tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2759349994566283394.post1950625901757455093..comments2012-05-14T07:48:21.438-07:00Comments on My Exciting Life: Not Federally led??Alisahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12616353052721328113noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2759349994566283394.post-75585276964458812982012-03-08T19:18:57.242-08:002012-03-08T19:18:57.242-08:00I'm grateful for the teachers who truly care a...I'm grateful for the teachers who truly care about our children. Common Core brings several aspects of good and improvement for the educational system. This is why it is attractive to many teachers and those who have received the marketing. They make it good for the teachers & administrators in order to get their support. Common Core is not the best for America's children because of where it's coming from. 1) Education was never meant to be run by the Feds. Common Core only furthers the socialization of America's educational system. Giving up local control only makes it easier for those with evil intents in high places to accomplish their designs. Common Core gives the illusion of local control but at its heart it is not. 2) Whoever puts the money into it gets to teach what they want. This is very scary and dangerous understanding who is behind it. Supporting Common Core means giving away more freedom. 3) Obama is pushing this - everything he pushes is about getting more Federal control. Common Core is about the government getting more control and power and taking away freedom and options from families. If any of this sounds false I urge you to please do more research. Alisa, thank you for all your time into this!Marshall Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14615586003860216944noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2759349994566283394.post-64551777703535664062012-03-08T16:16:05.040-08:002012-03-08T16:16:05.040-08:00I completely agree with "Heidi". Thanks ...I completely agree with "Heidi". Thanks for posting:)<br />As a science teacher we have national standards that all students should be proficient in. How can you have an educated, functioning work base to draw from if our students can not compete with other students from other states or country. It is the same for math and english. I have researched this as a new teacher. As much as I have tried I just can't buy into the consiracy theory. What if Utah decided not to teach the scientific method? or how about learning how to summarize and analyze data? Having a common base of standards is crucial.SJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14313834177470499561noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2759349994566283394.post-72715521711266093612012-03-07T18:51:34.752-08:002012-03-07T18:51:34.752-08:00[Part 2]
As parents, teachers, and lawmakers we a...[Part 2]<br /><br />As parents, teachers, and lawmakers we all have the same goal: to do what is best for children. And Common Core State Standards are what is best for our children. I mean all of our children. The sweet babies in inner-city Chicago, the ones in rural Mississippi, and the ones in suburban Utah. Some may have more advantages than others, but how is it fair to say, “Oh, you don’t have the same opportunities so you only need to succeed at this certain level. But these kids over there, with the involved parents and homes full of books, we want you to reach this level up here.” At best that sort of attitude is callous. At worst it is immoral. The foundation of America is to offer all of her people the chance to pursue happiness. We know that education is the only way to rise above the challenge of poverty. If America’s poor are held to a lower standard, how will any of them gain the skills to compete in our cutthroat global economy? American students already underperform their international peers, we cannot afford to hinder them any further by muddying the educational waters with political power plays and murky expectations. We need the clear, research-based guidelines of the CCSS. <br /><br />Some argue that switching our curriculum will require unnecessary expense. That is not true. Switching to a common curriculum will actually SAVE the state money in the long run. That is because, while educators are not in the money-making business, textbook companies are. They tailor their resources to the needs of the biggest states: California and Texas. If a state adopts a curriculum that is not similar to that in the larger states, districts must bear the expense of developing all their own materials or, what commonly happens, adopt a program that only partially meets their standards and then buy supplemental resources. With the CCSS, publishers can produce materials suited to any classroom. Districts can invest in one program freeing up funds for remediation and enrichment. Teachers don’t have to spend their free time looking for classroom resources. (And believe me, it takes a lot of time!) Instead, they can focus more on individual student achievement. <br /><br />This may all sound like rose-colored hyperbole, but having implemented the CCSS in my classroom this year has made me a much more focused teacher. The new core allows me up to take a reflective look at my students. My classroom looks vastly different this year than it did last year. That’s because the CCSS gives me the freedom to differentiate my practice for the individuals in my care. I’m not tied down to drilling dozens of indicators. I have the time to teach to mastery—what a luxury! I can meet the students where they are and help them achieve more. Instead of teaching to the middle of the pack, for the first time I am effectively and consistently able to offer challenges for the children that are ready for them. And I am more available to support those that still struggle. I know who is at what level, what the next step is, and I have the time to get them there. For me, and for the sweet little ones in my classroom, the Common Core State Standards are truly a gift.Heidihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08851532805558590586noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2759349994566283394.post-78123256343042588832012-03-07T18:50:07.062-08:002012-03-07T18:50:07.062-08:00I’m a friend of Mandy’s and I would like to add my...I’m a friend of Mandy’s and I would like to add my 2 cents about the Common Core State Standards (CCSS). <br />Some background information: I’m a Republican. I’m also a teacher. I’ve devoted my life to nurturing young minds. I believe teaching is a sacred profession. I do not invite practices or influences (resources, textbooks, philosophies, etc.) into my classroom that won’t help each little one reach his/her potential as a happy, ethical, contributing member of society.<br /><br />And I support the Common Core State Standards.<br /><br />With the adoption of any curriculum, there are questions that arise. And there ought to be. The education of future generations is not an issue to be trifled with. Which is why I think the CCSS are a huge step forward. Teachers, administrators, and education experts pooled their expertise to come up with the levels of basic competence a child should have in each grade. And yes, it is basic. That is what a core is. At the center of an apple is its core. It holds it together, it gives it a foundation. But what gives an apple its apple-ness is not the core, but all the rest around it. And with the CCSS, the rest--the interventions, the enrichment, the implementation-- is still open to district, school, and individual teacher interpretation. It was the same with the previous core. The state set the outline. The districts decided the format. And the teachers, the women and men who know the children, were able to make the best decisions for their classrooms. <br /><br />Yes, UNESCO/Gates Foundation may have contributed to the development of the curriculum, but that did not put them in control of the product. Yes, the federal government may have a stake in this. But nearly every other major world economy has a national curriculum. In this modern mobile society it is in the best interest of children. One of my little girls is moving to Colorado on Friday. If in Colorado’s curriculum a skill is taught in January in 2nd grade and Utah doesn’t teach it until 3rd, when will she learn it? She will have missed her chance in both states! And when we look to see which teaching practices have the greatest impact on student learning, how can we measure that without a common measure? If (hypothetically) California reports that 40% of their first graders leave first grade on grade-level, and Utah (hypothetically) says 85% of their first graders do, does Utah truly have a better first grade program? Not if they’re assessing different things! This sort of discrepancy becomes particularly pernicious when we’re tackling issues like the “4th Grade Slump.” How can we know which students are in need of intervention, which are soaring, and which programs are most helpful if everyone has a different definition for “On Grade-Level?”Heidihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08851532805558590586noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2759349994566283394.post-18657261323706867532012-03-07T11:32:31.426-08:002012-03-07T11:32:31.426-08:00Alisa - Your sweet caring voice is being heard and...Alisa - Your sweet caring voice is being heard and understood. Unlike so many other's who raise their voices to get their point of view across, but don't educate themselves like you have done and I know you are only voicing your concerns because you care and want other's to educate themselves so that they can see the real issues and act responsibly. I admire your courage and your ability to follow prompting when you feel something isn't quite as it seems.Shirlyn H.https://www.blogger.com/profile/17349935888792802733noreply@blogger.com