75% of African American boys in California fail to meet state reading levels.

[sealybobo]

Report: 75% Of Black California Boys Fail To Meet Reading And Writing Standards

There's a problem with the education system, and it's not about money. The problem is with common core. Teaching students to be worker bees, teaching them there's only one way to skin a cat, and it's our way. Our education system has been continuing to fail our kids for the past 50 years, and their only solution is more and more money. We spend way more than most of the world per student, and the number keeps growing, and education keeps getting worse. When are we going to learn that one size fits all policy doesn't work. Dictating from the top down does not work. When you put a small group of people in charge over all citizens, you get a limited number of solutions to problems, and a lack of creativity AT BEST. Usually what you get is complacency, self serving actions to stay in power, and a black hole of money and increase in control that is never satisfied. And when they fail we give them more money, more control, more personnel, and what we get is the same solutions causing the problems, that just cost more.

"The system" works fine for anyone disciplined and driven to succeed.
The real problem:
Ghetto parents are a joke and turn to schools to do their parenting for them...the filthy sub-humans are way to busy smoking weed and making more babies.
The solution:
Raise the iQ in ghettos by forcing ghetto parents receiving any sort of welfare into classrooms which teach to break the ghetto mindset.

How about we stop demanding parents send their kids to school or reject their kids if they aren't really trying.

These kids have problems at home. And when I say problems I mean bad parents.

 

[sakinago]

The problem with the eduction system is very simple: it's a complex problem and there's no simple solution. Many people don't even understand the problem fully, and therefore their solutions are garbage. For example, the OP in his post clearly doesn't understand that Common Core is a set of standards...yet complains about a curriculum later on. If you don't know the difference between a set of standards and a curriculum-then you have no foundation in educational knowledge, meaning your solutions are irrelevant because you can't prescribe the appropriate medication if you can't even diagnose the problem at hand.

I'm not suggesting that Common Core is perfect-it's not. But if you don't even know what it is, then quite frankly nobody should give two craps about your opinion on it.

Also what in the world do you think a "set of standards" means? Like to hear it.

Standards are what is to be taught and has nothing to do with how it is to be taught. Critics of public education have been confusing the two for years. Don't feel like the Lone Ranger, because you are not alone in not knowing the difference. Blaming Common Core is a cop-out.

Common core just happens to be the primary example of the ideology (top down) that I pointed out. What I am looking at is trends in education. And common core happens to fall in the cross hairs of a down trend. A trend just like this is secondary education.

College grade inflation: Does 'A' stand for 'average'?

How does one set standards? They have to be able to test to evaluate their standards. And what happened in the case of common core is teachers had to start teaching to those tests, test that tested the ability to follow instruction vs results. Are you acting like there wasn't a huge shift in curriculum after common core?

Has there been a shift in education? Yes. Is it based on what you're saying? No. I'm in the classroom every single school day, so unless you also are, I'm going to assume I'm more versed on the issues at hand than you are.

Common Core is WHAT skills students are supposed to learn...a curriculum is HOW they learn them, big difference. Also the main test that my students have to pass is their writing test for the state...so I have to teach them reading/writing skills...are you suggesting I shouldn't be teaching them that?

I'm not, but my girlfriend is, as well as most of her friends. And is still administering tests to the severely autistic that can't even speak. That's what I call top down, one size fits all. And not to mention her mom is on the forefront of common core, and before that was a superintendent of 2 different districts.

And no I'm not suggesting the strawman you claim I am suggesting, at all. You pulled that one out of your ass all on your own. And adds credence to my OP if you're a teacher and you think that's an effective technique to use, our students aren't learning how to learn, but what to learn. If you're using such obvious logical fallacies, then why the hell are we trusting you with teaching our kids?

My problem (if I must state it again) is with A. The top down method coming from the government. All kids need one unified method of teaching based on X, Y, and Z standards. B. Is what our secondary education facilities are teaching our teachers...which is pretty much the same thing in A, along with the state is a better vessel of education over parents.

 

[sakinago]

The problem with the eduction system is very simple: it's a complex problem and there's no simple solution. Many people don't even understand the problem fully, and therefore their solutions are garbage. For example, the OP in his post clearly doesn't understand that Common Core is a set of standards...yet complains about a curriculum later on. If you don't know the difference between a set of standards and a curriculum-then you have no foundation in educational knowledge, meaning your solutions are irrelevant because you can't prescribe the appropriate medication if you can't even diagnose the problem at hand.

I'm not suggesting that Common Core is perfect-it's not. But if you don't even know what it is, then quite frankly nobody should give two craps about your opinion on it.

Also what in the world do you think a "set of standards" means? Like to hear it.

The best analogy I can give you is a race. Let's say everybody in this thread is entered into a race and we have to get from New York City to Boston. The finish line is in Boston (this is what a standard would be-WHAT is to be learned). Now each district/state creates a curriculum which is HOW. Some people might take a plane, others might take a boat, others might taker a car, a train etc.

Finish line=standard (what is to be learned)
Curriculum=the act of achieving the standard (how)

Here is Common Core's website...if you can find some standards that you think schools should not focus on-point them out.

English Language Arts Standards | Common Core State Standards Initiative

Keep in mind the HOW the Common Core standards are achieved is the stuff you'll see online (such as "wow look at how Common Core teaches my kid to do math!")...no Common Core is the math skill to be learned...your curriculum is the problem.

In my experience the standards are fine for English, and like I said I challenge anybody to find English standards (I'm only familiar with grades 9-12), that they think should be ended. Now as for my curriculum? Some of it is good, some of it is ok, quite a bit is crap. I do my best to supplement it when necessary and when I'm allowed to (luckily I'm given a good amount of autonomy since my ratings-yes us teachers are rated every school year-are always very strong).

dude, I know what common core is, I know how it was formed, I know how it's been implemented in schools, and better yet I know how it was sold to the public...And now my girlfriends mom is now stuck in the position of giving up a really high paying job, or going with her conscious and finding something else. She was a big believer in it. Not any more. And I don't blame her at all for staying because discovery pays her a shit ton to sell it. On that salary...I'd probably take her place and sell it myself. It's that much money.

And thank you, you just described my problem of top down. And even when you're rated high, you don't get a say in curriculum (unless at a private school). They might give you the over summer come up with curriculum job, but they do not give you any real power over curriculum. It's more of an update the current with these changes type job.

 

[mgh80]

The problem with the eduction system is very simple: it's a complex problem and there's no simple solution. Many people don't even understand the problem fully, and therefore their solutions are garbage. For example, the OP in his post clearly doesn't understand that Common Core is a set of standards...yet complains about a curriculum later on. If you don't know the difference between a set of standards and a curriculum-then you have no foundation in educational knowledge, meaning your solutions are irrelevant because you can't prescribe the appropriate medication if you can't even diagnose the problem at hand.

I'm not suggesting that Common Core is perfect-it's not. But if you don't even know what it is, then quite frankly nobody should give two craps about your opinion on it.

Also what in the world do you think a "set of standards" means? Like to hear it.

Standards are what is to be taught and has nothing to do with how it is to be taught. Critics of public education have been confusing the two for years. Don't feel like the Lone Ranger, because you are not alone in not knowing the difference. Blaming Common Core is a cop-out.

Common core just happens to be the primary example of the ideology (top down) that I pointed out. What I am looking at is trends in education. And common core happens to fall in the cross hairs of a down trend. A trend just like this is secondary education.

College grade inflation: Does 'A' stand for 'average'?

How does one set standards? They have to be able to test to evaluate their standards. And what happened in the case of common core is teachers had to start teaching to those tests, test that tested the ability to follow instruction vs results. Are you acting like there wasn't a huge shift in curriculum after common core?

Has there been a shift in education? Yes. Is it based on what you're saying? No. I'm in the classroom every single school day, so unless you also are, I'm going to assume I'm more versed on the issues at hand than you are.

Common Core is WHAT skills students are supposed to learn...a curriculum is HOW they learn them, big difference. Also the main test that my students have to pass is their writing test for the state...so I have to teach them reading/writing skills...are you suggesting I shouldn't be teaching them that?

I'm not, but my girlfriend is, as well as most of her friends. And is still administering tests to the severely autistic that can't even speak. That's what I call top down, one size fits all. And not to mention her mom is on the forefront of common core, and before that was a superintendent of 2 different districts.

And no I'm not suggesting the strawman you claim I am suggesting, at all. You pulled that one out of your ass all on your own. And adds credence to my OP if you're a teacher and you think that's an effective technique to use, our students aren't learning how to learn, but what to learn. If you're using such obvious logical fallacies, then why the hell are we trusting you with teaching our kids?

My problem (if I must state it again) is with A. The top down method coming from the government. All kids need one unified method of teaching based on X, Y, and Z standards. B. Is what our secondary education facilities are teaching our teachers...which is pretty much the same thing in A, along with the state is a better vessel of education over parents.

If your girlfriend is teaching severely autistic students, then surely you're aware that they'd have both a 504 and IEP. The very acronym of IEP is "Individualized Education Program"...meaning no she's not teaching a one size fits all with her students, hence the word "individualized".

As for the problem you're pointing out the "one size fits all"-that's true...but it's also when differentiating instruction comes in hand. I'm able to adjust my assignments for different kids in order for them to reach what I want them to learn. For example, my students had to demonstrate to me what "internal monologue" is...I had a student who is very low in his writing skills and he told me he wasn't sure what it meant...so I had to change up the way he learned the material...I drew an image of a character thinking inside of a thought bubble, and it just "clicked" with him. That student learned the same exact thing as all of my other students, but in a different way and that's ok.

PS: A good friend of mine plays in the MLB...does that make me an expert on the MLB or baseball? No. My wife works at a mental health crisis facility...does that automatically mean I'm an expert on mental health? No. Your girlfriend is a teacher, does that mean you're an expert on education? No.

Seriously your posts in this thread demonstrate that you're unaware of 504's, IEP's, the differences between a set of standards and a curriculum, hell you didn't even know what a set of standards was...so you'll have to excuse us if we don't take your opinions on education very seriously.

 

[sakinago]

Also what in the world do you think a "set of standards" means? Like to hear it.

Standards are what is to be taught and has nothing to do with how it is to be taught. Critics of public education have been confusing the two for years. Don't feel like the Lone Ranger, because you are not alone in not knowing the difference. Blaming Common Core is a cop-out.

Common core just happens to be the primary example of the ideology (top down) that I pointed out. What I am looking at is trends in education. And common core happens to fall in the cross hairs of a down trend. A trend just like this is secondary education.

College grade inflation: Does 'A' stand for 'average'?

How does one set standards? They have to be able to test to evaluate their standards. And what happened in the case of common core is teachers had to start teaching to those tests, test that tested the ability to follow instruction vs results. Are you acting like there wasn't a huge shift in curriculum after common core?

Has there been a shift in education? Yes. Is it based on what you're saying? No. I'm in the classroom every single school day, so unless you also are, I'm going to assume I'm more versed on the issues at hand than you are.

Common Core is WHAT skills students are supposed to learn...a curriculum is HOW they learn them, big difference. Also the main test that my students have to pass is their writing test for the state...so I have to teach them reading/writing skills...are you suggesting I shouldn't be teaching them that?

I'm not, but my girlfriend is, as well as most of her friends. And is still administering tests to the severely autistic that can't even speak. That's what I call top down, one size fits all. And not to mention her mom is on the forefront of common core, and before that was a superintendent of 2 different districts.

And no I'm not suggesting the strawman you claim I am suggesting, at all. You pulled that one out of your ass all on your own. And adds credence to my OP if you're a teacher and you think that's an effective technique to use, our students aren't learning how to learn, but what to learn. If you're using such obvious logical fallacies, then why the hell are we trusting you with teaching our kids?

My problem (if I must state it again) is with A. The top down method coming from the government. All kids need one unified method of teaching based on X, Y, and Z standards. B. Is what our secondary education facilities are teaching our teachers...which is pretty much the same thing in A, along with the state is a better vessel of education over parents.

If your girlfriend is teaching severely autistic students, then surely you're aware that they'd have both a 504 and IEP. The very acronym of IEP is "Individualized Education Program"...meaning no she's not teaching a one size fits all with her students, hence the word "individualized".

As for the problem you're pointing out the "one size fits all"-that's true...but it's also when differentiating instruction comes in hand. I'm able to adjust my assignments for different kids in order for them to reach what I want them to learn. For example, my students had to demonstrate to me what "internal monologue" is...I had a student who is very low in his writing skills and he told me he wasn't sure what it meant...so I had to change up the way he learned the material...I drew an image of a character thinking inside of a thought bubble, and it just "clicked" with him. That student learned the same exact thing as all of my other students, but in a different way and that's ok.

PS: A good friend of mine plays in the MLB...does that make me an expert on the MLB or baseball? No. My wife works at a mental health crisis facility...does that automatically mean I'm an expert on mental health? No. Your girlfriend is a teacher, does that mean you're an expert on education? No.

Seriously your posts in this thread demonstrate that you're unaware of 504's, IEP's, the differences between a set of standards and a curriculum, hell you didn't even know what a set of standards was...so you'll have to excuse us if we don't take your opinions on education very seriously.

Just asked her...Thats pretty much what requires her to give these tests. Since she would be "denying them equal education," otherwise. She does the IEPs, but if she doesn't do the tests (or something like music or art class) it's viewed as denying them education...despite the name of the program, yea that's still a one size fits all. Over half her students are not potty trained, 2 can some what talk, and the other 4....Forget my girlfriends ideas, or the parents on what their goals are...the state knows better.

And no never, having a friend in the MLB does not translate, since that's such a natural physical type talent. Not ruling you out of being a MLB manager, but player, no. 70% is physical genetics and talents, 20% is childhood practice/playing, and the other 10% drive and training.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The problem with the eduction system is very simple: it's a complex problem and there's no simple solution. Many people don't even understand the problem fully, and therefore their solutions are garbage. For example, the OP in his post clearly doesn't understand that Common Core is a set of standards...yet complains about a curriculum later on. If you don't know the difference between a set of standards and a curriculum-then you have no foundation in educational knowledge, meaning your solutions are irrelevant because you can't prescribe the appropriate medication if you can't even diagnose the problem at hand.

I'm not suggesting that Common Core is perfect-it's not. But if you don't even know what it is, then quite frankly nobody should give two craps about your opinion on it.

Also what in the world do you think a "set of standards" means? Like to hear it.

Standards are what is to be taught and has nothing to do with how it is to be taught. Critics of public education have been confusing the two for years. Don't feel like the Lone Ranger, because you are not alone in not knowing the difference. Blaming Common Core is a cop-out.

Common core just happens to be the primary example of the ideology (top down) that I pointed out. What I am looking at is trends in education. And common core happens to fall in the cross hairs of a down trend. A trend just like this is secondary education.

College grade inflation: Does 'A' stand for 'average'?

How does one set standards? They have to be able to test to evaluate their standards. And what happened in the case of common core is teachers had to start teaching to those tests, test that tested the ability to follow instruction vs results. Are you acting like there wasn't a huge shift in curriculum after common core?

Has there been a shift in education? Yes. Is it based on what you're saying? No. I'm in the classroom every single school day, so unless you also are, I'm going to assume I'm more versed on the issues at hand than you are.

Common Core is WHAT skills students are supposed to learn...a curriculum is HOW they learn them, big difference. Also the main test that my students have to pass is their writing test for the state...so I have to teach them reading/writing skills...are you suggesting I shouldn't be teaching them that?

I'm not, but my girlfriend is, as well as most of her friends. And is still administering tests to the severely autistic that can't even speak. That's what I call top down, one size fits all. And not to mention her mom is on the forefront of common core, and before that was a superintendent of 2 different districts.

And no I'm not suggesting the strawman you claim I am suggesting, at all. You pulled that one out of your ass all on your own. And adds credence to my OP if you're a teacher and you think that's an effective technique to use, our students aren't learning how to learn, but what to learn. If you're using such obvious logical fallacies, then why the hell are we trusting you with teaching our kids?

My problem (if I must state it again) is with A. The top down method coming from the government. All kids need one unified method of teaching based on X, Y, and Z standards. B. Is what our secondary education facilities are teaching our teachers...which is pretty much the same thing in A, along with the state is a better vessel of education over parents.

So, what do you propose we do? Have 98,000+ different standards for each public school in the country?

As far as math standards go, years ago we used the National Council for Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) Standards. Then I taught using the Florida State Sunshine Standards (SSS). There was almost no difference. Now, I teach using Common Core. The NCTM basically abandoned their standards because the majority of the country was using Common Core and there was basically no difference.

I am sorry, but you are proposing abandoning a system that works!

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Standards are what is to be taught and has nothing to do with how it is to be taught. Critics of public education have been confusing the two for years. Don't feel like the Lone Ranger, because you are not alone in not knowing the difference. Blaming Common Core is a cop-out.

Common core just happens to be the primary example of the ideology (top down) that I pointed out. What I am looking at is trends in education. And common core happens to fall in the cross hairs of a down trend. A trend just like this is secondary education.

College grade inflation: Does 'A' stand for 'average'?

How does one set standards? They have to be able to test to evaluate their standards. And what happened in the case of common core is teachers had to start teaching to those tests, test that tested the ability to follow instruction vs results. Are you acting like there wasn't a huge shift in curriculum after common core?

Has there been a shift in education? Yes. Is it based on what you're saying? No. I'm in the classroom every single school day, so unless you also are, I'm going to assume I'm more versed on the issues at hand than you are.

Common Core is WHAT skills students are supposed to learn...a curriculum is HOW they learn them, big difference. Also the main test that my students have to pass is their writing test for the state...so I have to teach them reading/writing skills...are you suggesting I shouldn't be teaching them that?

I'm not, but my girlfriend is, as well as most of her friends. And is still administering tests to the severely autistic that can't even speak. That's what I call top down, one size fits all. And not to mention her mom is on the forefront of common core, and before that was a superintendent of 2 different districts.

And no I'm not suggesting the strawman you claim I am suggesting, at all. You pulled that one out of your ass all on your own. And adds credence to my OP if you're a teacher and you think that's an effective technique to use, our students aren't learning how to learn, but what to learn. If you're using such obvious logical fallacies, then why the hell are we trusting you with teaching our kids?

My problem (if I must state it again) is with A. The top down method coming from the government. All kids need one unified method of teaching based on X, Y, and Z standards. B. Is what our secondary education facilities are teaching our teachers...which is pretty much the same thing in A, along with the state is a better vessel of education over parents.

If your girlfriend is teaching severely autistic students, then surely you're aware that they'd have both a 504 and IEP. The very acronym of IEP is "Individualized Education Program"...meaning no she's not teaching a one size fits all with her students, hence the word "individualized".

As for the problem you're pointing out the "one size fits all"-that's true...but it's also when differentiating instruction comes in hand. I'm able to adjust my assignments for different kids in order for them to reach what I want them to learn. For example, my students had to demonstrate to me what "internal monologue" is...I had a student who is very low in his writing skills and he told me he wasn't sure what it meant...so I had to change up the way he learned the material...I drew an image of a character thinking inside of a thought bubble, and it just "clicked" with him. That student learned the same exact thing as all of my other students, but in a different way and that's ok.

PS: A good friend of mine plays in the MLB...does that make me an expert on the MLB or baseball? No. My wife works at a mental health crisis facility...does that automatically mean I'm an expert on mental health? No. Your girlfriend is a teacher, does that mean you're an expert on education? No.

Seriously your posts in this thread demonstrate that you're unaware of 504's, IEP's, the differences between a set of standards and a curriculum, hell you didn't even know what a set of standards was...so you'll have to excuse us if we don't take your opinions on education very seriously.

Just asked her...Thats pretty much what requires her to give these tests. Since she would be "denying them equal education," otherwise. She does the IEPs, but if she doesn't do the tests (or something like music or art class) it's viewed as denying them education...despite the name of the program, yea that's still a one size fits all. Over half her students are not potty trained, 2 can some what talk, and the other 4....Forget my girlfriends ideas, or the parents on what their goals are...the state knows better.

And no never, having a friend in the MLB does not translate, since that's such a natural physical type talent. Not ruling you out of being a MLB manager, but player, no. 70% is physical genetics and talents, 20% is childhood practice/playing, and the other 10% drive and training.

None of that has anything to do with Common Core. You need to educate yourself, because you are spewing about something you know nothing about.

 

[sakinago]

Also what in the world do you think a "set of standards" means? Like to hear it.

Standards are what is to be taught and has nothing to do with how it is to be taught. Critics of public education have been confusing the two for years. Don't feel like the Lone Ranger, because you are not alone in not knowing the difference. Blaming Common Core is a cop-out.

Common core just happens to be the primary example of the ideology (top down) that I pointed out. What I am looking at is trends in education. And common core happens to fall in the cross hairs of a down trend. A trend just like this is secondary education.

College grade inflation: Does 'A' stand for 'average'?

How does one set standards? They have to be able to test to evaluate their standards. And what happened in the case of common core is teachers had to start teaching to those tests, test that tested the ability to follow instruction vs results. Are you acting like there wasn't a huge shift in curriculum after common core?

Has there been a shift in education? Yes. Is it based on what you're saying? No. I'm in the classroom every single school day, so unless you also are, I'm going to assume I'm more versed on the issues at hand than you are.

Common Core is WHAT skills students are supposed to learn...a curriculum is HOW they learn them, big difference. Also the main test that my students have to pass is their writing test for the state...so I have to teach them reading/writing skills...are you suggesting I shouldn't be teaching them that?

I'm not, but my girlfriend is, as well as most of her friends. And is still administering tests to the severely autistic that can't even speak. That's what I call top down, one size fits all. And not to mention her mom is on the forefront of common core, and before that was a superintendent of 2 different districts.

And no I'm not suggesting the strawman you claim I am suggesting, at all. You pulled that one out of your ass all on your own. And adds credence to my OP if you're a teacher and you think that's an effective technique to use, our students aren't learning how to learn, but what to learn. If you're using such obvious logical fallacies, then why the hell are we trusting you with teaching our kids?

My problem (if I must state it again) is with A. The top down method coming from the government. All kids need one unified method of teaching based on X, Y, and Z standards. B. Is what our secondary education facilities are teaching our teachers...which is pretty much the same thing in A, along with the state is a better vessel of education over parents.

So, what do you propose we do? Have 98,000+ different standards for each public school in the country?

As far as math standards go, years ago we used the National Council for Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) Standards. Then I taught using the Florida State Sunshine Standards (SSS). There was almost no difference. Now, I teach using Common Core. The NCTM basically abandoned their standards because the majority of the country was using Common Core and there was basically no difference.

I am sorry, but you are proposing abandoning a system that works!

Yes and here's why.

The Wisdom of Crowds: Why the Many are Smarter than the Few | DiploFoundation

Would you want a few treatment options for a disease you have, or 98,000? Yes I want 98,000 different ways of trying to solve the problem vs a few ways dictated by the few for the many. At best that's service of the majority over the individual. Someone over in Mass, finds a good solution in education, someone else in MD, adopts that. Someone in TX improves upon in, then someone TN combines it with something else, and then someone in NV finds an even better way. So in and so forth. Then maybe something works better with inner city kids than rural kids, or something works better with males, or better with special needs.

Common core is absolutely the tail wagging the dog. The standards "wagging" the curriculum. By the few, to the many.

And we did have a system that worked, for a long time, we were top 3 in the world before the formation of the DOE. In the 1800s our kids were practically giving dissertations, and reciting the constitution in its entirety. Read a letter from 80 years ago from a high schooler, their vocabulary blow pretty much every on USMB out of the water.

 

[idb]

So what happens to these kids now?

Tell them it's their own fault and they should pull themselves up by their bootstraps.
Close the education department, remove social welfare, government programs, entitlements and health insurance to encourage their lazy arses.
That'll fix it.

 

[mgh80]

Standards are what is to be taught and has nothing to do with how it is to be taught. Critics of public education have been confusing the two for years. Don't feel like the Lone Ranger, because you are not alone in not knowing the difference. Blaming Common Core is a cop-out.

Common core just happens to be the primary example of the ideology (top down) that I pointed out. What I am looking at is trends in education. And common core happens to fall in the cross hairs of a down trend. A trend just like this is secondary education.

College grade inflation: Does 'A' stand for 'average'?

How does one set standards? They have to be able to test to evaluate their standards. And what happened in the case of common core is teachers had to start teaching to those tests, test that tested the ability to follow instruction vs results. Are you acting like there wasn't a huge shift in curriculum after common core?

Has there been a shift in education? Yes. Is it based on what you're saying? No. I'm in the classroom every single school day, so unless you also are, I'm going to assume I'm more versed on the issues at hand than you are.

Common Core is WHAT skills students are supposed to learn...a curriculum is HOW they learn them, big difference. Also the main test that my students have to pass is their writing test for the state...so I have to teach them reading/writing skills...are you suggesting I shouldn't be teaching them that?

I'm not, but my girlfriend is, as well as most of her friends. And is still administering tests to the severely autistic that can't even speak. That's what I call top down, one size fits all. And not to mention her mom is on the forefront of common core, and before that was a superintendent of 2 different districts.

And no I'm not suggesting the strawman you claim I am suggesting, at all. You pulled that one out of your ass all on your own. And adds credence to my OP if you're a teacher and you think that's an effective technique to use, our students aren't learning how to learn, but what to learn. If you're using such obvious logical fallacies, then why the hell are we trusting you with teaching our kids?

My problem (if I must state it again) is with A. The top down method coming from the government. All kids need one unified method of teaching based on X, Y, and Z standards. B. Is what our secondary education facilities are teaching our teachers...which is pretty much the same thing in A, along with the state is a better vessel of education over parents.

If your girlfriend is teaching severely autistic students, then surely you're aware that they'd have both a 504 and IEP. The very acronym of IEP is "Individualized Education Program"...meaning no she's not teaching a one size fits all with her students, hence the word "individualized".

As for the problem you're pointing out the "one size fits all"-that's true...but it's also when differentiating instruction comes in hand. I'm able to adjust my assignments for different kids in order for them to reach what I want them to learn. For example, my students had to demonstrate to me what "internal monologue" is...I had a student who is very low in his writing skills and he told me he wasn't sure what it meant...so I had to change up the way he learned the material...I drew an image of a character thinking inside of a thought bubble, and it just "clicked" with him. That student learned the same exact thing as all of my other students, but in a different way and that's ok.

PS: A good friend of mine plays in the MLB...does that make me an expert on the MLB or baseball? No. My wife works at a mental health crisis facility...does that automatically mean I'm an expert on mental health? No. Your girlfriend is a teacher, does that mean you're an expert on education? No.

Seriously your posts in this thread demonstrate that you're unaware of 504's, IEP's, the differences between a set of standards and a curriculum, hell you didn't even know what a set of standards was...so you'll have to excuse us if we don't take your opinions on education very seriously.

Just asked her...Thats pretty much what requires her to give these tests. Since she would be "denying them equal education," otherwise. She does the IEPs, but if she doesn't do the tests (or something like music or art class) it's viewed as denying them education...despite the name of the program, yea that's still a one size fits all. Over half her students are not potty trained, 2 can some what talk, and the other 4....Forget my girlfriends ideas, or the parents on what their goals are...the state knows better.

And no never, having a friend in the MLB does not translate, since that's such a natural physical type talent. Not ruling you out of being a MLB manager, but player, no. 70% is physical genetics and talents, 20% is childhood practice/playing, and the other 10% drive and training.

What do you mean she "does the IEPS"?

She's required to give the tests to students with IEPs-that's true...BUT IEP's grant special accommodations to students-that's the whole purpose of them in the first place.

You don't know what an IEP is. You don't know what a set of standards is. You don't know what a curriculum is. Yet you're claiming to be an expert and are figuratively stepping into the ring with multiple educators? You honestly expect to have a chance? Let's be real here: you're ignorant about the issues at hand-and that's ok and understandable. I'm not sure what your job is, but let's say you're a mechanic...I wouldn't pretend to know all of the details of being a mechanic and I sure as hell wouldn't think I know more than a mechanic at working on cars.

 

[sakinago]

Common core just happens to be the primary example of the ideology (top down) that I pointed out. What I am looking at is trends in education. And common core happens to fall in the cross hairs of a down trend. A trend just like this is secondary education.

College grade inflation: Does 'A' stand for 'average'?

How does one set standards? They have to be able to test to evaluate their standards. And what happened in the case of common core is teachers had to start teaching to those tests, test that tested the ability to follow instruction vs results. Are you acting like there wasn't a huge shift in curriculum after common core?

Has there been a shift in education? Yes. Is it based on what you're saying? No. I'm in the classroom every single school day, so unless you also are, I'm going to assume I'm more versed on the issues at hand than you are.

Common Core is WHAT skills students are supposed to learn...a curriculum is HOW they learn them, big difference. Also the main test that my students have to pass is their writing test for the state...so I have to teach them reading/writing skills...are you suggesting I shouldn't be teaching them that?

I'm not, but my girlfriend is, as well as most of her friends. And is still administering tests to the severely autistic that can't even speak. That's what I call top down, one size fits all. And not to mention her mom is on the forefront of common core, and before that was a superintendent of 2 different districts.

And no I'm not suggesting the strawman you claim I am suggesting, at all. You pulled that one out of your ass all on your own. And adds credence to my OP if you're a teacher and you think that's an effective technique to use, our students aren't learning how to learn, but what to learn. If you're using such obvious logical fallacies, then why the hell are we trusting you with teaching our kids?

My problem (if I must state it again) is with A. The top down method coming from the government. All kids need one unified method of teaching based on X, Y, and Z standards. B. Is what our secondary education facilities are teaching our teachers...which is pretty much the same thing in A, along with the state is a better vessel of education over parents.

If your girlfriend is teaching severely autistic students, then surely you're aware that they'd have both a 504 and IEP. The very acronym of IEP is "Individualized Education Program"...meaning no she's not teaching a one size fits all with her students, hence the word "individualized".

As for the problem you're pointing out the "one size fits all"-that's true...but it's also when differentiating instruction comes in hand. I'm able to adjust my assignments for different kids in order for them to reach what I want them to learn. For example, my students had to demonstrate to me what "internal monologue" is...I had a student who is very low in his writing skills and he told me he wasn't sure what it meant...so I had to change up the way he learned the material...I drew an image of a character thinking inside of a thought bubble, and it just "clicked" with him. That student learned the same exact thing as all of my other students, but in a different way and that's ok.

PS: A good friend of mine plays in the MLB...does that make me an expert on the MLB or baseball? No. My wife works at a mental health crisis facility...does that automatically mean I'm an expert on mental health? No. Your girlfriend is a teacher, does that mean you're an expert on education? No.

Seriously your posts in this thread demonstrate that you're unaware of 504's, IEP's, the differences between a set of standards and a curriculum, hell you didn't even know what a set of standards was...so you'll have to excuse us if we don't take your opinions on education very seriously.

Just asked her...Thats pretty much what requires her to give these tests. Since she would be "denying them equal education," otherwise. She does the IEPs, but if she doesn't do the tests (or something like music or art class) it's viewed as denying them education...despite the name of the program, yea that's still a one size fits all. Over half her students are not potty trained, 2 can some what talk, and the other 4....Forget my girlfriends ideas, or the parents on what their goals are...the state knows better.

And no never, having a friend in the MLB does not translate, since that's such a natural physical type talent. Not ruling you out of being a MLB manager, but player, no. 70% is physical genetics and talents, 20% is childhood practice/playing, and the other 10% drive and training.

What do you mean she "does the IEPS"?

She's required to give the tests to students with IEPs-that's true...BUT IEP's grant special accommodations to students-that's the whole purpose of them in the first place.

You don't know what an IEP is. You don't know what a set of standards is. You don't know what a curriculum is. Yet you're claiming to be an expert and are figuratively stepping into the ring with multiple educators? You honestly expect to have a chance? Let's be real here: you're ignorant about the issues at hand-and that's ok and understandable. I'm not sure what your job is, but let's say you're a mechanic...I wouldn't pretend to know all of the details of being a mechanic and I sure as hell wouldn't think I know more than a mechanic at working on cars.

RN. And I'm not claiming to be an "expert" in education. That certainly does not exclude me from pointing out, hey we got a big freaking problem here, WHICH WE DO.
U.S. students’ academic achievement still lags that of their peers in many other countries
That's not a success story there. And I suppose your answer to this is stay the course?

And YOU are part of the problem if you THINK we need to only listen to "experts" in education, or in other words the few. Here's a crazy idea, how bout we take a look at the teachers who are successful, get some ideas from them, how bout we source ideas from the parents. How bout we stop relying on teachers, who have to work with 20-30 students at a time, to be the only ones involved in teaching, I don't care how good of a teacher you are, you're not capable of giving them the time and attention they need. And how bout we stop listening to the few who think they know what's best. And we should also stop prentending like teacher unions=equals helping our students, when in reality, they're only there for the teachers.

You don't see me coming to you with appeals to ignorance/authority, and industry jargon and abbrevia, and then saying, see you don't know what you're talking about. You should be teaching your students how to spot appeals to authority and ignorance, and certainly not be using them yourself. That's the difference of teaching how to learn not what. If you can't spot your own logical fallacies, how are you supposed to teach kids to not get duped by them? (I get it's not actually part of the curriculum...which is part of the problem.)

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Standards are what is to be taught and has nothing to do with how it is to be taught. Critics of public education have been confusing the two for years. Don't feel like the Lone Ranger, because you are not alone in not knowing the difference. Blaming Common Core is a cop-out.

Common core just happens to be the primary example of the ideology (top down) that I pointed out. What I am looking at is trends in education. And common core happens to fall in the cross hairs of a down trend. A trend just like this is secondary education.

College grade inflation: Does 'A' stand for 'average'?

How does one set standards? They have to be able to test to evaluate their standards. And what happened in the case of common core is teachers had to start teaching to those tests, test that tested the ability to follow instruction vs results. Are you acting like there wasn't a huge shift in curriculum after common core?

Has there been a shift in education? Yes. Is it based on what you're saying? No. I'm in the classroom every single school day, so unless you also are, I'm going to assume I'm more versed on the issues at hand than you are.

Common Core is WHAT skills students are supposed to learn...a curriculum is HOW they learn them, big difference. Also the main test that my students have to pass is their writing test for the state...so I have to teach them reading/writing skills...are you suggesting I shouldn't be teaching them that?

I'm not, but my girlfriend is, as well as most of her friends. And is still administering tests to the severely autistic that can't even speak. That's what I call top down, one size fits all. And not to mention her mom is on the forefront of common core, and before that was a superintendent of 2 different districts.

And no I'm not suggesting the strawman you claim I am suggesting, at all. You pulled that one out of your ass all on your own. And adds credence to my OP if you're a teacher and you think that's an effective technique to use, our students aren't learning how to learn, but what to learn. If you're using such obvious logical fallacies, then why the hell are we trusting you with teaching our kids?

My problem (if I must state it again) is with A. The top down method coming from the government. All kids need one unified method of teaching based on X, Y, and Z standards. B. Is what our secondary education facilities are teaching our teachers...which is pretty much the same thing in A, along with the state is a better vessel of education over parents.

So, what do you propose we do? Have 98,000+ different standards for each public school in the country?

As far as math standards go, years ago we used the National Council for Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) Standards. Then I taught using the Florida State Sunshine Standards (SSS). There was almost no difference. Now, I teach using Common Core. The NCTM basically abandoned their standards because the majority of the country was using Common Core and there was basically no difference.

I am sorry, but you are proposing abandoning a system that works!

Yes and here's why.

The Wisdom of Crowds: Why the Many are Smarter than the Few | DiploFoundation

Would you want a few treatment options for a disease you have, or 98,000? Yes I want 98,000 different ways of trying to solve the problem vs a few ways dictated by the few for the many. At best that's service of the majority over the individual. Someone over in Mass, finds a good solution in education, someone else in MD, adopts that. Someone in TX improves upon in, then someone TN combines it with something else, and then someone in NV finds an even better way. So in and so forth. Then maybe something works better with inner city kids than rural kids, or something works better with males, or better with special needs.

Common core is absolutely the tail wagging the dog. The standards "wagging" the curriculum. By the few, to the many.

And we did have a system that worked, for a long time, we were top 3 in the world before the formation of the DOE. In the 1800s our kids were practically giving dissertations, and reciting the constitution in its entirety. Read a letter from 80 years ago from a high schooler, their vocabulary blow pretty much every on USMB out of the water.

You have that exactly backwards. You don't have 98,000 different ways to get it right. You have 97,999 ways to do it wrong.

Standards are what they need to learn. If you had any concept of what a standard is, you would understand that.

Do you agree that all students should be able to calculate compound interest? THAT is a standard. How you teach someone to do that is curriculum. At my past two schools, the teachers of the subject area were responsible for designing a curriculum in order for students to achieve the standard. It did not come from the district, state, or the federal government. I helped write it! That is where the rubber meets the road.

As for your other old wive's tales, I will leave that to your own ignorance and find out how well children performed in states like Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas and various other states before the federal government forced them to educate ALL children. Hint: They were not.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Report: 75% Of Black California Boys Fail To Meet Reading And Writing Standards

There's a problem with the education system, and it's not about money. The problem is with common core. Teaching students to be worker bees, teaching them there's only one way to skin a cat, and it's our way. Our education system has been continuing to fail our kids for the past 50 years, and their only solution is more and more money. We spend way more than most of the world per student, and the number keeps growing, and education keeps getting worse. When are we going to learn that one size fits all policy doesn't work. Dictating from the top down does not work. When you put a small group of people in charge over all citizens, you get a limited number of solutions to problems, and a lack of creativity AT BEST. Usually what you get is complacency, self serving actions to stay in power, and a black hole of money and increase in control that is never satisfied. And when they fail we give them more money, more control, more personnel, and what we get is the same solutions causing the problems, that just cost more.

Yes, it's very sad. Parents are failing and a lot of them are failing because education failed them. It'll just get worse and worse, but you get the feeling partisan politics will never bother to solve this.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Has there been a shift in education? Yes. Is it based on what you're saying? No. I'm in the classroom every single school day, so unless you also are, I'm going to assume I'm more versed on the issues at hand than you are.

Common Core is WHAT skills students are supposed to learn...a curriculum is HOW they learn them, big difference. Also the main test that my students have to pass is their writing test for the state...so I have to teach them reading/writing skills...are you suggesting I shouldn't be teaching them that?

I'm not, but my girlfriend is, as well as most of her friends. And is still administering tests to the severely autistic that can't even speak. That's what I call top down, one size fits all. And not to mention her mom is on the forefront of common core, and before that was a superintendent of 2 different districts.

And no I'm not suggesting the strawman you claim I am suggesting, at all. You pulled that one out of your ass all on your own. And adds credence to my OP if you're a teacher and you think that's an effective technique to use, our students aren't learning how to learn, but what to learn. If you're using such obvious logical fallacies, then why the hell are we trusting you with teaching our kids?

My problem (if I must state it again) is with A. The top down method coming from the government. All kids need one unified method of teaching based on X, Y, and Z standards. B. Is what our secondary education facilities are teaching our teachers...which is pretty much the same thing in A, along with the state is a better vessel of education over parents.

If your girlfriend is teaching severely autistic students, then surely you're aware that they'd have both a 504 and IEP. The very acronym of IEP is "Individualized Education Program"...meaning no she's not teaching a one size fits all with her students, hence the word "individualized".

As for the problem you're pointing out the "one size fits all"-that's true...but it's also when differentiating instruction comes in hand. I'm able to adjust my assignments for different kids in order for them to reach what I want them to learn. For example, my students had to demonstrate to me what "internal monologue" is...I had a student who is very low in his writing skills and he told me he wasn't sure what it meant...so I had to change up the way he learned the material...I drew an image of a character thinking inside of a thought bubble, and it just "clicked" with him. That student learned the same exact thing as all of my other students, but in a different way and that's ok.

PS: A good friend of mine plays in the MLB...does that make me an expert on the MLB or baseball? No. My wife works at a mental health crisis facility...does that automatically mean I'm an expert on mental health? No. Your girlfriend is a teacher, does that mean you're an expert on education? No.

Seriously your posts in this thread demonstrate that you're unaware of 504's, IEP's, the differences between a set of standards and a curriculum, hell you didn't even know what a set of standards was...so you'll have to excuse us if we don't take your opinions on education very seriously.

Just asked her...Thats pretty much what requires her to give these tests. Since she would be "denying them equal education," otherwise. She does the IEPs, but if she doesn't do the tests (or something like music or art class) it's viewed as denying them education...despite the name of the program, yea that's still a one size fits all. Over half her students are not potty trained, 2 can some what talk, and the other 4....Forget my girlfriends ideas, or the parents on what their goals are...the state knows better.

And no never, having a friend in the MLB does not translate, since that's such a natural physical type talent. Not ruling you out of being a MLB manager, but player, no. 70% is physical genetics and talents, 20% is childhood practice/playing, and the other 10% drive and training.

What do you mean she "does the IEPS"?

She's required to give the tests to students with IEPs-that's true...BUT IEP's grant special accommodations to students-that's the whole purpose of them in the first place.

You don't know what an IEP is. You don't know what a set of standards is. You don't know what a curriculum is. Yet you're claiming to be an expert and are figuratively stepping into the ring with multiple educators? You honestly expect to have a chance? Let's be real here: you're ignorant about the issues at hand-and that's ok and understandable. I'm not sure what your job is, but let's say you're a mechanic...I wouldn't pretend to know all of the details of being a mechanic and I sure as hell wouldn't think I know more than a mechanic at working on cars.

RN. And I'm not claiming to be an "expert" in education. That certainly does not exclude me from pointing out, hey we got a big freaking problem here, WHICH WE DO.
U.S. students’ academic achievement still lags that of their peers in many other countries
That's not a success story there. And I suppose your answer to this is stay the course?

And YOU are part of the problem if you THINK we need to only listen to "experts" in education, or in other words the few. Here's a crazy idea, how bout we take a look at the teachers who are successful, get some ideas from them, how bout we source ideas from the parents. How bout we stop relying on teachers, who have to work with 20-30 students at a time, to be the only ones involved in teaching, I don't care how good of a teacher you are, you're not capable of giving them the time and attention they need. And how bout we stop listening to the few who think they know what's best. And we should also stop prentending like teacher unions=equals helping our students, when in reality, they're only there for the teachers.

You don't see me coming to you with appeals to ignorance/authority, and industry jargon and abbrevia, and then saying, see you don't know what you're talking about. You should be teaching your students how to spot appeals to authority and ignorance, and certainly not be using them yourself. That's the difference of teaching how to learn not what. If you can't spot your own logical fallacies, how are you supposed to teach kids to not get duped by them? (I get it's not actually part of the curriculum...which is part of the problem.)

Well, what you do is you get the successful teachers and the successful schools and you get them together to figure things out in groups. Then the groups get together and you can see what works and what doesn't work. I've seen it happen and seen it work. Also you need to have aims for education, that's the biggest one. If you don't know what you want from education, you won't get anything.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Common core just happens to be the primary example of the ideology (top down) that I pointed out. What I am looking at is trends in education. And common core happens to fall in the cross hairs of a down trend. A trend just like this is secondary education.

College grade inflation: Does 'A' stand for 'average'?

How does one set standards? They have to be able to test to evaluate their standards. And what happened in the case of common core is teachers had to start teaching to those tests, test that tested the ability to follow instruction vs results. Are you acting like there wasn't a huge shift in curriculum after common core?

Has there been a shift in education? Yes. Is it based on what you're saying? No. I'm in the classroom every single school day, so unless you also are, I'm going to assume I'm more versed on the issues at hand than you are.

Common Core is WHAT skills students are supposed to learn...a curriculum is HOW they learn them, big difference. Also the main test that my students have to pass is their writing test for the state...so I have to teach them reading/writing skills...are you suggesting I shouldn't be teaching them that?

I'm not, but my girlfriend is, as well as most of her friends. And is still administering tests to the severely autistic that can't even speak. That's what I call top down, one size fits all. And not to mention her mom is on the forefront of common core, and before that was a superintendent of 2 different districts.

And no I'm not suggesting the strawman you claim I am suggesting, at all. You pulled that one out of your ass all on your own. And adds credence to my OP if you're a teacher and you think that's an effective technique to use, our students aren't learning how to learn, but what to learn. If you're using such obvious logical fallacies, then why the hell are we trusting you with teaching our kids?

My problem (if I must state it again) is with A. The top down method coming from the government. All kids need one unified method of teaching based on X, Y, and Z standards. B. Is what our secondary education facilities are teaching our teachers...which is pretty much the same thing in A, along with the state is a better vessel of education over parents.

So, what do you propose we do? Have 98,000+ different standards for each public school in the country?

As far as math standards go, years ago we used the National Council for Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) Standards. Then I taught using the Florida State Sunshine Standards (SSS). There was almost no difference. Now, I teach using Common Core. The NCTM basically abandoned their standards because the majority of the country was using Common Core and there was basically no difference.

I am sorry, but you are proposing abandoning a system that works!

Yes and here's why.

The Wisdom of Crowds: Why the Many are Smarter than the Few | DiploFoundation

Would you want a few treatment options for a disease you have, or 98,000? Yes I want 98,000 different ways of trying to solve the problem vs a few ways dictated by the few for the many. At best that's service of the majority over the individual. Someone over in Mass, finds a good solution in education, someone else in MD, adopts that. Someone in TX improves upon in, then someone TN combines it with something else, and then someone in NV finds an even better way. So in and so forth. Then maybe something works better with inner city kids than rural kids, or something works better with males, or better with special needs.

Common core is absolutely the tail wagging the dog. The standards "wagging" the curriculum. By the few, to the many.

And we did have a system that worked, for a long time, we were top 3 in the world before the formation of the DOE. In the 1800s our kids were practically giving dissertations, and reciting the constitution in its entirety. Read a letter from 80 years ago from a high schooler, their vocabulary blow pretty much every on USMB out of the water.

You have that exactly backwards. You don't have 98,000 different ways to get it right. You have 97,999 ways to do it wrong.

Standards are what they need to learn. If you had any concept of what a standard is, you would understand that.

Do you agree that all students should be able to calculate compound interest? THAT is a standard. How you teach someone to do that is curriculum. At my past two schools, the teachers of the subject area were responsible for designing a curriculum in order for students to achieve the standard. It did not come from the district, state, or the federal government. I helped write it! That is where the rubber meets the road.

As for your other old wive's tales, I will leave that to your own ignorance and find out how well children performed in states like Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas and various other states before the federal government forced them to educate ALL children. Hint: They were not.

Maybe this is part of the problem. Expecting a teacher to teach AND design a course is a lot of work. If the federal govt spent more of that money getting teachers together, designing courses that work, then going to the states and saying "hey, do you want to use our course?" then freeing teachers up to select from a variety of courses that have been prepared by experts, and then teaching it, you're going to end up with better teaching than if it's every teacher for themselves.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Has there been a shift in education? Yes. Is it based on what you're saying? No. I'm in the classroom every single school day, so unless you also are, I'm going to assume I'm more versed on the issues at hand than you are.

Common Core is WHAT skills students are supposed to learn...a curriculum is HOW they learn them, big difference. Also the main test that my students have to pass is their writing test for the state...so I have to teach them reading/writing skills...are you suggesting I shouldn't be teaching them that?

I'm not, but my girlfriend is, as well as most of her friends. And is still administering tests to the severely autistic that can't even speak. That's what I call top down, one size fits all. And not to mention her mom is on the forefront of common core, and before that was a superintendent of 2 different districts.

And no I'm not suggesting the strawman you claim I am suggesting, at all. You pulled that one out of your ass all on your own. And adds credence to my OP if you're a teacher and you think that's an effective technique to use, our students aren't learning how to learn, but what to learn. If you're using such obvious logical fallacies, then why the hell are we trusting you with teaching our kids?

My problem (if I must state it again) is with A. The top down method coming from the government. All kids need one unified method of teaching based on X, Y, and Z standards. B. Is what our secondary education facilities are teaching our teachers...which is pretty much the same thing in A, along with the state is a better vessel of education over parents.

If your girlfriend is teaching severely autistic students, then surely you're aware that they'd have both a 504 and IEP. The very acronym of IEP is "Individualized Education Program"...meaning no she's not teaching a one size fits all with her students, hence the word "individualized".

As for the problem you're pointing out the "one size fits all"-that's true...but it's also when differentiating instruction comes in hand. I'm able to adjust my assignments for different kids in order for them to reach what I want them to learn. For example, my students had to demonstrate to me what "internal monologue" is...I had a student who is very low in his writing skills and he told me he wasn't sure what it meant...so I had to change up the way he learned the material...I drew an image of a character thinking inside of a thought bubble, and it just "clicked" with him. That student learned the same exact thing as all of my other students, but in a different way and that's ok.

PS: A good friend of mine plays in the MLB...does that make me an expert on the MLB or baseball? No. My wife works at a mental health crisis facility...does that automatically mean I'm an expert on mental health? No. Your girlfriend is a teacher, does that mean you're an expert on education? No.

Seriously your posts in this thread demonstrate that you're unaware of 504's, IEP's, the differences between a set of standards and a curriculum, hell you didn't even know what a set of standards was...so you'll have to excuse us if we don't take your opinions on education very seriously.

Just asked her...Thats pretty much what requires her to give these tests. Since she would be "denying them equal education," otherwise. She does the IEPs, but if she doesn't do the tests (or something like music or art class) it's viewed as denying them education...despite the name of the program, yea that's still a one size fits all. Over half her students are not potty trained, 2 can some what talk, and the other 4....Forget my girlfriends ideas, or the parents on what their goals are...the state knows better.

And no never, having a friend in the MLB does not translate, since that's such a natural physical type talent. Not ruling you out of being a MLB manager, but player, no. 70% is physical genetics and talents, 20% is childhood practice/playing, and the other 10% drive and training.

What do you mean she "does the IEPS"?

She's required to give the tests to students with IEPs-that's true...BUT IEP's grant special accommodations to students-that's the whole purpose of them in the first place.

You don't know what an IEP is. You don't know what a set of standards is. You don't know what a curriculum is. Yet you're claiming to be an expert and are figuratively stepping into the ring with multiple educators? You honestly expect to have a chance? Let's be real here: you're ignorant about the issues at hand-and that's ok and understandable. I'm not sure what your job is, but let's say you're a mechanic...I wouldn't pretend to know all of the details of being a mechanic and I sure as hell wouldn't think I know more than a mechanic at working on cars.

RN. And I'm not claiming to be an "expert" in education. That certainly does not exclude me from pointing out, hey we got a big freaking problem here, WHICH WE DO.
U.S. students’ academic achievement still lags that of their peers in many other countries
That's not a success story there. And I suppose your answer to this is stay the course?

And YOU are part of the problem if you THINK we need to only listen to "experts" in education, or in other words the few. Here's a crazy idea, how bout we take a look at the teachers who are successful, get some ideas from them, how bout we source ideas from the parents. How bout we stop relying on teachers, who have to work with 20-30 students at a time, to be the only ones involved in teaching, I don't care how good of a teacher you are, you're not capable of giving them the time and attention they need. And how bout we stop listening to the few who think they know what's best. And we should also stop prentending like teacher unions=equals helping our students, when in reality, they're only there for the teachers.

You don't see me coming to you with appeals to ignorance/authority, and industry jargon and abbrevia, and then saying, see you don't know what you're talking about. You should be teaching your students how to spot appeals to authority and ignorance, and certainly not be using them yourself. That's the difference of teaching how to learn not what. If you can't spot your own logical fallacies, how are you supposed to teach kids to not get duped by them? (I get it's not actually part of the curriculum...which is part of the problem.)

I am sorry, but the ignorance you are displaying is overwhelming.

You mention teaching 20-30 students at a time? When I began my career, I taught 35-40 kids at a time. Now, I average less than 20 because teaching that many students is impossible.

Teachers unions do not help students. If you think that is their intended function, you are more ignorant than I thought.

The reason you can't come to us with appeals to ignorance/authority, industry jargon and abbreviations is simply because you are completely ignorant on this topic. Post something right, and I will gladly agree with you.

All you have done is parrot the same old tired bullshit we hear every day from wannabe educators who have neither the intellect or stamina to actually be an educator.

Leave education to the educators and get the politicians out of it. Republicans in Florida continuously bitched about education while I taught there, despite the fact that they controlled the legislature and governorship. They quickly found that having rank amateurs meddling in the process made things far worse than better.

 

[DGS49]

OK, here's the deal. Black Africans living in Africa have an average IQ of 70. African Americans have an average IQ of 85. There nothing in our education system that is going to "educate" average African Americans so that they will reach median levels of accomplishment (based on a typical average IQ of 100).

The solution is to segregate students by IQ - regardless of gender, race, or ethnicity - and teach them all at a pace and in subjects where they can "succeed" according to those subjects and ability levels. And be happy if we succeed at that, even if it means that MOST African Americans will "graduate" from high school at a lower overall achievement level than the national norms.

Notice, this does nothing to impede the learning of high-intelligence Blacks, but we are going to have to accept the fact that the lower IQ groupings are going to be largely "minority" and the highest IQ groupings are going to be mainly white, Asian, jewish, and so on.

The ONLY reason why Academe has not continued with this philosophy (it was common in the '50's) is because of the Leftist political dogma of "equality," meaning that if the education system is operating properly, there will be no differences between or among racial and ethnic groups - because we are all "equal."

Stupidity on steroids.

 

[initforme]

why is it that none of you actually put any responsibility on the kids? what you believe is it is all on the teachers. The teachers didn't beg for common core...your lovely democrat AND yes GOP politicians came up with it and said here you go. Teach it or else. But the kids have no responsibility at all. our getting it straight.

 

[sakinago]

Common core just happens to be the primary example of the ideology (top down) that I pointed out. What I am looking at is trends in education. And common core happens to fall in the cross hairs of a down trend. A trend just like this is secondary education.

College grade inflation: Does 'A' stand for 'average'?

How does one set standards? They have to be able to test to evaluate their standards. And what happened in the case of common core is teachers had to start teaching to those tests, test that tested the ability to follow instruction vs results. Are you acting like there wasn't a huge shift in curriculum after common core?

Has there been a shift in education? Yes. Is it based on what you're saying? No. I'm in the classroom every single school day, so unless you also are, I'm going to assume I'm more versed on the issues at hand than you are.

Common Core is WHAT skills students are supposed to learn...a curriculum is HOW they learn them, big difference. Also the main test that my students have to pass is their writing test for the state...so I have to teach them reading/writing skills...are you suggesting I shouldn't be teaching them that?

I'm not, but my girlfriend is, as well as most of her friends. And is still administering tests to the severely autistic that can't even speak. That's what I call top down, one size fits all. And not to mention her mom is on the forefront of common core, and before that was a superintendent of 2 different districts.

And no I'm not suggesting the strawman you claim I am suggesting, at all. You pulled that one out of your ass all on your own. And adds credence to my OP if you're a teacher and you think that's an effective technique to use, our students aren't learning how to learn, but what to learn. If you're using such obvious logical fallacies, then why the hell are we trusting you with teaching our kids?

My problem (if I must state it again) is with A. The top down method coming from the government. All kids need one unified method of teaching based on X, Y, and Z standards. B. Is what our secondary education facilities are teaching our teachers...which is pretty much the same thing in A, along with the state is a better vessel of education over parents.

So, what do you propose we do? Have 98,000+ different standards for each public school in the country?

As far as math standards go, years ago we used the National Council for Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) Standards. Then I taught using the Florida State Sunshine Standards (SSS). There was almost no difference. Now, I teach using Common Core. The NCTM basically abandoned their standards because the majority of the country was using Common Core and there was basically no difference.

I am sorry, but you are proposing abandoning a system that works!

Yes and here's why.

The Wisdom of Crowds: Why the Many are Smarter than the Few | DiploFoundation

Would you want a few treatment options for a disease you have, or 98,000? Yes I want 98,000 different ways of trying to solve the problem vs a few ways dictated by the few for the many. At best that's service of the majority over the individual. Someone over in Mass, finds a good solution in education, someone else in MD, adopts that. Someone in TX improves upon in, then someone TN combines it with something else, and then someone in NV finds an even better way. So in and so forth. Then maybe something works better with inner city kids than rural kids, or something works better with males, or better with special needs.

Common core is absolutely the tail wagging the dog. The standards "wagging" the curriculum. By the few, to the many.

And we did have a system that worked, for a long time, we were top 3 in the world before the formation of the DOE. In the 1800s our kids were practically giving dissertations, and reciting the constitution in its entirety. Read a letter from 80 years ago from a high schooler, their vocabulary blow pretty much every on USMB out of the water.

You have that exactly backwards. You don't have 98,000 different ways to get it right. You have 97,999 ways to do it wrong.

Standards are what they need to learn. If you had any concept of what a standard is, you would understand that.

Do you agree that all students should be able to calculate compound interest? THAT is a standard. How you teach someone to do that is curriculum. At my past two schools, the teachers of the subject area were responsible for designing a curriculum in order for students to achieve the standard. It did not come from the district, state, or the federal government. I helped write it! That is where the rubber meets the road.

As for your other old wive's tales, I will leave that to your own ignorance and find out how well children performed in states like Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas and various other states before the federal government forced them to educate ALL children. Hint: They were not.

...Really... 97999 ways to get it wrong, thanks for confirming the exact faulty way of thinking I've been describing. Only what way to do it right, and one size fits all.

And yes I know what standards are, and common core standards are the tail that's wagging the dog that is curriculum. And those standards are all coming from one place. And they are most certainly driving the curriculum.

It's not an old wives tale that we were top 3 in education for a long time. These aren't wives tells that I'm telling you, these are facts.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Has there been a shift in education? Yes. Is it based on what you're saying? No. I'm in the classroom every single school day, so unless you also are, I'm going to assume I'm more versed on the issues at hand than you are.

Common Core is WHAT skills students are supposed to learn...a curriculum is HOW they learn them, big difference. Also the main test that my students have to pass is their writing test for the state...so I have to teach them reading/writing skills...are you suggesting I shouldn't be teaching them that?

I'm not, but my girlfriend is, as well as most of her friends. And is still administering tests to the severely autistic that can't even speak. That's what I call top down, one size fits all. And not to mention her mom is on the forefront of common core, and before that was a superintendent of 2 different districts.

And no I'm not suggesting the strawman you claim I am suggesting, at all. You pulled that one out of your ass all on your own. And adds credence to my OP if you're a teacher and you think that's an effective technique to use, our students aren't learning how to learn, but what to learn. If you're using such obvious logical fallacies, then why the hell are we trusting you with teaching our kids?

My problem (if I must state it again) is with A. The top down method coming from the government. All kids need one unified method of teaching based on X, Y, and Z standards. B. Is what our secondary education facilities are teaching our teachers...which is pretty much the same thing in A, along with the state is a better vessel of education over parents.

So, what do you propose we do? Have 98,000+ different standards for each public school in the country?

As far as math standards go, years ago we used the National Council for Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) Standards. Then I taught using the Florida State Sunshine Standards (SSS). There was almost no difference. Now, I teach using Common Core. The NCTM basically abandoned their standards because the majority of the country was using Common Core and there was basically no difference.

I am sorry, but you are proposing abandoning a system that works!

Yes and here's why.

The Wisdom of Crowds: Why the Many are Smarter than the Few | DiploFoundation

Would you want a few treatment options for a disease you have, or 98,000? Yes I want 98,000 different ways of trying to solve the problem vs a few ways dictated by the few for the many. At best that's service of the majority over the individual. Someone over in Mass, finds a good solution in education, someone else in MD, adopts that. Someone in TX improves upon in, then someone TN combines it with something else, and then someone in NV finds an even better way. So in and so forth. Then maybe something works better with inner city kids than rural kids, or something works better with males, or better with special needs.

Common core is absolutely the tail wagging the dog. The standards "wagging" the curriculum. By the few, to the many.

And we did have a system that worked, for a long time, we were top 3 in the world before the formation of the DOE. In the 1800s our kids were practically giving dissertations, and reciting the constitution in its entirety. Read a letter from 80 years ago from a high schooler, their vocabulary blow pretty much every on USMB out of the water.

You have that exactly backwards. You don't have 98,000 different ways to get it right. You have 97,999 ways to do it wrong.

Standards are what they need to learn. If you had any concept of what a standard is, you would understand that.

Do you agree that all students should be able to calculate compound interest? THAT is a standard. How you teach someone to do that is curriculum. At my past two schools, the teachers of the subject area were responsible for designing a curriculum in order for students to achieve the standard. It did not come from the district, state, or the federal government. I helped write it! That is where the rubber meets the road.

As for your other old wive's tales, I will leave that to your own ignorance and find out how well children performed in states like Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas and various other states before the federal government forced them to educate ALL children. Hint: They were not.

...Really... 97999 ways to get it wrong, thanks for confirming the exact faulty way of thinking I've been describing. Only what way to do it right, and one size fits all.

And yes I know what standards are, and common core standards are the tail that's wagging the dog that is curriculum. And those standards are all coming from one place. And they are most certainly driving the curriculum.

It's not an old wives tale that we were top 3 in education for a long time. These aren't wives tells that I'm telling you, these are facts.

No, you do not understand! The professional educators present in this thread have schooled you every time you get it wrong and you continue to deny your own ignorance.

There is no Common Core curriculum. It does not exist, and I don't care how many times you claim you know, it does not.