Common Core Standards

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

... Malcolm Kirpatrick just did an outstanding job of literature citation for what I saw as a long time professor: that it is the public school kids who have more behavioral problems.

Fair enough, as far as it goes. It is not discriminatory as to cause, and remains open to the conclusions one wishes to assign.

Thanks, Pilot.
Hlafordlaes, as to "not discriminatory as to cause", consider the remarks of Darling-Hammond

... many well-known adolescent difficulties are not intrinsic to the teenage years but are related to the mismatch between adolescents' developmental needs and the kinds of experiences most junior high and high schools provide ...

and Clive Haber

Furthermore, according to a report for UNESCO, cited in Esteve (2000), the increasing level of pupil-teacher and pupil-pupil violence in classrooms is directly connected with compulsory schooling. The report argues that institutional violence against pupils who are obliged to attend daily at an educational centre until 16 or 18 years of age increases the frustration of these students to a level where they externalise it.
...
"... It is almost certainly more damaging for children to be in school than to out of it. Children whose days are spent herding animals rather than sitting in a classroom at least develop skills of problem solving and independence while the supposedly luckier ones in school are stunted in their mental, physical, and emotional development by being rendered passive, and by having to spend hours each day in a crowded classroom under the control of an adult who punishes them for any normal level of activity such as moving or speaking"

That looks pretty direct to me.

For those conclusions to not be self-serving for a political position, taken a priori as proof willy-nilly, one needs to establish the mechanisms at work and measure them directly. Statistical and mathematical proofs can show correlations, and be highly discriminatory if the variables are isolated properly. Most of the time, however, something more direct is required.
...
Correlation is not causation ...

Assassins used poisons for hundreds of years before systematic chemistry and physiology detailed the action of strychnine and arsenic. It was still murder to poison people.

Schools cause crime.

 

[AlaskaBushPilot]

The three year old is out there in the next room telling his older brother that gravity is causing his toy car to crash to the ground. I didn't teach him that. His brother did. I just don't see why we can't teach science at this level.

I couldn't agree more about two things Malcolm: First, that the closest model I can think of in terms of public schools is prison. Sit down, shut up, march in unison when the bell rings. At the same time this idea that everyone marches in unison academically, in fifty minute increments - it's absurd. That does not mean I think everyone should be homeschooled. But it can't hold a candle to what we are doing.

"Common Core" is a political term. That is why it is so impossible to explain succinctly. It is deceptive for the implication that reading, writing, and arithmetic achievement will be standardized - but then we're told oh no, the states can do whatever they want and it really has to do with being able to explain why you got the answer you did. Well then why is it called "Common Core"? Why is that not on page 1 of the common core web page? That's what people are ascribing to it here, but what I see from that website is a lot of talk about the political process that generated "common core".

I disagree that a political process is the best way to teach math. This "democracy fetish" that has so much PC currency nowadays is ridiculous in a number of situations. It is not an appropriate model for building cars either. I do not want my car to be built by political consensus. I don't want to listen to PC crap about it being a grass roots effort of consumer groups, car manufacturers, labor unions, environmentalists, and boilerplate rubbish about needing the most advanced technology for a car that is operated in the global economy.

I am struggling to think up the deceptive name we would apply to such a car.

 

[Minoosh]

People react with extreme negativity to parenting that is different from their own. We were running a blog at the time, with videos of what we were doing and citations of the early infant learning literature we were following.

It sounds like you were experimenting on your kids - perhaps trying to exploit a newborn's "walking" reflex - then posting video online, while making sure you (and your kids) could be readily identified by strangers in other states.

IMO, that's weird.

 

[marplots]

Since I have been called a liar by Marplots...

Not exactly. I said:

I would like to see an example of the high school chemistry the four year old is doing - partly curiosity, partly doubt.

... I'll see if I can post a video I took a while ago when we first began the Periodic Table of Elements. Edit: I don't see how I can do this without our names being public information.

I didn't word that well. I didn't mean "see" in the literal sense of a video, I was just interested in an example of what you referred to as "high school chemistry." Surely this isn't surprising when you said you were teaching your four year-old at that level?

To be plain, I only wanted you to expand on what material your four year-old had grasped and not even in great detail, just an example. No video required, I'll take your word for it.

As I recall, high school chemistry involved balancing chemical equations, understanding oxidation states, acids and bases, the families of elements in the periodic table, conversions between various measurement systems and chemical bonding. Here is a typical syllabus: http://www.scio.k12.or.us/shs/Staffweb/Chrostek/chemistry/CHSyllabus.pdf

 

[kellyb]

I taught my kids about gravity, atoms, elements, molecules, etc starting around age three.
"Kindergarten physics and chemistry". It was also reinforced at the Children's Museum classes.

Sadly, my 10 year old is still nowhere near to understanding Graham’s Law of Effusion.

 

[marplots]

I taught my kids about gravity, atoms, elements, molecules, etc starting around age three.
"Kindergarten physics and chemistry". It was also reinforced at the Children's Museum classes.

Sadly, my 10 year old is still nowhere near to understanding Graham’s Law of Effusion.

I did better. I actually made my kids out of elements, molecules, atoms and chemistry.

This is drifting into Baby Einstein territory. What happened to bragging about bowel and bladder control or being able to dress themselves? I get being proud of your kid, but I'd never claim my toddler could cook because they could press some buttons on the microwave.

 

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

I did better. I actually made my kids out of elements, molecules, atoms and chemistry.

This is drifting into Baby Einstein territory. What happened to bragging about bowel and bladder control or being able to dress themselves? I get being proud of your kid, but I'd never claim my toddler could cook because they could press some buttons on the microwave.

This illustrates why Common Core points to a false path. Children are not standard. Either Common Core justifies expensive centralization with no real point (no specified performance measures, no common curriculum, bureaucracy with no job) or it in fact centralizes authority over curriculum. It is either an expensive waste of adult time or an expensive intrusion by remote self-appointed "experts" into a decision process that should be as close to parents as possible. The question "what should all 8 year-olds study?" makes no more sense than "what size and style of shoe should all 8 year-olds wear?"

It does not take 12 years at $12,000 per pupil-year to teach a normal child to read and compute. Most vocational training occurs more effectively on the job than in a classroom. State (government, generally) provision of History, Economics, and Civics instruction is a conflict of interest.

 

[AlaskaBushPilot]

It sounds like you were experimenting on your kids - perhaps trying to exploit a newborn's "walking" reflex - then posting video online, while making sure you (and your kids) could be readily identified by strangers in other states.

IMO, that's weird.

Perfect, thanks!

You are exactly the kind of example showing how easy it is to make up malicious manipulative rhetoric to attack anyone who is different from the average. A person who reads peer reviewed published literature on early infant development is "weird" and "experimenting on their child".

Beautiful. And yes, we hear this mainly from other parents who get uber defensive about how far ahead our kids are than theirs. They say exactly the same thing, along with "pushing" the kids "before they are ready".

You want to conjure up an image of putting electric wires on their genitals, horse whips, and of course make us into bug-eyed loons (weird). Oh, and yes I am ready to hear you deny that this is what you are doing. My eyes are deceiving me. But this is exactly what we learned from the published researchers. It doesn't take intelligence to do this. What it takes is bad intentions.

We've generally been pretty careful not to say that our kids are exceptional in terms of "gifted". Parents who teach will have kids that are far ahead of their peers because kids can generally learn much earlier and most especially more efficiently than in a public school setting.

And yes, Malcolm - how can we expect differently when we use a political process with thousands or tens of thousands of people with conflicting agendas to produce such a thing. It is also in an environment that produces high school graduates that cannot read at even 5th grade level.

Despite the bluster about preparing students for college and the "global economy", it is extremely naiive to think this is actually going to change things. They will still be awarding high school diplomas to kids that read below fifth grade level, especially in the problem areas of inner cities and etc.

 

[marplots]

This illustrates why Common Core points to a false path. Children are not standard. Either Common Core justifies expensive centralization with no real point (no specified performance measures, no common curriculum, bureaucracy with no job) or it in fact centralizes authority over curriculum. It is either an expensive waste of adult time or an expensive intrusion by remote self-appointed "experts" into a decision process that should be as close to parents as possible. The question "what should all 8 year-olds study?" makes no more sense than "what size and style of shoe should all 8 year-olds wear?"

I disagree. We very much rely on experts, and should. They embody the benefits of institutional knowledge, knowledge spanning multiple lifetimes and education is important enough to need their skills. Parents do not have this advantage and have plenty of other roles to play in child rearing. So, yes, we might not need an expert to tell us what size and style of shoe an 8 year-old should wear, except they already do - a great deal of work goes into designing appropriate shoes for different purposes.

The ubiquity of good shoes and good education tricks us into thinking all shoes would be equally good or all education will fill the need. But it won't. It won't because we need students who have the basic training needed to then take on the specialist roles our modern society demands.

And even the least skilled of those roles also has input from experts, experts who tell us about safe working conditions or the most efficient way to dig a ditch.

It does not take 12 years at $12,000 per pupil-year to teach a normal child to read and compute. Most vocational training occurs more effectively on the job than in a classroom. State (government, generally) provision of History, Economics, and Civics instruction is a conflict of interest.

Yes, you can certainly teach some level of "read and compute" much cheaper. You could, for example, stop formal schooling at 7th or 8th grade. And the outcome of an education should be set by the community. But once you've decided on an endpoint, it's foolish not to go to the experts and find out the best way to meet the goal, whatever it is.

 

[xjx388]

As I was listening to Glen Beck this morning, I heard him say that one of the text exemplars for Common Core was a book that graphically depicts pedophilia. I have learned to take what he says with a grain of salt so I decided to research that myself. Surely he was exaggerating, as usual with him.

Well, he was right. Toni Morrison's "Bluest Eyes," is one of the 11th-grade text exemplars. Now, I understand that the text exemplars are meant to illustrate the complexity, quality and range that kids should be reading and don't represent an official reading list. But still. This is a book that, as Morrison once said, tries to make you a "co-conspirator," with the pedophile. If you google the book, you can find excerpts that are straight up pornography. It talks about the pedophile's anus softening as he thrusts in the kid.

So why would such a controversial book be any part of the common core standards?

 

[marplots]

So why would such a controversial book be any part of the common core standards?

Because Toni Morrison is such a great writer?

I don't remember at what grade level I learned about the Holocaust or reading The Diary of Anne Frank. But do you think I should have been protected from such horrible things? There is term used for the notion. It's sometimes called "greenhousing." The idea (and I have run across it only in the context of Christian education), is to protect the innocents from all that is unsavory and sinful. Those subject to the method risk graduating without some pretty critical information. Like tender plants which have never been exposed to the outside, they are subject to real damage when they finally get out into the "wicked" world.

 

[xjx388]

Because Toni Morrison is such a great writer?

She has much less objectionable and better written books. "Song of Solomon," for one -it won the Nobel Prize for literature. I have no problem with older high school kids dealing with controversial subject matter, even sex. But this seems too far over the line.

 

[marplots]

She has much less objectionable and better written books. "Song of Solomon," for one -it won the Nobel Prize for literature. I have no problem with older high school kids dealing with controversial subject matter, even sex. But this seems too far over the line.

A good item to bring up at your local school board meeting. If they agree, it will probably be removed from the list. It's nice there is some leeway offered that allows this.

My bias is to lean toward exposing high schoolers to as much as possible while there is still an adult around (the teacher) to add insight. I tend to think of young adults as rather robust and resilient enough to handle more than they sometimes get credit for.

 

[marplots]

I should have mentioned why this is such a hot button with me. My wife of 30+ years was greenhoused. Even in her 50's, she still avoids any movie with nudity or sex scenes. She finds profanity so distasteful we only rent movies with R ratings after carefully examining the reasons for the rating (violence, for some reason, gets a pass). There are many topics that are conversation killers with her as well - she cannot stomach them.

I'm not saying greenhousing is necessarily bad, but we want to be sure the outcome is the desired one, instead of defaulting toward protectionism. "As the twig is bent, so grows the tree."

 

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

I disagree. We very much rely on experts, and should.

No argument. In a market-oriented legal environment, people get to choose the experts on whom they rely. When experts choose the experts, the system serves the experts.

Furthermore, State (government, generally) monopolization of the education industry has produced a swarm of fraudulent experts. Consider Whole Language methods of reading instruction, "discovery" methods of Math instruction, block scheduling, portfolio assessment, critical pedagogy, and countless other fads which flow from Colleges of Education. Consider, most prominently, their claim to distinguish "expertise". There is no statistical, empirical evidence that students of teachers with degrees in Education outperform students of teachers with degrees in their subject.

"... the outcome of an education should be set by the community."

Why?

But once you've decided on an endpoint, it's foolish not to go to the experts and find out the best way to meet the goal, whatever it is.

The real problem here is with "it". The idea that 300 million individuals have __a__ goal is monstrous in a free society. "Uniformity shall prevail" works for the military. For society in general, it's a totalitarian ideal.

 

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

A good item to bring up at your local school board meeting. If they agree, it will probably be removed from the list. It's nice there is some leeway offered that allows this.

My bias is to lean toward exposing high schoolers to as much as possible while there is still an adult around (the teacher) to add insight. I tend to think of young adults as rather robust and resilient enough to handle more than they sometimes get credit for.

Taking these decisions from individual parents and submitting them to some aggregate decision making process guarantees a rancorous contest for control of the process. It will inevitably create unhappy losers (who may constitute the vast majority; consider the contest for control of the decision of what style and size of shoes we all must wear).

 

[AlaskaBushPilot]

A good item to bring up at your local school board meeting.

This is an important deception peddled by the democracy-fetish crowd. Why, all you have to do is go to the school board... as if that would have any effect...

... and the county commissioners and the state representatives and the congressional representatives and the mayor's office and the governor's office and the president and the galaxy of regulatory agencies at the local, state, and federal level, the boards and commissions, the advisory groups, political party operatives, the PACS, etc.

We are increasingly governed by quasi-democratic processes that would take more than a full-time job keeping up with to be informed and participate. I was ON the local assembly and God Almighty I lived through an entire week of testimony, day after day until midnight just over whether to move a pile of dirt a few miles. Not an exaggeration - when it was all over the assembly was so sick of it I immediately called the question. No debate. Unanimous vote: move the dirt. The homo-erotic art in the library... another gigantic, endless, nearly violent confrontation between groups spitting rhetorical venom at each other. TV coverage, news articles, letters to the editor, an endless parade of people testifying before us.

...just bring it up at the school board. lol. The effort per unit output in the public process approaches infinity.

This already HAS been a process in place for YEARS with thousands if not tens of thousands of people involved and at the end of the process people are advised to just... bring it up at the school board.

That's one reason why homeschooling is the big fix for us: complete control. Nobody can tell us what to do.

 

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

A good item to bring up at your local school board meeting.

This is an important deception peddled by the democracy-fetish crowd. Why, all you have to do is go to the school board... as if that would have any effect...

... and the county commissioners and the state representatives and the congressional representatives and the mayor's office and the governor's office and the president and the galaxy of regulatory agencies at the local, state, and federal level, the boards and commissions, the advisory groups, political party operatives, the PACS, etc.

We are increasingly governed by quasi-democratic processes that would take more than a full-time job keeping up with to be informed and participate. ...

Your neighbor to the right will be happy to settle a boundary dispute over a chessboard, if his name is Gary Kasparov. The neighbor on the left will be happy to settle a boundary dispute in the boxing ring if his name is Vladimir Klitschko. The neighbor on the back lot will be happy to settle a boundary dispute in court if his name is Gerry Spence.

The process is the punishment, and non-experts are outclassed.

 

[Minoosh]

This illustrates why Common Core points to a false path. Children are not standard. Either Common Core justifies expensive centralization with no real point (no specified performance measures, no common curriculum, bureaucracy with no job) or it in fact centralizes authority over curriculum.

The education system is already centralized, and to the best of my understanding Common Core doesn't really move much beyond that.

Before, states set their own standards, and now, states have agreed to adopt a common standard. There's no punishment that I know of for opting out. There could be one, but I'm not finding it.

It is either an expensive waste of adult time or an expensive intrusion by remote self-appointed "experts" into a decision process that should be as close to parents as possible.

I don't really see what the additional intrusion is.

The question "what should all 8 year-olds study?" makes no more sense than "what size and style of shoe should all 8 year-olds wear?"

Applying the question somewhat differently, people do (IMO) have expectations for what a high school graduate should know. Nevertheless, standardized tests were mainly developed to hold educators accountable, not students.

The Obama Administration wasn't thrilled to have 50 states with 50 different standards, but as far as I know states drove the adoption of common standards.

The standards movement was born out of fear that the U.S. was losing its competitive edge due to lax schooling. I've seen conflicting reports on how well-founded that fear is.

 

[marplots]

This is an important deception peddled by the democracy-fetish crowd. Why, all you have to do is go to the school board... as if that would have any effect...

... and the county commissioners and the state representatives and the congressional representatives and the mayor's office and the governor's office and the president and the galaxy of regulatory agencies at the local, state, and federal level, the boards and commissions, the advisory groups, political party operatives, the PACS, etc.

We are increasingly governed by quasi-democratic processes that would take more than a full-time job keeping up with to be informed and participate. I was ON the local assembly and God Almighty I lived through an entire week of testimony, day after day until midnight just over whether to move a pile of dirt a few miles. Not an exaggeration - when it was all over the assembly was so sick of it I immediately called the question. No debate. Unanimous vote: move the dirt. The homo-erotic art in the library... another gigantic, endless, nearly violent confrontation between groups spitting rhetorical venom at each other. TV coverage, news articles, letters to the editor, an endless parade of people testifying before us.

...just bring it up at the school board. lol. The effort per unit output in the public process approaches infinity.

This already HAS been a process in place for YEARS with thousands if not tens of thousands of people involved and at the end of the process people are advised to just... bring it up at the school board.

That's one reason why homeschooling is the big fix for us: complete control. Nobody can tell us what to do.

It sounds like your complaint is about efficiency and your solution is to opt out? Or is the complaint about the democratic process not being authoritarian enough, with too many voices having input? Still, the solution you have found is the same - not to participate. Unilateralism is a great move when it's available.

What I don't understand is whether you think your move should be broadly applied because the public school system isn't to your liking, or was it a custom fit to meet your own frustrations?

And on a side note, how did you figure out what you would and wouldn't teach your kid(s)?