If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Townhall)   'Common Core' curriculum will harm students by taking away local control of education. Because while 2 + 2 = 4 in New York or California, in real American states like Alabama 2 + 2 = potato   (townhall.com) divider line 79
    More: Dumbass, academic standards, President Obama, New York, race to the top, Alabama, The Big Book of, Western civilizations, University of Arkansas  
•       •       •

1136 clicks; posted to Politics » on 23 Jan 2013 at 10:17 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



79 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-23 08:39:40 AM
"Local" control of education is doing our nation's children a great disservice. The only thing that "local" control does is give idiots with little or no professional educational background an enormous amount of control over a process that they neither respect nor understand. It is akin to having "local" control of a doctors' training and practice...
 
2013-01-23 08:44:33 AM

hubiestubert: "Local" control of education is doing our nation's children a great disservice


I don't disagree, but I also worry about a harmonized, standardized program. We have a large population of schools, and if we want a healthy population, we want to have variation. We want schools to be empowered to experiment, both in delivery and curriculum.

The public school system in the US is not good at that, and the modern push to standardize education demonstrates how bad we are at innovating in education. The roots of public schooling draw from the assembly line process, standardized testing just slaps a metric-oriented QA layer on it.

All in all, I'm in favor of more Federal involvement in education, but less standardization.
 
2013-01-23 08:46:30 AM
There's also some risks from a liberal standpoint in common core standards; they're immediately going to be a target for conservatives seeking to whitewash social studies, remove "critical reading" from English, excise evolution from biology, and continue the fight against the fifty-year old "new math".
 
2013-01-23 09:07:11 AM
I have nothing to add but this:

My school offers a "Peace" major. I'm thinking about taking a course in it to fill a humanities requirement, if only to troll the hippies that, in my observation, make up the majority of kids studying that field.
 
2013-01-23 09:14:36 AM
Is this how the math section on the SAT ended up being racist?
 
2013-01-23 09:28:17 AM
This article is really alarming me that I need to pay more attention to our education system.  They definitely have kids learning stuff at a later age than I learned it, so that's a cause for concern without a damn good reason.
I'm interested that the guy mentions proof by induction being "skimped on".  I don't think that was part of the curriculum when I was in high school, but something I covered in college.
 
2013-01-23 09:35:38 AM

Frank N Stein: I have nothing to add but this:

My school offers a "Peace" major. I'm thinking about taking a course in it to fill a humanities requirement, if only to troll the hippies that, in my observation, make up the majority of kids studying that field.


You might be surprised.  A good prof can make that a challenging course instead of mutual agreement masturbatory exercise.  I took an excellent senior seminar on "Racism in America" and thought it was very illuminating.  But as I said, that's all in the hands of the professor.  Maybe ask others who have had classes with him or her.
 
2013-01-23 09:43:37 AM

Diogenes: Frank N Stein: I have nothing to add but this:

My school offers a "Peace" major. I'm thinking about taking a course in it to fill a humanities requirement, if only to troll the hippies that, in my observation, make up the majority of kids studying that field.

You might be surprised.  A good prof can make that a challenging course instead of mutual agreement masturbatory exercise.  I took an excellent senior seminar on "Racism in America" and thought it was very illuminating.  But as I said, that's all in the hands of the professor.  Maybe ask others who have had classes with him or her.


Yeah, I took a "Christianity, Judaism, and Islam" class expecting to troll everybody and get an easy A (I went to a Catholic high school and they were big on the whole Ecumenical Movement thing, so I knew a lot of the material already).  The discussions were actually pretty good though, and even the die hard religious folks in there were open to logically discussing their faiths instead of just assertively reiterating what they heard from a pop/rabbi/imam/TV attention whore.  Turns out when you get smart people discussing that stuff it works out a lot better than your average fark thread.

/ Still wasn't really a good use for the money I was paying for tuition though.  Wish I could have just taken an extra CS class instead.
 
2013-01-23 09:45:19 AM
Actually it will hard students because having a central body controlling the education means idiots and bigots only have to overcome ONE barrier to start influencing EVERY school in the nation.

You can see this in the Japanese education system, if you're a teacher there, where some really weird things show up in the textbooks. For example, every middle school English course has a chapter about Hiroshima in the 3rd year. It's kind of weird using 150,000 deaths and 2000 degree fireballs as a springboard for a lesson on counting higher numbers. Like REALLY weird.

So if America centralizes curriculum, you're gonna see abject weirdness and I guarantee you some derper will shoe horn creationism into the science books just to win some rural counties and win a seat in the house.

That's my two bits.
 
2013-01-23 09:46:04 AM

t3knomanser: hubiestubert: "Local" control of education is doing our nation's children a great disservice

I don't disagree, but I also worry about a harmonized, standardized program. We have a large population of schools, and if we want a healthy population, we want to have variation. We want schools to be empowered to experiment, both in delivery and curriculum.

The public school system in the US is not good at that, and the modern push to standardize education demonstrates how bad we are at innovating in education. The roots of public schooling draw from the assembly line process, standardized testing just slaps a metric-oriented QA layer on it.

All in all, I'm in favor of more Federal involvement in education, but less standardization.


The push towards testing is another leg of the stool hobbling our schools. Testing IS important. That is why grading is important. That is why professional standards are important.

Critical thinking, problem solving, research and skills training are tools to give our kids so that if they don't have the information before them, they can find it on their own. The push for standardized testing is a way to appease folks, and do something, as opposed to something useful. Folks who don't understand education can fathom test scores--even if they don't understand the tests themselves. Testing is a way to look busy, and it is a great way to soak towns and the states for cash, and that is really why so many folks advocate standardized testing: because there is cash in it. It has nothing to do with education, it is a way to look busy and make some cash on the side...
 
2013-01-23 10:06:09 AM

Frank N Stein: I'm thinking about taking a course in it to fill a humanities requirement, if only to troll the hippies that, in my observation, make up the majority of kids studying that field.


"All peace is merely a transition into continuing a war by means of politics, temporarily."
 
2013-01-23 10:10:41 AM

hubiestubert: "Local" control of education is doing our nation's children a great disservice. The only thing that "local" control does is give idiots with little or no professional educational background an enormous amount of control over a process that they neither respect nor understand. It is akin to having "local" control of a doctors' training and practice...


"Localized" education led me to believe until I was about 18 years old that the Chesapeake Bay is the most important body of water in the world.

/MD public schools, what the hell
 
2013-01-23 10:23:31 AM
The free market is speaking Townhall.

Private groups are advising the states, this is what they wanted, isn't it.

//Oh, right, the private groups aren't Bob Jones University and Liberty U.
 
2013-01-23 10:24:15 AM
Assessment is incredibly important, the problem is we don't assess the right things. It's easy to assess performance on a test. It's really hard to assess intelligence and critical thinking, because they don't look the same for everybody.
 
2013-01-23 10:28:38 AM

Frank N Stein: I have nothing to add but this:

My school offers a "Peace" major. I'm thinking about taking a course in it to fill a humanities requirement, if only to troll the hippies that, in my observation, make up the majority of kids studying that field.


It probably isn't what you think. I had a professor who did peace studies. Which meant she studied the effects of peace making rather than war making. Her specific field was studying the short term economic effects of the Treaty of Versailles. Not exactly touchy feely hippy stuff.
 
2013-01-23 10:33:23 AM

serial_crusher: Diogenes: Frank N Stein: I have nothing to add but this:

My school offers a "Peace" major. I'm thinking about taking a course in it to fill a humanities requirement, if only to troll the hippies that, in my observation, make up the majority of kids studying that field.

You might be surprised.  A good prof can make that a challenging course instead of mutual agreement masturbatory exercise.  I took an excellent senior seminar on "Racism in America" and thought it was very illuminating.  But as I said, that's all in the hands of the professor.  Maybe ask others who have had classes with him or her.

Yeah, I took a "Christianity, Judaism, and Islam" class expecting to troll everybody and get an easy A (I went to a Catholic high school and they were big on the whole Ecumenical Movement thing, so I knew a lot of the material already).  The discussions were actually pretty good though, and even the die hard religious folks in there were open to logically discussing their faiths instead of just assertively reiterating what they heard from a pop/rabbi/imam/TV attention whore.  Turns out when you get smart people discussing that stuff it works out a lot better than your average fark thread.

/ Still wasn't really a good use for the money I was paying for tuition though.  Wish I could have just taken an extra CS class instead.


This. I've been amazed at how supposed bird-courses had more rigour than courses in pure logic because the professor and students were willing to discuss the topic in a scholarly, well-researched fashion. I remember taking a course on Post-Modern philosophy and getting 18/20 on a presentation about Martin Heidegger's "Vas Ein Denken" (or something) and lo it turned out that old Heidegger did indeed have twenty points that he made in the article, and we (my presentation partner who I'd worked with for several hours a week for three weeks) had missed two of them. Of course, there were also courses where the professor and/or the students made the whole business worthless.

Interestingly, and not picking on the CS students, the worst course I ever took (not counting the classes I dropped after the first day) was a course on Computer Ethics. It was terrible because of a combination of the professor being a skeezy New Zealand hippy (insisted on walking around the lecture theatre barefoot), and the students treating it as a [required] bird course where we shared our opinions instead of studying the course material. And since the course material basically boiled down to: "Don't do bad stuff with computers" it kind of soured me on the whole "[subject] ethics" classes where the level of discussion in a Fark thread would have been a step up, because at least some people in a Fark thread might have actually studied ethics rather than regarding the subject as an opportunity to talk about their feelings and Dragonball Z.
 
2013-01-23 10:37:51 AM
Just because kids are only being tested a certain way, doesn't mean that they aren't also getting whatever other skill you think is important.

There will always be variation in test scores. I don't agree with saying, "every student needs to score this much to be promoted" or "we are failing because 30% of kids didn't get the arbitrary test score we were looking for".

What I do agree with is testing a classroom at the beginning of the year. A simple, multi-choice, logic, math, and reading test. Tell the teacher, whatever the median score is for his or her class, it had better improve. Tell him or her that the ones with the lowest scores are expected to improve the most. Then test the same kids with a similar simple, hourlong test at the end of the year.

We will never have all of our 18-year olds reading and mathing well enough to prosper in a college setting. That can't be the goal. We just have to make sure they're not stagnating, that's all. Many will do well enough for college, many will not. We have to accept that as OK.
 
2013-01-23 10:38:28 AM
No Subby, it's 1+1=3.

http://snapwebsites.info/story/proof-1-1-3
 
2013-01-23 10:41:13 AM

Diogenes: Frank N Stein: I have nothing to add but this:

My school offers a "Peace" major. I'm thinking about taking a course in it to fill a humanities requirement, if only to troll the hippies that, in my observation, make up the majority of kids studying that field.

You might be surprised.  A good prof can make that a challenging course instead of mutual agreement masturbatory exercise.  I took an excellent senior seminar on "Racism in America" and thought it was very illuminating.  But as I said, that's all in the hands of the professor.  Maybe ask others who have had classes with him or her.



I took a class called "Sorcery, and the anthropology of evil", expecting a low-brow anthropology snoozefest to cruise through.

What I actually got was an incredibly mentally taxing and superb lecture series on the fundamentally different world views of the West and central Africa, and why aid agencies have such difficulty interacting in that environment. Took it for a laugh, ended up being one of the intellectual highlights of my degree.
 
2013-01-23 10:42:29 AM
i.imgur.com

PO TA TO
 
2013-01-23 10:49:01 AM
Glad to see others were surprised by the rigors and quality in classes from which you wouldn't predict.  The racism seminar was excellent.  But my big surprise was German Cinema (during the Weimar Period).  The course topic just naturally invites interdisciplinary perspectives, which was Colgate's "thing."

But this is somewhat off topic.

Despite all the recent interest in "multiple intelligences" and whatnot, I definitely agree that there should be a core curriculum and that certain minimum basic skills must be established.

And of course, the tards that argue that core curricula are a means of liberal indoctrination should go back to school.
 
2013-01-23 10:49:12 AM

GentDirkly: What I do agree with is testing a classroom at the beginning of the year. A simple, multi-choice, logic, math, and reading test. Tell the teacher, whatever the median score is for his or her class, it had better improve. Tell him or her that the ones with the lowest scores are expected to improve the most.


Without incentive for students to improve this idea is useless. Teachers can't make them learn or care about a standardized test that doesn't impact them in any way.
 
2013-01-23 10:56:30 AM
Yeah Common Core will be everywhere. Teachers and administrators will run around like chickens without a head making sure their presentations/curriculum guides/lessons use all the right buzz words so some outsider with about 20 total minutes of observation time won't cut their funding.

It will be the end all, be all... until something else gets jammed to the front by this political group or that one - then the dance begins again.
 
2013-01-23 11:05:57 AM
i0.kym-cdn.com
 
2013-01-23 11:06:39 AM
Can we require adults (in age not maturity level), such as Michelle Malkin, to study core curriculum as well.
 
2013-01-23 11:07:53 AM

t3knomanser: hubiestubert: "Local" control of education is doing our nation's children a great disservice

I don't disagree, but I also worry about a harmonized, standardized program. We have a large population of schools, and if we want a healthy population, we want to have variation. We want schools to be empowered to experiment, both in delivery and curriculum.

The public school system in the US is not good at that, and the modern push to standardize education demonstrates how bad we are at innovating in education. The roots of public schooling draw from the assembly line process, standardized testing just slaps a metric-oriented QA layer on it.

All in all, I'm in favor of more Federal involvement in education, but less standardization.


25.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-01-23 11:08:24 AM

DeathBySmiley: [i0.kym-cdn.com image 500x333]


You can make fun of all that kid all you want but please don't demean him by associating him with Teahadists. That's just cruel.
 
2013-01-23 11:14:03 AM

t3knomanser: hubiestubert: "Local" control of education is doing our nation's children a great disservice

I don't disagree, but I also worry about a harmonized, standardized program. We have a large population of schools, and if we want a healthy population, we want to have variation. We want schools to be empowered to experiment, both in delivery and curriculum.

The public school system in the US is not good at that, and the modern push to standardize education demonstrates how bad we are at innovating in education. The roots of public schooling draw from the assembly line process, standardized testing just slaps a metric-oriented QA layer on it.

All in all, I'm in favor of more Federal involvement in education, but less standardization.


Surely the idea should be you standardize all tests and testing at a federal level, and leave it up the states or even more local than that to experiment with how to achieve good scores on the test (and try to avoid incentives for overly teaching to the test). If Texas decides to teach creationism in their science lessons then their test scores will drop across the board, technology and science businesses will drain out of the state, and everyone else will laugh at them for being morons.
 
2013-01-23 11:16:57 AM

Diogenes: Frank N Stein: I have nothing to add but this:

My school offers a "Peace" major. I'm thinking about taking a course in it to fill a humanities requirement, if only to troll the hippies that, in my observation, make up the majority of kids studying that field.

You might be surprised.  A good prof can make that a challenging course instead of mutual agreement masturbatory exercise.  I took an excellent senior seminar on "Racism in America" and thought it was very illuminating.  But as I said, that's all in the hands of the professor.  Maybe ask others who have had classes with him or her.


Okay....so....where IS this school that offers courses in mutual masturbation?
 
2013-01-23 11:18:40 AM

Fizpez: Yeah Common Core will be everywhere. Teachers and administrators will run around like chickens without a head making sure their presentations/curriculum guides/lessons use all the right buzz words so some outsider with about 20 total minutes of observation time won't cut their funding.

It will be the end all, be all... until something else gets jammed to the front by this political group or that one - then the dance begins again.


You really don't have the slightest idea what Common Core Standards are at all, do you?

I attended a presentation on CCS at last year's state PTA convention (I'm the Legislative Chair for our local unit). The standards are drafted primarily by educators, not political operatives, and they're simply a tool to ensure that children have similar core skill sets in basic disciplines while still allowing teachers and local districts considerable leeway to tailor the curriculum as they see fit. The standards will go a long way toward smoothing transitions from one level of the system to another - that is, kids moving from the elementary to secondary level, or from high school to college, because of gaps in core curricula - while still allowing good teachers or progressive districts to go beyond the standards. There's very little to dislike about CCS, and a great deal to like about them.
 
2013-01-23 11:18:44 AM
You take away control of education, you take away how stupid the rednecks can keep future generations. They need that control to create more GOP voters.
 
2013-01-23 11:20:58 AM
If Republicans had their way, education would only exist for the exceptionally wealthy
 
2013-01-23 11:24:54 AM
I believe that is spelled 'Potatoe'
 
2013-01-23 11:28:44 AM
How about instead of arguing "local" vs. "Federal" or "standardized" or "community determined", we stop stealing to support these institutions and stop forcing kids into them?

You can support what you want with your saved tax dollars, and you can let Darwin himself prove his theories to those that don't want to teach them.
 
2013-01-23 11:32:30 AM

Lost Thought 00: If Republicans had their way, education would only exist for the exceptionally wealthy


If Democrats had their way, there would be one system that they tout as "the best in the world" that they give to all the poor constituents, while sending their rich kids to a private system catering to the exceptionally wealthy.

How about you and I stop giving these psychopaths their way and use our resources to do things our way?
 
2013-01-23 11:35:14 AM

AdmirableSnackbar: GentDirkly: What I do agree with is testing a classroom at the beginning of the year. A simple, multi-choice, logic, math, and reading test. Tell the teacher, whatever the median score is for his or her class, it had better improve. Tell him or her that the ones with the lowest scores are expected to improve the most.

Without incentive for students to improve this idea is useless. Teachers can't make them learn or care about a standardized test that doesn't impact them in any way.


What incentive do students have to improve now? My idea is only for the lower grades, anyways. Most of those students will accept challenges without wondering "what's in it for me" so long as the teacher establishes empathy. Which, you know, is something they teach Education majors.
 
2013-01-23 11:41:33 AM
As someone that went to locally-governed public schools as a kid, has taught in eight or ten different institutions, and has regular dealings with the parents of students, school boards, etc...

"This will remove local control of education" is always, ALWAYS an argument FOR a policy. Always. School boards are generally collections of parents, which means:

1- No matter how smart an individual member is in other aspects, since this involves his kids in some fashion he's a giant, blithering moron when it comes to board business.

2- A group of non-professionals is, without fail, significantly less intelligent collectively than the average single member of said group.

Thus, school boards are literally the stupidest examples of humanity that the nation has to offer. QED.

//Example of parent stupidity: attempts to reject standardized tests entirely, which are quite literally the only tool that we as teachers had for a dispassionate evaluation of the progress of our students outside the context of our own classroom. And I don't mean "hey, we shouldn't formulaically anchor funding to this", that's maybe reasonable, I mean school boards routinely try to get rid of them entirely.
 
2013-01-23 11:41:56 AM

GiantRex: hubiestubert: "Local" control of education is doing our nation's children a great disservice. The only thing that "local" control does is give idiots with little or no professional educational background an enormous amount of control over a process that they neither respect nor understand. It is akin to having "local" control of a doctors' training and practice...

"Localized" education led me to believe until I was about 18 years old that the Chesapeake Bay is the most important body of water in the world.

/MD public schools, what the hell


But it's the largest estuary in the world, it has islands in it where the island people speak some bastardize form of English that makes honey boo-boo sound British and where else can you get Maryland blue crabs. The last one alone makes it the most important body of water in the world.

/arguably, Kate Upton is the best bag of mostly water in the world.

Also went to MD schools and now that I have lived in other states, Maryland public schools are actually pretty good compared to what I have seen.

I think the state public schools should teach about local things and be proud of state resources and history. Granted they should also teach other things (like about the Great Lakes), but I am okay with promoting the state. Plus growing up near the Mason-Dixon line, it was awesome to study the Civil War/War of Northern Aggression and then visit a lot of the historical sites and battlefields involved. Gettysburg is a fun town.
 
2013-01-23 11:44:44 AM

BMulligan: Fizpez: Yeah Common Core will be everywhere. Teachers and administrators will run around like chickens without a head making sure their presentations/curriculum guides/lessons use all the right buzz words so some outsider with about 20 total minutes of observation time won't cut their funding.

It will be the end all, be all... until something else gets jammed to the front by this political group or that one - then the dance begins again.

You really don't have the slightest idea what Common Core Standards are at all, do you?

I attended a presentation on CCS at last year's state PTA convention (I'm the Legislative Chair for our local unit). The standards are drafted primarily by educators, not political operatives, and they're simply a tool to ensure that children have similar core skill sets in basic disciplines while still allowing teachers and local districts considerable leeway to tailor the curriculum as they see fit. The standards will go a long way toward smoothing transitions from one level of the system to another - that is, kids moving from the elementary to secondary level, or from high school to college, because of gaps in core curricula - while still allowing good teachers or progressive districts to go beyond the standards. There's very little to dislike about CCS, and a great deal to like about them.


I think you misinterpreted what I meant (or maybe I wasn't clear) - These big ideas always result in a sort of chaotic realignment within the schools which is unfortunately repeated all too often and at a cost to actual teaching or teacher development.

Case in point: Several years ago the me and my fellow chemistry teachers would meet at least once a week as part of a planned team meeting (in lieu of a duty period for the day). We would discuss how we were approaching certain topics, new ideas for labs, difficulties/problems the newer teachers were having etc.

As part of a statewide initiative we gave up that time and instead had to align all of our standards to the new state documents. This was almost entirely a matter of language - fitting what our documents said using the same words as the "new" state standards. More than half of our teachers were actual, practicing chemists before becoming teachers - we had a pretty good idea which topics were needed to cover but we spend valuable time making sure the check boxes our adminstration were looking at were checked.

Four years later those are out the window and we're doing something else equally as useful (useless). The most recent staff meetings have had the "We're moving to the common core but not sure what that means...." talk thrown in. At some point someone will suggest we rehash all those old documents once again - yet it won't change what we are teaching since we are already going WELL past those requirements.

TL;DR It's not the requirements (minimal) that bother me, it's the additional time and resources wasted as part of the administrations need to confirm we are following this new guide - which will (almost certainly) be changed yet again with 4 years.
 
2013-01-23 11:48:41 AM

Fizpez: TL;DR It's not the requirements (minimal) that bother me, it's the additional time and resources wasted as part of the administrations need to confirm we are following this new guide - which will (almost certainly) be changed yet again with 4 years.


So, teaching works like pretty much any profession?
Fill out those TPS reports, monkey!  Use the new cover sheets and talk about recent buzzwords!
 
2013-01-23 11:51:58 AM

tnpir: Diogenes: Frank N Stein: I have nothing to add but this:

My school offers a "Peace" major. I'm thinking about taking a course in it to fill a humanities requirement, if only to troll the hippies that, in my observation, make up the majority of kids studying that field.

You might be surprised.  A good prof can make that a challenging course instead of mutual agreement masturbatory exercise.  I took an excellent senior seminar on "Racism in America" and thought it was very illuminating.  But as I said, that's all in the hands of the professor.  Maybe ask others who have had classes with him or her.

Okay....so....where IS this school that offers courses in mutual masturbation?


Isn't that in the unofficial curriculum of every college in America?
 
2013-01-23 11:54:05 AM

hubiestubert: "Local" control of education is doing our nation's children a great disservice. The only thing that "local" control does is give idiots with little or no professional educational background an enormous amount of control over a process that they neither respect nor understand. It is akin to having "local" control of a doctors' training and practice...


While I agree with you most times, this is not one of them. While local control can be detrimental when there are staffing problems, some schools excel when the correct staff is in place. Insisting that all schools be state, or federally controlled will force those schools that are excelling under local control to degrade into a cesspool. State- or federal control should only ever be exercised on those schools that are falling apart, not those that are achieving improvements or maintaining a high performance level.

The downside of non-local control: Link
 
2013-01-23 11:56:29 AM

GentDirkly: AdmirableSnackbar: GentDirkly: What I do agree with is testing a classroom at the beginning of the year. A simple, multi-choice, logic, math, and reading test. Tell the teacher, whatever the median score is for his or her class, it had better improve. Tell him or her that the ones with the lowest scores are expected to improve the most.

Without incentive for students to improve this idea is useless. Teachers can't make them learn or care about a standardized test that doesn't impact them in any way.

What incentive do students have to improve now? My idea is only for the lower grades, anyways. Most of those students will accept challenges without wondering "what's in it for me" so long as the teacher establishes empathy. Which, you know, is something they teach Education majors.


There is no incentive for students to improve now, which is why evaluating teacher performance by student improvement - especially improvement of students who are at the bottom of the class to begin with - is unreasonable. Most students, even the young ones, will only do so much as their parents make them do. Teachers attempting to establish empathy with kids who don't care at all about school is like Obama attempting to establish empathy with Boehner and McConnell. Warm fuzzies like doing well on a standardized test that has no bearing on a student's future aren't any incentive for a kid to try when he doesn't want to try.
 
2013-01-23 12:01:22 PM

Fizpez: Yeah Common Core will be everywhere. Teachers and administrators will run around like chickens without a head making sure their presentations/curriculum guides/lessons use all the right buzz words so some outsider with about 20 total minutes of observation time won't cut their funding.

It will be the end all, be all... until something else gets jammed to the front by this political group or that one - then the dance begins again.


The said part is the English teachers seem to lack reading comprehension.

The reading guidelines expand what students are exposed to in all classes, not just the English/Reading/Literature class. Some teachers were dropping the classics to include technical manuals meant for the science classroom.
 
2013-01-23 12:01:23 PM

imashark: hubiestubert: "Local" control of education is doing our nation's children a great disservice. The only thing that "local" control does is give idiots with little or no professional educational background an enormous amount of control over a process that they neither respect nor understand. It is akin to having "local" control of a doctors' training and practice...

While I agree with you most times, this is not one of them. While local control can be detrimental when there are staffing problems, some schools excel when the correct staff is in place. Insisting that all schools be state, or federally controlled will force those schools that are excelling under local control to degrade into a cesspool. State- or federal control should only ever be exercised on those schools that are falling apart, not those that are achieving improvements or maintaining a high performance level.

The downside of non-local control: Link


That said, I'm defining local control as the school itself deciding what is best for the needs of the students. I guess school boards and school administrations are really some of the dumbest dumbells that ever dumbed.
 
2013-01-23 12:02:17 PM

hubiestubert: t3knomanser: hubiestubert: "Local" control of education is doing our nation's children a great disservice

I don't disagree, but I also worry about a harmonized, standardized program. We have a large population of schools, and if we want a healthy population, we want to have variation. We want schools to be empowered to experiment, both in delivery and curriculum.

The public school system in the US is not good at that, and the modern push to standardize education demonstrates how bad we are at innovating in education. The roots of public schooling draw from the assembly line process, standardized testing just slaps a metric-oriented QA layer on it.

All in all, I'm in favor of more Federal involvement in education, but less standardization.

The push towards testing is another leg of the stool hobbling our schools. Testing IS important. That is why grading is important. That is why professional standards are important.

Critical thinking, problem solving, research and skills training are tools to give our kids so that if they don't have the information before them, they can find it on their own. The push for standardized testing is a way to appease folks, and do something, as opposed to something useful. Folks who don't understand education can fathom test scores--even if they don't understand the tests themselves. Testing is a way to look busy, and it is a great way to soak towns and the states for cash, and that is really why so many folks advocate standardized testing: because there is cash in it. It has nothing to do with education, it is a way to look busy and make some cash on the side...


I am a fan of national minimum standards. I am not a fan of the way testing is being handled. Just one example: In Ohio, they were looking at having a social studies/history standardized test for the state. Included in the test was a question asking who invented the traffic light. This is a disposable information, at best. When teachers see tests filled with questions like this, it really sends a message that testing is just bullshiat. Instead, a social studies/history tests need to focus on something like our current citizenship test. Why isn't this being done? Because the local committee in Ohio wanted to feature an Ohio inventor.

Local control is idiotic.
 
2013-01-23 12:06:58 PM
"Local control" means teaching foolishness like Intelligent Design as science, abstinence only programs in sex education, and attempts to remove Thomas Jefferson from U.S. History books because he was that "separation of church and state guy." While I'm okay with some local programming (we learned our state's history, for example), many other subjects should have national standards.
 
2013-01-23 12:08:13 PM
by Michelle Malkin

*click*
 
2013-01-23 12:08:13 PM

serial_crusher: Fizpez: TL;DR It's not the requirements (minimal) that bother me, it's the additional time and resources wasted as part of the administrations need to confirm we are following this new guide - which will (almost certainly) be changed yet again with 4 years.

So, teaching works like pretty much any profession?
Fill out those TPS reports, monkey!  Use the new cover sheets and talk about recent buzzwords!


I just don't want to be one of those guys that's in his office until twelve o'clock at night worrying about the WENUS.
 
2013-01-23 12:26:24 PM
Good. So we can have local legislatures declaring stuff like this upload.wikimedia.org again
 
Displayed 50 of 79 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report