tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7691251033406320222.post4752341216753688384..comments2024-03-26T04:19:38.862-07:00Comments on kitchen table math, the sequel: What are standards for? What do they have to do with curriculum?Catherine Johnsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03347093496361370174noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7691251033406320222.post-72939041363413295322013-05-04T04:52:59.394-07:002013-05-04T04:52:59.394-07:00We have had "minimum" standards since I ...We have had "minimum" standards since I began teaching 22 yrs ago. Our local curriculum teams have worked within that system to ensure that we meet those minimum standards, but also prepare students for ACT/SAT etc. Common Core makes up 85% of standards, and my opinion is that college prep math to be added would exceed 15%. I'm not against all testing, an "anti-test" person, but increasing test time while decreasing instructional time is a reality that does not serve students... There has to be a better way. <br /><br />And the changes to FERPA along with increased data collection via these tests has no academic purpose in serving students imho.<br /><br />See => parentalrights.org Common Core: The 'State-led' Myth concernedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14374789062880735051noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7691251033406320222.post-18076058209370914612013-04-04T03:20:49.709-07:002013-04-04T03:20:49.709-07:00Hi writer, we need standards in education that giv...Hi writer, we need standards in education that give quality students. But the general public would agree that prime faculty graduates ought to show proficiency in reading, math, writing, and argument analysis. do not you? Here's only one of my thoughts regarding the Anti-Test folks and why they are misguided:study medicine abroadhttp://www.tauedu.org/us-track-board-review.htmlnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7691251033406320222.post-91462865870317867982013-03-30T07:51:38.777-07:002013-03-30T07:51:38.777-07:00"minimum"
A minimum building code withs..."minimum"<br /><br />A minimum building code withstands extreme weather conditions, whereas a PARCC "strong" standard in math means having a 75 percent chance of passing a college algebra course - and that's after taking four years of who knows what math in high school.<br /><br />Of course, the CCSS standard is nothing like a building code. The CCSS standard is vague and fuzzy and open to a wide range of expectations and pedagogy. Besides, you don't have builders telling us that the building failed because it just has a low IQ or that it just didn't have enough engagement and motivation. Perhaps it didn't live up to the standards because all of the surrounding houses enticed it to smoke dope and drink beer.<br /><br /><br />However, part of me is still a little optimistic about the CCSS standards. We are past the level where people can argue that standards and testing are not necessary. We are also at the level where standards are common between many more states. The question is whether these standards (defined by the actual tests) will ever amount to anything more than "minimum" and fuzzy. <br /><br />I now see the big battleground between tests like PARCC and whatever tests that ACT and the College Board can offer. Will states care about things more than the minimum? The ACT and College Board seem to offer more, but that's not the case for PARCC, where the top "distinguished" level in math means not much more than no remediation at most colleges.<br /><br />It's a question of whether states will take any responsibility for high expectations, not just minimum, no STEM, expectations. The promise is that maybe a few states will show what can be done. Maybe the can drive higher expectations into the lower grades.<br />SteveHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03956560674752399562noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7691251033406320222.post-31418368244737046222013-03-29T07:55:55.677-07:002013-03-29T07:55:55.677-07:00Standards are appropriate for English also. Many w...Standards are appropriate for English also. Many well known folks in the Anti-Test movement are, in their hearts, against standards. <br /><br />People have been predicting the end of standardized tests for ages. But most people would agree that high school graduates should show proficiency in reading, math, writing, and argument analysis. Don't you? Here's just one of my thoughts about the Anti-Test people and why they're misguided:<br />Both sides in this debate have legitimate views, but the anti-test folks are becoming increasingly rabid, especially against The SAT. I think that some of these folks have never given The SAT a real study as to what the test actually tests. For example, is it possible that the skills necessary to perform well on SAT reading are more important than those that many teachers are teaching in our schools? That learning how to do SAT reading is an important skill, one necessary for success in college and afterward? I have always thought that many students find SAT Critical Reading so difficult because SAT reading requires a kind of reading that students simply don't do in school. SAT Critical Reading is not reading in the sense that students have come to understand in school. We all know that many teachers are adamant about not “Teaching to the Test”. However, SAT designers test for the lack of important skills in reading comprehension, and they do this quite well. (Don't the colleges want to know whether their incoming students have these skills?) There is no easy fix for this lack of reading skill. Most students neither read nor study reading in school in the manner required for SAT reading. Most students talk and write about how they “feel” about a passage. Unfortunately, the SAT doesn't give a darn about what a student feels about a passage. The SAT cares only for the “argument” in the passage.<br /><br />Understanding the argument is a universally important skill.<br /><br />There's a lively conversation on this topic over on Linkedin:<br />http://www.linkedin.com/groupAnswers?viewQuestionAndAnswers=&discussionID=224378387&gid=2225009&commentID=127869439&trk=view_disc&ut=0JwAPkr0Yo1RI1<br /><br />Bob<br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16357086052122260057noreply@blogger.com