Category Archives: News

Feds announce takeover of CC assessments

Well to anyone still under the delusion that the feds aren’t involved with Common Core, lets put that to rest. The feds have officially announced it. By setting up a “review” process for SBAC and PARCC focusing on item design and validation, the feds will immediately gain control of everything else. Curriculum will be mapped to the assessments and teachers will teach to the test because they are graded on their students’ test performance. Standards themselves will fade in importance because the target will be test score maximization. Whatever is tested becomes the standard for what will be taught. The clear solution is to end our relationship with AIR/SAGE and get fully away from all federal testing, and restore full local control of education.

http://americansforprosperity.org/legislativealerts/its-official-the-feds-control-common-core/

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/curriculum/2013/04/common_assessment_groups_to_undergo_new_federal_review_process.html
(be sure to read the first few comments on this one)

 

State Board Member Challenges Stotsky and Wurman

On July 20th, we published an article entitled “What do the CC math authors say about them?” In this article we shared comments the 2 math-field related authors (Zimba and McCallum) of the Common Core standards made.

On July 25th, the Deseret News published an op-ed from Dr. Sandra Stotsky entitled “This is why I oppose Common Core” and in which she quotes Zimba and McCallum’s remarks. Dr. Stotsky has been quoting them ever since their remarks were first made in 2010 at the time the Common Core standards were released.

On August 2nd, the Deseret News published an op-ed response from state school board member Jennifer Johnson entitled “Clarifying Criticism of Common Core.”  In her response, Jennifer takes issue with Dr. Stotsky’s quote on Zimba, and received an email from McCallum stating that Ze’ev Wurman misunderstood comments he made at a meeting in 2010 in San Diego.

Here’s where the story gets interesting.

I received this email from Dr. Stotsky which she sent to the Deseret News after reading Jennifer’s op-ed.

Jennifer Johnson contacted me several times in the past few weeks about the official minutes of the March 2010 meeting of the Massachusetts Board of Elementary and Secondary Education.  According to the official minutes of the meeting, Jason Zimba told the Board and others at this large public meeting that “the concept of college readiness is minimal and focuses on non-selective colleges.”  I was a member of this Board at the time and heard Professor Zimba’s comments on the meaning of college readiness in Common Core’s mathematics standards.

Rhoda Schneider, the chief legal counsel for the Board, usually writes up and/or approves the minutes of every meeting, and the minutes were approved by about a dozen people—Board members and the Commissioner of Education—the next month. http://www.doe.mass.edu/boe/minutes/10/0323reg.pdf.

Most or all of these people were at the meeting at which Professor Zimba spoke.  I have been referring to these minutes and Professor Zimba’s comments for several years.  The minutes have not changed since they were officially approved in April 2010.

I wrote back to Ms. Johnson and suggested that if there were any concerns about the accuracy of the official minutes, she should feel free to contact Ms. Schneider at rschneider@doe.mass.edu. I am obviously not the person to question the official minutes of the meeting.

Jennifer failed to note in her op-ed that Jason Zimba’s quote by Dr. Stotsky is straight out of the official board minutes of the March 2010 Massachusetts Board of Education…something Dr. Stotsky pointed her to much prior to her op-ed. That omission of an important fact in determining the real story is troubling. For 3 years Jason’s statements have been available and quoted by Dr. Stotsky. Jason has never sought to change the official record, and the MA state superintendent and a dozen board members including Dr. Stotsky who was on the board at that time, authenticated the minutes as correct.

I also received this email from Ze’ev Wurman after he read Jennifer’s op-ed.

Editor,

In her Aug.2, 2013 OpEd, State School Board Member Jennifer Johnson quotes William McCallum:

“In January 2010, six months before the standards were finalized, I gave a presentation about them at the joint meetings of the American Mathematical Society and the Mathematical Association of America in San Diego. After the presentation, one audience member expressed a worry that the standards would be too high (as in excessively high). I replied that they would not be too high and that they would be equal to the standards of high achieving East Asian countries. In context, it was clear that I meant ‘not excessively high,’ but the phrase ‘not too high,’ taken out of context, can be interpreted colloquially as ‘not very high.’ This is the way Wurman, who was there, chose to misinterpret it, despite the fact that my meaning was crystal clear from the context.”

Prof. McCallum is engaging here in a bit of historical revisionism. The report of his statement at the time is as follows: (http://toped.svefoundation.org/2010/01/17/common-core-standards-under-fire/ )

“While acknowledging the concerns about front-loading demands in early grades, [McCallum] said that the overall standards would not be too high, certainly not in comparison other nations, including East Asia, where math education excels.”

From the “certainly” in the “certainly not in comparison to other nations” and from the reference to East Asia “where math education excels” it is clear that McCallum meant that the Common Core will be lower, rather than equal to those of other nations, as he currently wants us to believe.

McCallum did not correct the original report at the time nor until recently, when that quote became evidence of an embarrassing admission. To put his modern recollection of the past in a sharper relief, McCallum’s memory is not as perfect as it seems – that joint meeting in January 2010 took place in San Francisco rather than in San Diego.

Ze’ev Wurman

The fact that Zimba and McCallum have changed their tune from the time of the standards being released, to something different now, indicates to me that they’ve come under some pressure to change their stances, not that they have been misrepresented from that time period as Jennifer would lead us to believe.

A Common Core Replacement Plan

Math

We have often been asked by legislators and the public, “well if you don’t like Common Core, what do you want?” We have posted this elsewhere, but I was reminded of something while visiting Dr. David Wright’s website this week. Back in 2006 when we were crusading against Utah’s “D-” Fordham rated math standards, and trying to get a major overhaul, the USOE was fighting us every step of the way. It took legislative hearings and testimony by Dr. Jim Milgram to get legislators to pressure the state superintendent into agreeing to rewrite the math standards. One idea we had at the time was to use California’s highly rated math standards which had been revised around 2000 and the Fordham Foundation had given an “A” rating to, stating:

“California’s standards are excellent in every respect. The language is crystal clear, important topics are given priority, and key connections between different skills and tasks are explicitly addressed. Computational skills, problem-solving, and mathematical reasoning are unambiguously supported and integrated throughout.”

The USOE immediately rejected this idea without even a review of their standards (I guess that’s somewhat of a pattern for them), even though there would have been plenty of curriculum materials and assessments completely aligned to the standards. They stated they “didn’t want to be like California” and “we don’t want California standards in Utah”. <smile> Now that California has adopted Common Core standards below their own created standards, Utah is pleased to be on the same page as them.

So back in 2006 when this fight was raging, Dr. David Wright created his own math petition, and got 144 Utah university professors of math, science, and engineering to sign asking that we adopt California’s math standards. Now there’s consensus and a good solid plan from our university professors.

A Petition Directed to the State of Utah

We ask the state of Utah to adopt and implement the California Mathematics Standards for our public schools. We agree with the Fordham Foundation report on state mathematics standards that gave Utah’s current standards a D rating while giving California an A. We agree with the foundation’s assessment, “California’s standards are excellent in every respect. The language is crystal clear, important topics are given priority, and key connections between different skills and tasks are explicitly addressed. Computational skills, problem-solving, and mathematical reasoning are unambiguously supported and integrated throughout.” We want our Utah children to master the mathematics they need to compete favorably with the best students of other states and nations. Setting good standards is an important step toward achieving that goal. Please adopt and implement the California Mathematics Standards for our public schools.

Reading Fordham’s review of the California standards now that Common Core has been added to the mix, we find this:

California’s standards could well serve as a model for internationally competitive national standards. They are explicit, clear, and cover the essential topics for rigorous mathematics instruction.
The Bottom Line
With some minor differences, Common Core and California both cover the essential content for a rigorous, K-12 mathematics program. That said, California’s standards are exceptionally clear and well presented, and indeed represent a model for mathematically sound writing. They are further supported by excellent peripheral material, including the Framework that provides clear and detailed guidance on the standards. Taken together, these enhancements make the standards easier to read and follow than Common Core. In addition, the high school content is organized so that the standards about various topics, such as quadratic functions, are grouped together in a mathematically coherent way. The organization of the Common Core is more difficult to navigate, in part because standards on related topics sometimes appear separately rather than together.
Common Core includes some minor high school content—including the vertex form of quadratics and max/min problems—that is missing in California.
Footnote 1: California’s academic content standards have not changed since Fordham’s last evaluation, the State of State Mathematics Standards 2005. However, the evaluation criteria that we used to judge the 2010 standards have been substantially revised and improved since 2005. (See Appendix C for a complete explanation of changes in criteria.) Even through this new lens, California’s math grade remained an impressive A.
As noted, the USOE rejected the California standards plan and created a committee to create our own. We wound up with A- rated standards which Fordham says are clearer than Common Core, but California’s are still widely acknowledged as stronger.

English Language Arts

Utah’s ELA standards prior to Common Core were rated a “C” by the Fordham Foundation. On June 2, 2010, the final version of the Common Core standards was released. The Fordham Foundation interestingly released their review of Common Core on that very day. Two days later at the USOE’s June 4th board meeting, the board was encouraged to adopt the standards on their first reading. They didn’t know what the standards were and I doubt there was any discussion of how the Fordham Foundation rated the standards. It was all about the Race to the Top money.

Fordham’s review of Common Core ELA standards only gave it a “B+”, and it should be noted that this was after the Gates Foundation gave Fordham a hefty grant/bribe to review the standards so Fordham can’t be viewed as giving a totally honest rating. In spite of this, several other states have superior standards to Common Core (including California which received an “A” on their ELA standards.

In 2001, Dr. Sandra Stotsky was one of the chief contributors to the Massachusetts ELA standards which put MA on track to become the consistent top scoring state on standardized exams. In 2010 those standards were reviewed by Fordham as part of their comparison to Common Core and they said this of Massachusetts’ “A-” rated ELA standards:

The Bottom Line
Massachusetts’s existing standards are clearer, more thorough, and easier to read than the Common Core standards. Essential content is grouped more logically, so that standards addressing inextricably linked characteristics, such as themes in literary texts, can be found together rather than spread across strands. In addition, Massachusetts frequently uses standard-specific examples to clarify expectations. Unlike the Common Core, Massachusetts’s standards treat both literary and non-literary texts in systematic detail throughout the document, addressing the specific genres, sub-genres, and characteristics of both text types. While both sets of standards address American literature and append lists of exemplar texts, Massachusetts’s reading list is far more comprehensive. Standards addressing vocabulary development and grammar are also more detailed and rigorous in the Massachusetts document.
On the other hand, Common Core includes samples of student writing to clarify grade- and genre-specific writing expectations. In addition, the Common Core standards explicitly address foundational U.S. documents. Such enhancements would benefit Massachusetts’s already-strong standards.
In 2010, Dr. Stotsky helped create a new revision of the 2001 A- rated standards. Those standards were never submitted for use in MA, but they were passed onto one of the Fordham ELA reviewers for comment. Sheila Byrd Carmichael had this to say about the 2010 draft Dr. Stotsky worked on.
Overview
The 2010 draft ELA standards have improved upon already clear and rigorous expectations without losing any of the essential content that was included in the original. The organization of the draft standards is clearer, and most of the few gaps that existed have been addressed.
Comparison
Improvements
The organization of the 2010 draft is dramatically improved. Grade-specific standards are now presented for all grades in a single, coherent document. By more clearly delineating grade specific standards, the 2010 draft has also more clearly defined the progression of content and rigor across all strands. While many states slip into repetition across grades, this draft makes meaningful distinctions in every strand from one grade to the next. The 2010 draft also includes several small enhancements that further strengthen Massachusetts’s already excellent expectations. For example, while the 2001 document included standards addressing “discussion and presentation” within the Language strand, the 2010 draft devotes a separate strand to “discussion and presentation.” Within this strand, the state has more clearly and rigorously defined standards for discussion, group work, and oral presentation. Each genre of writing is also now addressed in its own sub-strand, making genre-specific expectations even clearer, more detailed, and rigorous. Finally, the draft standards have addressed the two minor weaknesses that were noted (above) in the 2001 document. They now include expectations that specifically address foundational U.S. documents, and they require students to write a coherent paragraph in third grade.
No Change
All of the strengths that existed in the 2001 document remain, or have been improved and enhanced, in the 2010 update. For example, the standards continue to include helpful examples to clarify the intent and rigor of the standards, as in these from various strands: Identify the sense (touch, hearing, sight, taste, smell, and taste) implied in words appealing to the senses (fiction, grade 1) Analyze the function of character types (e.g., antagonist, protagonist, foil, tragic hero) (fiction, grade 9) Identify the type of evidence used to support a claim in a persuasive text (e.g., scientific research evidence, anecdotal evidence based on personal knowledge, or the discipline based opinion of experts) (nonfiction, grade 5) In addition, the reading, writing, grammar, and research standards remain clear, specific, and rigorous. The one gap that remains in the 2010 draft is the continued absence of exemplar student writing samples that could further clarify writing expectations across grade levels.
The Bottom Line
The 2001 edition of the Massachusetts ELA standards were already among the best in the nation. The 2010 draft manages to further strengthen these standards without losing any of the essential content or clarity. These standards are a model of clear, rigorous K-12 ELA content and expectations.
Dr. Stotsky has taken those excellent 2010 draft standards and made another revision with feedback from ALSCW (Association of Literary Scholars, Critics, and Writers) and has contributed it to the public domain. Any state could adopt these for free and they would have the best standards in the nation. Dr. Stotsky also has a standing offer to come to a state and work with the teachers in that state to create their own standards that would be the best in the nation. To see her 2013 standards, click here.

Recommendations

  1. Adopt California’s math standards since they are clearly better than Common Core and have the strong support of 144 Utah math-field related university professors
  2. Adopt Dr. Stotsky’s free revision of Massachusett’s excellent ELA standards. Nobody else is using them and they are probably the best available. If Utah wants to tweak the ELA standards, Dr. Stotsky has offered for free to come to Utah and sit down and create the strongest ELA standards in the nation with the input of Utah teachers.

Event: Picket the State Board Meeting

When Carie Valentine, a mother against Common Core, secured the proper permit yesterday to have a peaceful demonstration against Common Core this coming Friday, she also called the Salt Lake Police to let them know about the event.

The officer on the other end of the line told her that he was thrilled that Utahns are not backing down and asked her to continue the fight, saying that he spoke for many in his office.

Wow.

So, this Friday, outside the State School Board’s monthly, all-day meeting, Utah teachers, parents and citizens will demonstrate against Common Core. The peaceful demonstration has been organized for many reasons.

1. Normally, the public may only speak at USSB meetings if a request is made ahead of time, and only two minutes are given per person, with a firm limit on numbers allowed to speak.

2. There is a long history with most of the members of this board, that demonstrates a refusal do adequate research about the experiment called Common Core or to acknowledge that there are terrible, sobering academic flaws, and even unconstitutional flaws, in the new agenda. The board tends to use talking points rather than evidence or references, such as pilot studies, references to laws, or empirical data, to make their parroted claims that the Common Core system is legitimate. Many citizens feel that this atmosphere of no debate is an anti-intellectual, un-American stance.

3. There are numerous, serious concerns about the 518-page agenda to be addressed in the meeting, (including a tax-funded propaganda campaign to push common core acceptance on schools, media and parents).

4. The board did not provide a thorough public and media vetting of the transformative changes to our children’s educational experience prior to implementation; and Common Core cannot be amended without Utah asking permission from unelected D.C. groups who copyrighted the standards Utah uses. Local control has thus been opted away by the board.

Many who would stand up and protest can not do so; they have to be at jobs at 8:30 on a Friday morning; or they are children, who don’t have a voice to articulate their displeasure with the Common Core situtation; or they are principals, staff and teachers whose jobs depend on them appearing to agree with Common Core’s implementation in Utah.

Keeping that in mind, if you can make it, please come. Know that you likely represent thousands who cannot join us Friday.

———————————————-
Where:

Utah State Office of Education
250 East 500 South
Salt Lake City, Utah, 84114

When: beginning 8:30 a.m. this Friday, August 2.

Who: All are welcome.
————————————————-

From Carie Valentine, event organizer:

“…[W]hen I found out about Common Core I was upset and even angry that our state would make such radical and damaging changes to our education system. Since that time, many good parents just like you have worked tirelessly to get the word out about Common Core. Parents are not being educated by our own state school board and so we have had to educate ourselves.

The rally at the capitol was amazing. The [many hundreds of] people that showed up to voice their opposition was inspiring. I would like to continue that momentum and demonstrate in front of the state education offices. Their last meeting before the traditional school schedule begins is this Friday, Aug 2. Please join me to send them a message that we are in this for the long haul.

I have secured the proper permit for a demonstration this Friday at the State School Board Offices in Salt Lake City. This is considered a spontaneous demonstration.

…I have also called the SLC police dept. and they know we are coming and the officer I spoke with was thrilled we aren’t backing down. He asked us to continue the fight and said he spoke for many in his office.

If you have access to a bigger bank of people, please pass the word along. These are our children, our tax dollars, and our schools. You have my permission to give out my email address to others who want to come. Please try and make time. We are all busy but this is important.

This is a chance to let them know we are not going away. If you are coming, plan on attending the public comment period from 8-8:30 and the picketing will be from 8:30am-9:30am. Please make your own sign and if you have an button wear that. Here are the “rules”.
We can’t block the sidewalk or the entrance to the building. We can’t (shouldn’t) swear or yell through bull horns. We can hold signs and chant something clever about “no common core”. We can’t prevent movement of pedestrians on the sidewalk. Please email me your confirmation so I can have an idea of how many of us there will be.

If you would like to speak to the board directly the public comment period will be from 8-8:30.

You must sign up in advance. I tried attending and signing up at the meeting and they took the sign up away before I could put my name on it.

To sign up to speak at the board meeting in advance, contact Board Secretary Lorraine Austin at (801) 538-7517.

To picket outside, there is no need to sign up in advance, but if you want to give us a head count, email Carie Valentine at carie.valentine.2@q.com

Op-Ed: Stop the Rush to Common Core

In a great writeup in the NY Daily Post, coauthors Neal Mccluskey, Williamson Evers, and Sandra Stotsky show why the backlash to Common Core is completely justified.

“The Common Core — effectively national math and English curriculum standards coming soon to a school near you — is supposed to be a new, higher bar that will take the United States from the academic doldrums to international dominance.

So why is there so much unhappiness about it? There didn’t seem to be much just three years ago. Back then, state school boards and governors were sprinting to adopt the Core. In practically the blink of an eye, 45 states had signed on.

But states weren’t leaping because they couldn’t resist the Core’s academic magnetism. They were leaping because it was the Great Recession — and the Obama administration was dangling a $4.35 billion Race to the Top carrot in front of them. Big points in that federal program were awarded for adopting the Core, so, with little public debate, most did.

Major displeasure has come only recently, because only recently has implementation hit the district level. And that means moms, dads and other citizens have recently gotten a crash course in the Core.

Their opposition has been sudden and potent — with several states now considering legislation to either slow or end implementation, and Indiana, Pennsylvania and Michigan having officially paused it.

There are good reasons a backlash is now in full swing.” …

Pro-CC Teacher Defects After Seeing Big Picture

Anthony Cody at Ed Week just posted this letter from a teacher who a few months ago wrote in support of Common Core. The teacher has done some homework and is seeing the writing on the wall and the coming dangers.

The Common Core Loses This Teacher’s Support

Guest post by Katie Lapham.

In April I carried a guest post written by New York City elementary teacher Katie Lapham, expressing support for the Common Core standards, but opposing the tests attached to them. Since then, Ms. Lapham has shifted her views. She explains:

When I first learned about the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) two or so years ago, I didn’t question their implementation. I’ve always preferred designing my own lessons and was sold on the idea that the standards were mostly a guide; we were free to choose our own curriculum.

Since writing to Dr. John King, head of New York State’s Education Department, about the excessive CCSS state assessments administered in April, I have spent countless hours educating myself on education reform and Race to the Top polices. I now feel duped. CCSS are much more than a set of learning objectives. By attaching them to government initiatives such as high-stakes testing and teacher evaluation plans, the standards are being used as an instrument to standardize and control public education in the US. Teachers and schools feel increasingly micromanaged, which is insulting and demoralizing. We have less autonomy and choice, and my own personalized instruction is being threatened. Below are the main reasons why I, a teacher and parent, oppose the Common Core State Standards.

1.) My biggest concern has always been high-stakes testing, which deprives students of meaningful learning experiences. The NYS ELA and math exams have been redesigned to align with the CCSS. The content and length of these exams are educationally unsound. I have written about this in great detail on my blog.

I now understand that you cannot separate the CCSS from high-stakes standardized testing. The two go hand in hand. I originally thought the CCSS stood alone, used solely as standards to shape instruction. I now see that they are much more than that. The current high-stakes tests in New York State that I so detest are the way they are because of the CCSS.

Read the rest here: The Common Core Loses This Teacher’s Support

Glenn Beck on Battling Common Core

On Glenn Beck’s show last night he invited legislators and groups from around the country to come in and discuss Common Core. Senator Margaret Dayton and Rep. Brian Greene from Utah were among the guests as were Gayle Ruzicka and Dalane England from Utah’s Eagle Forum. Glenn’s stated goal is to have Common Core dead in America by the beginning of school year 2014-15.

An Open Letter to Teachers, Plus Teacher Comments

Dear Teachers,

We want you to know that we support and appreciate you. We want to return local control to the schools so that you can again work closely with parents and children to individualize the educational experience for as many children as possible. We know many of you feel like the teacher in this video. You’re frustrated and many of you have thought about retiring because you are unappreciated and being standardized yourselves. The vast majority of you are total professionals trying to do a very difficult job. We know that some of you don’t yet realize the hammer coming down on you from Common Core. Others of you are fully aware of what’s happening and you’re in various stages of frustration. Please don’t quit. Please speak out. If you can’t within your school or district, contact the media and ask if they will protect your identity. Most will. We will keep you anonymous unless you are able and willing to put your name to your comment. There are legislators who can help but they just don’t know what is happening. Contact them and express your concerns. Hundreds of you have contacted us sharing your concerns and we are trying to do everything in our power to help you.

Here are some teacher comments we have received recently. Previous comments can be read at these links (batch 1, batch 2).

As an educator, I oppose the Common Core. After teaching it for one year I am completely convinced that we are destroying our students’ love of learning. What used to be our favorite part of the day (math) has become the most dreaded and hated part of the day! We have taken the most important part of learning away from children…fun! Not only that, but it is completely unconstitutional! The federal government has NO right to dictate to local school districts, parents and teachers what will be taught. -1st Grade Teacher in Cache County

Our system doesn’t push kids to their full potential. Education isn’t one-size fits all. – Salt Lake County, 4th grade

It has very socialist leanings.  It seems to dumb down what the students are to learn. – Middle School, Iron County

They are taking away our rights as parents and a community to decide whats best for our local kids. – Jr. High, Washington County

Education should be locally controlled. The more and more red tape being hung up, the worse and worse education has become.  Bring it back to a local level. State guidelines maybe, but local communities will be a lot more invested in the education of their youth than someone hundreds or thousands of miles away. It is about control and there is way to much of that right now. Ultimately, education has suffered and will continue to suffer because the family is breaking down. As you continue to give away or take away more and more responsibility from parents, this will only get worse not better. If the state, who should be defending families and education, particularly this state, continues to give away or allow the federal government to usurp control, your students will become mindless robots without the ability to think and only the ability to obey. Do we want automatons or do we want thinking, processing, problem-solving humans? If it is the latter, then step far, far, far away from Common Core. It isn’t worth the money. – 5th, 8th, 11th grade teacher in Cache County

Common Core Curriculum lowers the standards for real achievement in academics. Even more dangerous, it tries to subvert the values that Utahns uphold and strive for while “subtly” or not-so-subtly brainwashing our children with anti-American and pro-socialism propaganda. – 10-12th grade Social Studies, Utah County

1).  It is more government involvement than NCLB. 2).  There is no legitimate data that shows there are positive benefits that come from CC. 3).  Home work assignments that intrude on the student and family.  There are schools that do not follow the law by sending prior notes home to parents asking them permission for their child to respond to intrusive questions. – Heidi, Salt Lake County Teacher

I recently attended a common core day of cheer leading for the sixth grade teachers in my district.  Money was used to pay for subs so that we could all hear for a day why the common core was so wonderful.  We were told that students would no longer be graded on completion of assignments or an average of assignment and test scores over a grading period.  Instead grading will be based on mastery of a subject.  How do we determine mastery?  The district has provided bench mark tests in language arts.  We were told that these are not mandatory BUT that if we did not use them they would become mandatory.  I find it scary that students will now be graded only on tests written by the core.  The final assessment was a research paper on modern revolutions.  Interesting how Now in the sixth grade learning can be skewed to a political point of view that may or may not be historically accurate.  I find the curriculum scary and the measurement of learning terrifying. I know though that any questions I asked contrary to the core were met with anger and frustration. It was NOT allowed and dismissed to ask a question that was not common core friendly. I along with other teachers are afraid to speak out publicly against the core for fear of losing our jobs. I work in the Jordan school district.

In my opinion, this all started with “no child left behind.”  Now teachers are afraid for their job security, cheating on testing, and now dumbing down our children so they can pass off a test for federal funding.  I am against socialist/communistic agendas that seek to own responsibility for children instead of parents.  I am against data-testing which label children and their capacity for growth.  It’s Hitler all over again. (Which gene-based prejudice began in the US.) I am against Channel-One and the propaganda it is brainwashing our children with to pull them into compliance by telling them that soon there will be brain studies that will help them, in care of Obama. I am scared of what it will do to Special Ed. students who will then have to wear a label the rest of their lives as being worthless to society.  How dare the government label OUR children and tell them their worth. PLEASE STOP COMMON CORE IN OUR STATE! PLEASE STOP AND PREVENT SOCIALISM AND COMMUNISM FROM GETTING INTO OUR EDUCATION. – Salt Lake County

First grade math is not age  approriate !  I have taught math for 25yrs.  To both average and gifted children.  The approach does not give children a sequential program.  Average children who are open minded and want to learn give up and start hating math.  My gifted children don’t want to do math either because the way they want it taught is so confusing.  As an experienced math certified teacher I want my children to love it as I do.  We are not allowed to adjust our curriculum to give our children the preparatory skills they need to move on.  I have never had such a discouraging year teaching.  We are not allowed to diversify our teaching to accelerate those who are gifted.  We are trying to create a Nation of mediocrity.  How sad to see education to come to this.  Why not allow teachers with years of experience and a love for learning to teach children in tried and tested ways they know work. – Salt Lake, 1st Grade Teacher

The standards are still a mile wide and an inch thick. First graders are supposed to solve equations with unknowns…yet, most first graders have such little number sense that they can’t tell you the difference between 9 and 10 without counting down nine on their fingers. Number lines used to be a math staple. Now we let students learn counting with blocks and hundred charts. That doesn’t help them see that comparing numbers and subtraction truly are related ideas like a number line does. No wonder they can’t understand word problems. Oh, and equal, if not greater emphasis is on constructivism rather than instruction. This is true in all disciplines. Second graders don’t remember to start a sentence with a capital and end with punctuation nor can most spell…but who cares? If you let them read and write a lot, that will all be fixed through natural processes. Have them write Multi-page stories and papers when the don’t know how to write one well constructed sentence using 7 or more words, capitals, end marks, and which make complete sense – oh and don’t forget the importance of creative spelling. All of this nonsense remains in the Common Core the way Utah teachers are being trained by the state. Your child can’t read or write clear sentences…who cares? Have them write story summaries, find supporting details and write clarifying questions about the text. Don’t bother teaching them how to summarize a paragraph…skip to them just realizing what a good summary of an entire book is and writing it. In addition, districts have decided that the Core matters…not the curriculum. So why purchase curriculum that covers the Core? The only good part of the Core is that students ought to be learning content…remember history, geography and science books from the olden days? Well, according to the state, the students don’t actually need to learn the content…just use it to be better readers and writers using our wonderful constructivist writing and reading strategies. Another great part of the Core? Grammar is back! Oh, but that isn’t essential..so you don’t need grammar instruction, except of course in your constructivist writing class where students will realize what looks and sound correct from their knowledgable peer editors. And, for all this constructivism, you simply don’t need to buy curriculum….no, no, no! The beauty is that teachers can just write the curriculum in unit studies for, GET THIS, the cost of paper copies! No content knowledge experts needed. No curriculum sequencing specialists needed, and no experts in assessment design.   Will that leave much time for lesson planning? Will teachers be able to teach whole class instruction? No, of course not…but, who cares? The children can lead the direction once they know the learning objective. They can read different texts and use the one thing you did model…how to stop and think all kinds of things when reading a book..write down words you don’t know, predict, wonder, make connections to self so that reading one story takes a mere week of struggling and questioning. Did you know that when read well, it takes at least THREE full reading periods to read aloud the first grade book “Are You My Mother?” – of course, that is really how good readers read…stopping to wonder, question and write so that ten pages of big text takes hours to read. I mean, that really helps you get through college.  All in all, we really are heading in great directions here. – San Juan County, 2nd grade teacher

Common Core is not classical education, which I believe in.  It dumbs the curriculum down even more. – Karen Hunt, Utah County El. Ed. Teacher

The standards are a knee jerk attempt to assess students in a way that may be counter productive.  The mathematics common core is not and will not be recognized nationally.  Why are we limiting our students? – Sanpete, 11th grade

Simply because,I would like to see education administered locally, not by the federal government.  Education should not be generalized across the nation.  Common Core dumbs down education to the lowest common denominator. – K-6 Resource Teacher, Utah County

After reading information both for and against common core, I don’t appreciate the fact that states had to be “bribed” to accept it. – Sheri Rivera, 4th grade, Utah county

I am opposed to any one group making such important decisions about what should or should not be taught to school children all over this country especially when it gain driven as Common Core appears to be. There is suspect in testing because of the tremendous amount of money that exchanges hands, and because of the large amount of money behind lobbyists on Capitol Hill. Common Core is just one more monster on the money list. – Sevier County, 8th grade

I feel that the Common Core is only focusing on certain things, like non-fiction, to the exclusion of other, equally important things.  I am also concerned that students are being dropped into the Common Core in the middle without the requisite information, and are floundering. – Davis, 8-9th grade

I’ve seen the math doing very incompetent and poor learning because of the lack of cohesive, tried and true, concept teaching. I’ve spent more and more time trying to meet the demands of all the “big wigs” above me justifying their large salary jobs through the common core etc. than in being able to prepare meaningful lessons and grading “only the bare minimum” of what I do assign.  I was a great teacher when I had parents who I accounted to and only a few (Principal, and Superintendent) administrators who were there to help me be the best teacher I could be through their support – NOT their job-justification demands. – Anne Roundy, Davis, High School

Having taught math to middle schoolers for 16 years, the CCS are developmentally inappropriate. Some standards are too abstract for those still on a concrete level. Not every child is ready to “see” and understand Algebraic concepts by 8th grade. – 7-8 grade teacher

I went to the Secondary Math Common Core training last summer.  I saw the negative reaction of every teacher but one who were “trying” to implement the half-baked common core curriculum from the state.  I have read the melange of standards for Sec I, II and III, and have seen the lack of textbooks that support this curriculum.  Besides teaching HS Secondary Math, I also teach as an adjunct in Dev. Math at 3 universities, I know the entry level math and curriculum required for entry level college math, and the methods used to teach this, and the common core standards are simply not going to get students to where they need to be for college. In our “training” what bothered me most was the “one size fits all,” “one way to teach” garbage we were fed.  The “Learning Cycle” at the center of the core is merely one way to teach math. Am I to believe that different learning and teaching styles don’t matter? I fear we are headed down a path to having our students taught by robots. I may move just to teaching at the university level so I can continue to help remediate the poorly prepared students from public education.  There have been more developmental math classes offered at my university this year than ever before and I contribute this to the beginning stages of implementing the common core integrated standards.  I guess at least my job there will be secure. – 7-9th grade, Utah County

I’m very worried about the Federal Government taking control of education in our State.  I feel they promote their agenda–and in the new reading programs I’m forced to teach, the literature promotes their agenda while never teaching patriotism or anything about the virtues we have traditionally held dear.  We can never teach about our Founding Fathers or freedom when we follow the outline they’ve set up–but they have us teaching about how great Obama is! – 1st-3rd grade teacher in Washington County

I don’t like the math.  It doesn’t allow for students to accelerate into higher math classes. – 8th grade teacher, Sevier Co.

I feel that CC takes away local control.  It was not adopted in an open and honest way.  I feel that it provides way to much opportunity for the agendas of national politicians to be introduced and taught contrary to what parents and teachers feel are best.  I can see in Language Arts alone the very real possibility that students will not enjoy reading anymore with the push towards reading “informational text” and away from classic novels. I fear that if I speak out against CC I will be blacklisted and treated differently, perhaps to the point of losing my job.  These are just a few of my concerns. – Middle School, Utah County

Common Core is dumbing down our students by requiring less of them. The math standards are ridiculous! I can’t even begin to tell you how insuffient they are.  Working one problem 3 different ways?  Why not spend time on three different problems giving the students more exposure.  The students are getting very bored reworking one problem over and over. They want to be challenged, not pacified. – 5th grade, Davis County

I don’t think we should slow down the top students which is what CC will do.  I also think the low end students need more help and CC won’t allow it.  One size fits all isn’t the answer to education.  I also think local parents and teachers need say in what is taught, not the Federal Government being paid off by Corporate $$$ telling us what to teach.     There have been a couple of times in my teaching career that I spent time at the USOE as a committee member working on curriculum and testing.  It was a group of Utah teachers.  That is how it should be.      I have a friend that teaches at Head Start.  She has always complained about the Federal Gov. control of the program and how with some kids things need to done differently.    Keep the Federal Government out of our children’s education.  Public Education is the job of the states. – Miriam Chambers, 7-9th grade Weber teacher

Common Core does not take into consideration the needs of individual students. All must learn that standard element at a prescribed instant. Teachers are not allowed to take the time to reteach, adjust instruction or review. Once the prescribed time has past, another concept must be introduced. – K-8 teacher

Students are not widgets on an assembly line to be mined for data.  They should be treated as individuals by professional educators.  That often requires a unique approach that doesn’t fit into a nationwide educational system. – Uintah 7th grade

It is unconstitutional, It takes the right to privacy away from the individual an parents, it is worse than what we already have, unknown costs and out come. – 9-12th grade, Weber County

I oppose the philosophies of the groups funding and supporting Common Core – Bill Gates, Bill Ayers, Arne Duncan, etc.  These individuals do not promote or adhere to Constitutional principles. – K Turner, 6-8th grade Bountiful

It takes little into consideration for child development at the lower grades. – 1st grade teacher, Utah county

It opens the door for too much bad and doesn’t offer enough good. It’s not the direction we need to go. It encourages everyone to git inside a square when many kids don’t. It states that kids must learn on a schedule and if they don’t there’s no going back and picking up the pieces. There’s not time. They are just plain out of luck.   We need to more to a student based learning system. See where they are at the beginning of the year, put them in like groups, and chart their progress. This will help our lows catch up, and will help our highs keep growing.   We need to encourage parents to be involved. Offer a tax credit for parents who volunteer a certain amount of hours in the classroom. We need to fix the family. One of the student’s I use to teach mom would remind me frequently that her name was on her child’s birth certificate not mine (her teacher) or the government so if there was a problem with her or she wasn’t learning it was the parent’s responsibility, not mine. We need to get more parents to think this way.   Common Core is a step backwards, not forwards. If we are to remain competitive we need to focus on our kids where they are starting and chart their progress. Not give them unrealistic goals that many can’t reach.   My other worry with Common Core is the fact that 46 out of 50 states are using this curriculum. That means that every text book publishing company will begin to cater their text books to common core. That’s where the money is. Down the road it will become increasingly easy for someone to come in and decide that kids no longer need to learn about …. For example the causes of the Civil War. It will become easy to forget our history. It opens the door for someone to get too much power. We need to back out of this. It seems like the easy way out of NCLB which is a bad law, but a majority of the time the easy way out isn’t the best.-Davis County, 2nd grade

 

Change the purpose of education

Lynn Stoddard, a retired educator, had this article published in the Ogden Standard-Examiner. With permission from Lynn, I am reposting it here. Lynn makes several great points about the differences in children that make standardization of a classroom of children impossible.

********

It is a disturbing fact that Utah spends less per student in our public schools than any other state, but we spend more than the national average to incarcerate prisoners in jail.

We could reduce the tax burden for prisons and spend more for education, if nearly every child grew up with a firm resolve to be a “contributor” rather than a “burden” to society. Is this possible? The answer is yes, if we have the courage to change the purpose of public education.

At the present time, the main purpose of education is for students to be standardized, uniform or “common,” in a limited number of school subjects, mainly reading, writing and math.

Should this be the main purpose of education?

Do we really want students to be alike in knowledge and skills? A typical fifth- or sixth-grade class has students who range all the way from beginning readers, and a few at each grade level, all the way up to one or two who are reading at eleventh- or twelfth-grade level. Why and how would you standardize them?

If we were to change our main purpose, it would open the door to a new system of public education. The following major purpose would jump-start the transformation: Help children find their purposes for existing and develop the powers of human greatness to be special contributors to society.

What changes would be needed in public education for this objective to be exercised?

Visions of greatness

Perhaps the most important thing we can do for children is to help them see a vision of their God-given, unlimited potential — to help them see their purposes for existing to be joyful contributors to their world. One way to do this is to ask a child, “What do you want to be or do when you grow up?” “Who are your heroes?” “Why?” Later you can ask, “What do you need to do to get ready for your chosen vocation?

These kinds of questions start the wheels turning in the child’s mind — to begin the visioning process. Questions like these also leave the responsibility where it belongs — with the child.

It’s not only wrong, but harmful to hold teachers accountable for standardizing students. Perhaps the most degrading and dehumanizing activity in public schools is what I learned about last week. An elementary school principal told me the school is now starting three weeks of testing to see how well teachers are standardizing students.

He said these tests regulate everything teachers do during the school year. Teachers are angry and frustrated.

It is especially sad to learn the tests are developed to hold teachers accountable for making students alike in knowledge and skills at each grade level.

Being sensitive to each child’s unique needs is the highest form of respect and love. It’s this relationship that will help students make a commitment to be contributors to society.

When a child respects (loves) a teacher, that teacher’s words will often have a life-long impact. Words like, “Charles, I can see you becoming a great scientist some day,” or “Becky, you are so good at writing, it gives me goose bumps.” When we help children see themselves as contributors, we, ourselves, are then making a valuable contribution.

If we really want to end drop outs, bullying, and restore enthusiasm in teachers, parents and students, we will change the main purpose of education. If Utah continues down the path of standardizing students, education will continue to stagnate. Teachers will stay demoralized and student achievement will remain flat.

On the other hand, if we change the main purpose of education, there will be a renaissance of excitement, enthusiasm and creativity. The group I work with is promoting “educating for human greatness,” a concept that fosters positive human diversity, “phd,” advanced, different achievement for every child. It’s a concept that helps children learn reading, writing and math better, and not according to the conventional time table, but when the time is right for each one.

I urge school boards, teachers and parents to activate their integrity and tool-up for next year with an all-inclusive purpose for public education that honors a child’s agency, right and reasons to be unique and different from all others.

Lynn Stoddard, a retired educator, is the author of four books and many articles on how to improve public education. He lives in Farmington and can be contacted at lstrd@yahoo.com.