- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: This is why I'm against Common Core.
Posted on 7/24/14 at 1:38 pm to tiderider
Posted on 7/24/14 at 1:38 pm to tiderider
quote:
lol ... can't fail the little ones ... no, no ... must increase self esteem ... can't have standards ... unless it's CC ...
I didn't say you can't. I said that there's no good data that says it helps kids learn when you fail them. Usually, all that is accomplished is an increase in the likelihood that the failed student drops out.
1
Posted on 7/24/14 at 2:02 pm to the808bass
quote:
Yes, Bobby flip-flopped. Whether he did it for the reasons that he claims is up for the individual to determine. Bottom line, there are bigger problems in education than curriculum. Speaking for my school district, no students from grades K-3 are allowed to be retained unless the parent requests it. This is just backward thinking. What we end up with is a large percentage of 4th graders who don't have the basic math/reading skills to keep up. Consequently, they never catch up and are just bumped along, with many becoming behavior problems along the way. This further disrupts the educational opportunity of the students who are on level. Teachers are powerless to make anything better when the students/parents have zero accountability in the process.
This is what I put in one of the multiple Common Core threads on here. And 808, and you produce data that shows where just passing them along leads to higher graduation rates?
Posted on 7/24/14 at 2:52 pm to High C
i've seen/read the same research claims ... retention doesn't increase their learning is the claim, i believe ... may claim that grad rates are increased, but "graduation" is simply a stamp of attendance and the ability to answer 50 % on a standardized test ...
Posted on 7/24/14 at 2:57 pm to bhtigerfan
I don't have any children or an agenda, but I looked into the math part of it to see what the fuss was all about and it actually makes sense and is easier. And most people that are actually good at math (do calculations in their head) use this method anyway. As far as the English/reading I have no clue.
And this is true about EBR High School students also. I am in a freshman American History and Statistics class at BRCC and most of my classes are filled with EBR High Schools grads. There is ZERO chance most of them legit passed High School. My 11th grade American History class was WAY more demanding and in depth than this dumbed down class.
quote:
Speaking for my school district, no students from grades K-3 are allowed to be retained unless the parent requests it. This is just backward thinking. What we end up with is a large percentage of 4th graders who don't have the basic math/reading skills to keep up. Consequently, they never catch up and are just bumped along, with many becoming behavior problems along the way. This further disrupts the educational opportunity of the students who are on level. Teachers are powerless to make anything better when the students/parents have zero accountability in the process.
And this is true about EBR High School students also. I am in a freshman American History and Statistics class at BRCC and most of my classes are filled with EBR High Schools grads. There is ZERO chance most of them legit passed High School. My 11th grade American History class was WAY more demanding and in depth than this dumbed down class.
This post was edited on 7/24/14 at 3:02 pm
Posted on 7/24/14 at 2:59 pm to High C
Posted on 7/24/14 at 3:00 pm to tiderider
quote:
i've seen/read the same research claims ... retention doesn't increase their learning is the claim, i believe ... may claim that grad rates are increased, but "graduation" is simply a stamp of attendance and the ability to answer 50 % on a standardized test ...
Yes, graduation for the sake of graduation doesn't accomplish much. Having kids drop out doesn't either.
Posted on 7/24/14 at 3:03 pm to Lsut81
quote:
Can someone, in a few hundred words or less, explain to me what Common Core is?
Save up to send your kids to a private/parochial school that has good teachers and doesn't use common core. They will thank you later. Thee end.
Posted on 7/24/14 at 3:14 pm to navy
quote:
Save up to send your kids to a private/parochial school that has good teachers and doesn't use common core. They will thank you later. Thee end.
I did read somewhere that slightly more than half of catholic schools use Common Core a standard as well.
So there is that.
Posted on 7/24/14 at 3:15 pm to the808bass
quote:
Yes, graduation for the sake of graduation doesn't accomplish much. Having kids drop out doesn't either
It appears to me that some of these need a different route, one that isn't academic and isn't traditional. I don't know what, mechanical, menial, agricultural? I remember having kids in class with me in high school that did nothing but retard the progress of the class. They were behind at the beginning and couldn't keep up, whether they wanted to or not, and they took up too much of the teacher's time.
But I digress. This thread is about common core. So if you don't hold them back, and you advance kids because holding them back doesn't improve their success, and if now the schools performance on a standardized common core (or any other) exam at a certain grade level is diminished due to the promotion of underachieving kids, should a schools 'grade' be affected by the inclusion of the test scores of the underachievers.
Posted on 7/24/14 at 3:40 pm to mauser
quote:
appears to me that some of these need a different route, one that isn't academic and isn't traditional. I don't know what, mechanical, menial, agricultural? I remember having kids in class with me in high school that did nothing but retard the progress of the class. They were behind at the beginning and couldn't keep up, whether they wanted to or not, and they took up too much of the teacher's time.
The answer to this is with remedial classes for the core subjects where teachers can handle disruptive children and children with learning disabilities with a more one on one hands on approach.
This way a students social growth is minimally affected which I believe is a much closer identifying factor in current high school dropouts.
This post was edited on 7/24/14 at 3:42 pm
Posted on 7/24/14 at 3:43 pm to mauser
quote:
It appears to me that some of these need a different route, one that isn't academic and isn't traditional. I don't know what, mechanical, menial, agricultural?
Agreed. College isn't the answer for every kid.
Posted on 7/24/14 at 3:47 pm to BigJim
quote:
I did read somewhere that slightly more than half of catholic schools use Common Core a standard as well.
Not the one that I pay a pretty penny for my kids to go to.
Posted on 7/24/14 at 4:07 pm to navy
quote:
Save up to send your kids to a private/parochial school that has good teachers and doesn't use common core. They will thank you later. Thee end.
Some private schools use the Common Core standards. In fact, some private schools are private in name and student demographics only.
Posted on 7/24/14 at 4:09 pm to the808bass
quote:
It will be pretty plain exactly how horrible a job they're doing.
for dogmatic positivists, maybe
Posted on 7/24/14 at 4:22 pm to the808bass
quote:
A math curriculum, called Everyday Math (which may be the worst curriculum ever written) has been sold to schools as meeting Common Core objectives. This math curriculum makes up almost all (if not all) of the examples of ridiculous math problems you may or may not have seen floating on the interwebs. The Everyday Math curriculum is no more mandated by Common Core than driving a Yugo is mandated by your state transportation department.
Thank you, and this was always my issue with what I had read on CC. I wasn't sure on the full story behind the math books, some information I read made it appear as if when CC was first brought into place... this curriculum was the ONLY thing available that would meet common core standards.
That was what they intimated in any case. Obviously CC allows for schools to pick, but I would like to know there is a good selection before I start making schools select from bad and worse. And even if they change back to a more "accepted" math curriculum, that still essentially means lost time. For example a 5th grader taking the 5th grade lvl portion of a curriculum would not have the foundation laid down in the 4th grade lvl because they were learning how to write an essay on how their incorrect calculation is actually correct because they tried.
Maybe you can shed some light on that if you know any more details as to the available math curriculum that meets CC standards?
No sarcasm at you 808, that stupid math crap I've seen just bothers me.
Posted on 7/24/14 at 5:23 pm to LSUnation78
There is so much misinformation and out right lies being spread about CCSS that the public at large does not know what to think. Overall, the standards themselves are a pretty good set of goals to build a curriculum from. The problem lies in the timelines set for implementation and the draconian consequences that befall schools and teachers whose students do not reach the goals set.
First and foremost louisiana rushed into the adoption and then told districts that there would be a phased in implementation over a three year period. Then after the first year of the three year plan, the state DOE mandated that theory were not waiting and were instead going full bore in the second year. This decision caughtt many districts off guard and unprepared to implement. This rush resulted in a lack of teacher resources, a lack of technology and mot importantly a lack of clear guidance.
But, teachers and districts scrambled and did the best they could with what they could find or build. Around mid term of the second year the state finally released a sample test and the regional leaders told districts to "teach this test" for the remainder of the year. This appears to be an attempt to prevent drastic drops in test scores by practically giving the state test out to districts.
First and foremost louisiana rushed into the adoption and then told districts that there would be a phased in implementation over a three year period. Then after the first year of the three year plan, the state DOE mandated that theory were not waiting and were instead going full bore in the second year. This decision caughtt many districts off guard and unprepared to implement. This rush resulted in a lack of teacher resources, a lack of technology and mot importantly a lack of clear guidance.
But, teachers and districts scrambled and did the best they could with what they could find or build. Around mid term of the second year the state finally released a sample test and the regional leaders told districts to "teach this test" for the remainder of the year. This appears to be an attempt to prevent drastic drops in test scores by practically giving the state test out to districts.
Page 4 of 4
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News