. I wanted to see how they worked in practice. I wanted to know, based on evidence, whether or not they improve education and whether they reduce or increase the achievement gaps among different racial and ethnic groups.

After much deliberation, I have come to the conclusion that I can’t wait five or ten years to find out whether test scores go up or down, whether or not schools improve, and whether the kids now far behind are worse off than they are today.

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. We are a nation of guinea pigs, almost all trying an unknown new program at the same time.

Maybe the standards will be great. Maybe they will be a disaster. Maybe they will improve achievement. Maybe they will widen the achievement gaps between haves and have-nots. Maybe they will cause the children who now struggle to give up altogether. Would the Federal Drug Administration approve the use of a drug with no trials, no concern for possible harm or unintended consequences?

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 and the National Governors Association, both of which were generously funded by the Gates Foundation. 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. Federal law prohibits the U.S. Department of Education from prescribing any curriculum, but in this case the Department figured out a clever way to evade the letter of the law. Forty-six states and the District of Columbia signed on, not because the Common Core standards were better than their own, but because they wanted a share of the federal cash. In some cases, the Common Core standards really were better than the state standards, but in Massachusetts, for example, the state standards were superior and well tested but were ditched anyway and replaced with the Common Core. The former Texas State Commissioner of Education, Robert Scott, has stated for the record that he was urged to adopt the Common Core standards before they were written.

The flap over fiction vs. informational text further undermined my confidence in the standards. There is no reason for national standards to tell teachers what percentage of their time should be devoted to literature or information. Both can develop the ability to think critically. The claim that the writers of the standards picked their arbitrary ratios because NAEP has similar ratios makes no sense. NAEP gives specifications to test-developers, not to classroom teachers.

I must say too that it was offensive when Joel Klein and Condoleeza Rice issued a report declaring that our nation’s public schools were so terrible that they were a “very grave threat to our national security.” Their antidote to this allegedly desperate situation: the untried Common Core standards plus charters and vouchers.

Another reason I cannot support the Common Core standards is that I am worried that they will cause a precipitous decline in test scores, based on arbitrary cut scores, and this will have a disparate impact on students who are English language learners, students with disabilities, and students who are poor and low-performing. A principal in the Mid-West told me that his school piloted the Common Core assessments and the failure rate rocketed upwards, especially among the students with the highest needs. He said the exams looked like AP exams and were beyond the reach of many students.

When Kentucky piloted the Common Core, proficiency rates dropped by 30 percent. The Chancellor of the New York Board of Regents has already warned that the state should expect a sharp drop in test scores.

What is the purpose of raising the bar so high that many more students fail?

Rick Hess opined that reformers were confident that the Common Core would cause so much dissatisfaction among suburban parents that they would flee their public schools and embrace the reformers’ ideas (charters and vouchers). Rick was appropriately doubtful that suburban parents could be frightened so easily.

Jeb Bush, at a conference of business leaders, confidently predicted that the high failure rates sure to be caused by Common Core would bring about “a rude awakening.” Why so much glee at the prospect of higher failure rates?.

I recently asked a friend who is a strong supporter of the standards why he was so confident that the standards would succeed, absent any real-world validation. His answer: “People I trust say so.” That’s not good enough for me.

Now that David Coleman, the architect of the Common Core standards, has become president of the College Board, we can expect that the SAT will be aligned to the standards. No one will escape their reach, whether they attend public or private school.

Is there not something unseemly about placing the fate and the future of American education in the hands of one man?

I hope for the sake of the nation that the Common Core standards are great and wonderful. I wish they were voluntary, not mandatory. I wish we knew more about how they will affect our most vulnerable students.

But since I do not know the answer to any of the questions that trouble me, I cannot support the Common Core standards.

I will continue to watch and listen. While I cannot support the Common Core standards, I will remain open to new evidence. If the standards help kids, I will say so. If they hurt them, I will say so. I will listen to their advocates and to their critics.

I will encourage my allies to think critically about the standards, to pay attention to how they affect students, and to insist, at least, that they do no harm.
dianeravitch.net/2013/02/26/why-i-cannot-support-the-common-core-standards/

For half a second there, I thought this was your work, until I saw the link at the bottom. Heh, you should set off long passages with quotes or links.

[RandomGuy]

Staying with something, even though results show it's not working is stupid too...not saying that common core will cure the nation's education system, not at all, but it replaces a system that hasn't worked for decades...

What if what was in place, was better than the standards of the Common Core? T.B.s posted bit said that was the case in at least one state.

On balance it was a well-written critique, unlike the twit in the OP's rambling about the cultural revolution.

[TeyshaBlue]

For half a second there, I thought this was your work, until I saw the link at the bottom. Heh, you should set off long passages with quotes or links.

I was on my phone. Im just damn lucky the link made it to the same thread.

[RandomGuy]

I was on my phone. Im just damn lucky the link made it to the same thread.

It was a good article though. Thanks, I did feel a bit better informed about the whole thing after reading it, and it didn't come off as a mindless polemic.

[boutons_deux]

"fundamentally flawed by the process with which they have been foisted upon the nation."

CC flawed by foisting? what does "foisting" have to with tainting the content and objectives of CC?

CC is optional, not FOISTED, as seen by retrograde, anti-education red states refusing to adopt them because right-wingers ideology keeps them stupid, ignorant, anti-education,anti-intellectual, anti-science.

"no one has any idea how they will affect students, teachers, or schools." really?

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2012/12/04/common-core-standards-early-results-from-kentucky-are-in

http://www.ppic.org/main/publication_quick.asp?i=1093

http://edex.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.c...ReportHR_8.pdf

"There was minimal public engagement in the development of the Common Core."

The "public" aren't professional educators, teachers, and are a problem because 10Ms of them want to destroy public education, and 10Ms of them are ignorant Jaywalkers, and REALLY intense about blocking anything that expects to them to get smart.

The biggest problem I see with CC is that its HUGE transformation was expected to occur without adequate time and preparation of teachers, lesson plans, books, etc.

I usually a fan of Ravitch, but I think she's screwed up on trashing CC, eg, she's generally against the charter school scam.

[Nbadan]

What if what was in place, was better than the standards of the Common Core? T.B.s posted bit said that was the case in at least one state.

On balance it was a well-written critique, unlike the twit in the OP's rambling about the cultural revolution.

No one is making states follow common core....Texas doesn't....changes don't happen in education overnight....people expect quick results but for changes to really take effect could take a decade or two...then we will know if common core has been effective....again, I suspect that curriculum standards are only part of the problem in public education...we need to find a way to shift kids who want to learn away from kids who don't want to learn and use up tons of resources....that is why I favor stem schools and magnet schools....