Is Common Core losing the public perception test?

[GregH]

SimonV wrote:

GregH wrote:

Let the traditionalists teach obsolete skills like handwriting and how to add stacks of numbers in a world where those skills are not necessary.

This statement blows my mind. Are you seriously suggesting that basic math skills are no longer necessary in the modern world? Or how to write without a keyboard? I just finished an engineering degree, and you know what? Fancy calculator or not, if you don’t know how to do some math by hand you will fail. That calculator will slow you down and you will have a really bad time. I’m not saying everybody needs to know calculus, but basic math is pretty, well, basic. And knowing how to write by hand is pretty important too. For instance, in most math and science classes you can’t take notes on a computer because it’s just not possible. You need to be able to write, and write fast or you will never keep up with the teacher. Maybe the Common Core is good in some ways, and maybe schools still teach some things that aren’t really important today, but math and handwriting are not two of them.

Yes you need to know basic math skills. But you do not need years of just adding stacks of numbers and long division. That is what the most popular Christian math textbooks focus on and at the expense of word and logic problems which are far more relevant to real life. It is old thinking and it is bad thinking for today’s world in which believe it or not, people just don’t do that stuff any more. They use calculators and Excel and QuickBooks.

Ditto for handwriting. Sure, people need to know how to write. But do they need five or six years of a teacher telling them how to make perfect curls in the capital E’s? In 2014 when most people can get through months without writing anything long than a short note or their signature with a pen and paper? It is absurd.

Yes, we do need new ideas in education because the world has changed. Some traditionalists can put their head in the sand if they want but what worked in 1900 is not appropriate for today. The bar is raised.

But you do not need … It is old thinking and it is bad thinking … It is absurd.

Greg, I don’t know much about common core, and I am skeptical of all the conspiracy theories, but I do wonder about how you know what is needed or not, what is old and bad thinking, and what is absurd. Do you have some education qualifications that give you particular insight into this? I was under the impression that you were not in the field of education. Was I incorrect about that?

[Chip Van Emmerik]

GregH,

Please forgive me if this is too blunt, but you simply don’t have any idea what you re talking about.

Forgive me for being blunt but you are stuck in paradigms that don’t work anymore and can’t see it because you almost certainly don’t know how the business world works in 2014 outside education. Your perspective is so skewed by that and your politics that you have to resort to throwing out insults. Everyone that disagrees with you Chip is not a weak-minded voter. I find it interesting that you go there because it proves my point: this is largely a political issue rather than an education one. It is honestly a bit pathetic how this plays out. That by the way is a primary reason why our country has “become the disaster it is today.”

[Chip Van Emmerik]

GregH wrote:

SimonV wrote:

GregH wrote:

Let the traditionalists teach obsolete skills like handwriting and how to add stacks of numbers in a world where those skills are not necessary.

This statement blows my mind. Are you seriously suggesting that basic math skills are no longer necessary in the modern world? Or how to write without a keyboard? I just finished an engineering degree, and you know what? Fancy calculator or not, if you don’t know how to do some math by hand you will fail. That calculator will slow you down and you will have a really bad time. I’m not saying everybody needs to know calculus, but basic math is pretty, well, basic. And knowing how to write by hand is pretty important too. For instance, in most math and science classes you can’t take notes on a computer because it’s just not possible. You need to be able to write, and write fast or you will never keep up with the teacher. Maybe the Common Core is good in some ways, and maybe schools still teach some things that aren’t really important today, but math and handwriting are not two of them.

Yes you need to know basic math skills. But you do not need years of just adding stacks of numbers and long division. That is what the most popular Christian math textbooks focus on and at the expense of word and logic problems which are far more relevant to real life. It is old thinking and it is bad thinking for today’s world in which believe it or not, people just don’t do that stuff any more. They use calculators and Excel and QuickBooks.

Ditto for handwriting. Sure, people need to know how to write. But do they need five or six years of a teacher telling them how to make perfect curls in the capital E’s? In 2014 when most people can get through months without writing anything long than a short note or their signature with a pen and paper? It is absurd.

Yes, we do need new ideas in education because the world has changed. Some traditionalists can put their head in the sand if they want but what worked in 1900 is not appropriate for today. The bar is raised.

You can blindly and ignorantly bash the traditionalists if you like, but, again, facts are not on your side. Those private and public charter schools that adhere even remotely to a traditional philosophy of education consistently out-pace their so-called progressive counterparts on standardized tests. This is even true among the general public school districts that have set up a single “traditional” school among their “regular” schools. They are almost always the highest performing school in the entire district. In my current district, which has 15 elementary schools including a single traditional school, the traditional school is running above 95% proficiency on the state standardized assessment while the rest of the district is in the 60’s or below. Your assertion would be laughable if it just weren’t so tragic.

Yes, but that view doesn’t take into fact all of the statistics. A private school or charter school is typically filled with students that have high parental involvement, specifically tied to the fact that the parents have to make financial sacrifices. Whereas, a public school is filled with many smart kids, but also filled with everything else. There are many other variables,

the broader facts are, that even though people complain about education system. Worldwide innovation and workplace effectiveness is still dominated by the US, with individuals who overwhelmingly have had a public school education.

[Larry]

But you do not need … It is old thinking and it is bad thinking … It is absurd.

Greg, I don’t know much about common core, and I am skeptical of all the conspiracy theories, but I do wonder about how you know what is needed or not, what is old and bad thinking, and what is absurd. Do you have some education qualifications that give you particular insight into this? I was under the impression that you were not in the field of education. Was I incorrect about that?

You are correct. I write from outside the often closed box of education. The big difference between Chip and me is in how we measure. Chip measures by standardized testing as he makes clear in his non-stop references to it. I come at it from the perspective of a person who has hired scores of employees, looked at thousands of resumes, and know what skills are really needed in 2014. I also come at it from the view of someone very knowledgeable in how a flat world is changing our paradigm. I know that topic well enough to have lectured about it at a university level.
In other words, I don’t care how well students do on standardized tests because that is meaningless if those tests do not test the right things. I am more interested in making sure my children do not end up sitting in my basement at 30 because they have no skills to succeed in the difficult world they are going in to. If I sat in the closed box of education, I might fall into the trap of thinking standardized testing is the right measuring stick too but the real world woke me up.

I write from outside the often closed box of education.

Thanks Greg. If I can push back a bit, and perhaps further the discussion, let me press here a little. Does reading a few thousand resumes and hiring scores of people for your relatively narrow field give you the right kind of background to be passing authoritative opinions on education and standardized testing? I can accept that you know something about what you want from the people you hire, but what about the rest of the world? Do you think the STEM schools share your view? Do the automotive companies hiring engineers share your view? Or the schools hiring teachers? Or the hospitals hiring lab techs or nurses?

These kinds of question tie into the idea of liberal arts education vs. vocational training. You seem to think the latter is better. I think the former is better, even at an early age. A broad education in the basic skills of life is important. You talk about working with stories and logic, but I was doing that in elementary school thirty five years ago. And everyone I know was. But how would that contradict the usefulness of standardized testing? And if you don’t have standardized testing, how would you evaluate if people are learning at a general age level?

In other words, I don’t care how well students do on standardized tests because that is meaningless if those tests do not test the right things.

You seem here to make a pretty large jump saying you don’t care how well students do on standardized tests because those tests are meaningless if they do not test the right things; however, your actual objection appears to be, not against standardized tests (as you say), but against standardized tests that don’t measure the right things. So if a standardized test measure the “right things” it would be acceptable?

I agree. I have no interest in standardized tests that measure wrong things. Do you know anyone who disagrees? But you have completely jumped over the question of what are the right things to measure, and how do we know what the right things are. I am not sure your looking at thousands of resumes or hiring scores of people qualifies you to determine what the “right things” are for the population at large. And that was the question. You admit that you have no qualifications to determine that, apart from your very narrow experience. Experts are known for actually having wide experience in a given field.

Earlier, you decry learning to do long division by hand, or learning to write legibly through handwriting course (which are actually about quite a bit more than handwriting … things such as spelling, composition, etc.). Yet you have no evidence to show that these things are not the “right things” to test. What happens in a world where students can’t do basic math by knowledge of math, and knowing how to do long division by hand is a piece of the bigger picture of how the world works? What about a world where students can’t write legibly, spell correctly, or compose texts for various purposes? What does that world look like? I would say we are already entering that world, and it’s not a pretty sight.

Have you ever hired someone who didn’t undergo the educational process and standardized testing? Of those you have hired, what is the percentage of those that have done it your way (i.e., without standardized testing)? And how do they measure up?

I am more interested in making sure my children do not end up sitting in my basement at 30 because they have no skills to succeed in the difficult world they are going in to. If I sat in the closed box of education, I might fall into the trap of thinking standardized testing is the right measuring stick too but the real world woke me up.

I share your interest in making sure kids are prepared. But again, notice your leap. You again object to standardized testing. But you already indicated that’s not your objection. Your objection is to measuring wrong things.

What measuring stick do you propose? How do you equip young people (say, ages 5-18) who do not yet know what field what they want to spend their lives in? How do you make sure that they are gaining basic life skills?

[dgszweda]

Chip Van Emmerik wrote:

GregH wrote:

SimonV wrote:

GregH wrote:

Let the traditionalists teach obsolete skills like handwriting and how to add stacks of numbers in a world where those skills are not necessary.

This statement blows my mind. Are you seriously suggesting that basic math skills are no longer necessary in the modern world? Or how to write without a keyboard? I just finished an engineering degree, and you know what? Fancy calculator or not, if you don’t know how to do some math by hand you will fail. That calculator will slow you down and you will have a really bad time. I’m not saying everybody needs to know calculus, but basic math is pretty, well, basic. And knowing how to write by hand is pretty important too. For instance, in most math and science classes you can’t take notes on a computer because it’s just not possible. You need to be able to write, and write fast or you will never keep up with the teacher. Maybe the Common Core is good in some ways, and maybe schools still teach some things that aren’t really important today, but math and handwriting are not two of them.

Yes you need to know basic math skills. But you do not need years of just adding stacks of numbers and long division. That is what the most popular Christian math textbooks focus on and at the expense of word and logic problems which are far more relevant to real life. It is old thinking and it is bad thinking for today’s world in which believe it or not, people just don’t do that stuff any more. They use calculators and Excel and QuickBooks.

Ditto for handwriting. Sure, people need to know how to write. But do they need five or six years of a teacher telling them how to make perfect curls in the capital E’s? In 2014 when most people can get through months without writing anything long than a short note or their signature with a pen and paper? It is absurd.

Yes, we do need new ideas in education because the world has changed. Some traditionalists can put their head in the sand if they want but what worked in 1900 is not appropriate for today. The bar is raised.

You can blindly and ignorantly bash the traditionalists if you like, but, again, facts are not on your side. Those private and public charter schools that adhere even remotely to a traditional philosophy of education consistently out-pace their so-called progressive counterparts on standardized tests. This is even true among the general public school districts that have set up a single “traditional” school among their “regular” schools. They are almost always the highest performing school in the entire district. In my current district, which has 15 elementary schools including a single traditional school, the traditional school is running above 95% proficiency on the state standardized assessment while the rest of the district is in the 60’s or below. Your assertion would be laughable if it just weren’t so tragic.

Yes, but that view doesn’t take into fact all of the statistics. A private school or charter school is typically filled with students that have high parental involvement, specifically tied to the fact that the parents have to make financial sacrifices. Whereas, a public school is filled with many smart kids, but also filled with everything else. There are many other variables,

the broader facts are, that even though people complain about education system. Worldwide innovation and workplace effectiveness is still dominated by the US, with individuals who overwhelmingly have had a public school education.

Larry, seriously :) Talk about leaps.

I never said all of my qualifications or expertise came from reading thousands of resumes. I don’t want to brag and start listing what I have done. In fact, I won’t. You can Google if you want to know. But yes, your attempt to paint me as a guy that does not know what is going on is really a bit silly.

Nor did I say I was against standardized testing.

Nor do I say that vocational training is better than liberal arts.

I don’t even know how to deal with your post when it is arguing against things that I don’t even support. And because you are quick to downplay what experience I have, what is the point anyway? So yes, I am going to pass on writing a scholarly paper here that discusses how to fix education, what should be measured etc.
The point of my first post was to say that in my opinion, Common Core is an improvement, that much of the opposition is just political, that traditionalists are stuck in paradigms that don’t work in real life any more, and that an emphasis on handwriting and menial skills that are not useful in 2014 is misguided. I reserve the right to hold that opinion regardless of how uninformed you think it is.

GregH,

Just for the record, I posted several specific examples, even some actual math work, of problems with common core, none of which you you have chosen to interact with yet.

Thanks, Greg. I am not really interested in going back and forth and I have no desire to misrepresent you. I drew some conclusions based on what you said, and asked you to clarify. I will quickly explain why I drew the conclusions I did, and if you think I have misunderstood, then please clarify, particularly by answreing some of the questions I posed that would help me understand.

I never said all of my qualifications or expertise came from reading thousands of resumes. I don’t want to brag and start listing what I have done. In fact, I won’t. You can Google if you want to know. But yes, your attempt to paint me as a guy that does not know what is going on is really a bit silly.

I asked for your qualifications to support your views, and that’s what you gave us. If you have more reasons why we should accept your opinions are informed opinions, I am interested. I am not sure I disagree, why is why I asked some specific questions about your alternatives and views. (I googled you and didn’t see anything that seemed relevant immediately.)

Nor did I say I was against standardized testing.

Not specifically, but you did say you didn’t care how well a student does on them. So perhaps “against” is too strong. Maybe “apathetic” is better? Not being provocative there. Just trying to understand. If your objection or apathy is that they test wrong things, then we agree.

Nor do I say that vocational training is better than liberal arts.

You said that “you do not need years of just adding stacks of numbers and long division” because they are not “relevant to real life.” You repeated that in this post. That seems a major difference between liberal arts and vocational training … relevance to “real life.” Furthermore, how do we conclude that these things have no relevance to real life? That’s a pretty big issue. I actually think they are pretty relevant.

I don’t even know how to deal with your post when it is arguing against things that I don’t even support.

You could answer the questions I asked, even if you disagree with my conclusions about your previous view. I certainly don’t intend to misrepresent you but all I had to go on was what you said. I would welcome short clarifying answers.

And because you are quick to downplay what experience I have, what is the point anyway?

I am not downplaying your experience; I don’t actually know what it is yet. I am questioning whether that gives you an informed opinion outside of your experience. If there are reasons to believe you have that broader base for an informed opinion, it would certainly give more weight to your views. That’s why I asked. (Again I googled and didn’t see anything.)

So yes, I am going to pass on writing a scholarly paper here that discusses how to fix education, what should be measured etc.

I certainly hope so. I have no interested in reading a scholarly paper here. There were a few basic questions I asked in hopes of furthering my understanding of what you were saying.

The point of my first post was to say that in my opinion, Common Core is an improvement, that much of the opposition is just political, that traditionalists are stuck in paradigms that don’t work in real life any more, and that an emphasis on handwriting and menial skills that are not useful in 2014 is misguided. I reserve the right to hold that opinion regardless of how uninformed you think it is.

I tend to agree with the first part (though I admit to not knowing much about common core). I don’t think I agree with the second part about things “not working in real life anymore” but that may be because I don’t know what you mean by that. I do disagree that handwriting is not important, and I wouldn’t put long division in the category of menial skills. But again, until an argument is made for that, I don’t really know how to evaluate it for myself.

I will bow out here. I hope you will give at least a few answers in search of understanding.

[Chip Van Emmerik]

dgszweda wrote:

Once again, your facts are just wrong. Charter schools and district “traditional” schools are both part of the public education sector. Neither charges tuition, and they draw their families from the exact same parent pool as the rest of the public school empire. While I agree that the difference is not as monolithic as just pointing at educational philosophy, that remains one of the most important differences. Furthermore, our country’s public schooling continues to lag behind all other industrialized nations. Public education is a disaster zone headed in the wrong direction for the last 75 years.

[dgszweda]

Chip Van Emmerik wrote:

dgszweda wrote:

Once again, your facts are just wrong. Charter schools and district “traditional” schools are both part of the public education sector. Neither charges tuition, and they draw their families from the exact same parent pool as the rest of the public school empire. While I agree that the difference is not as monolithic as just pointing at educational philosophy, that remains one of the most important differences. Furthermore, our country’s public schooling continues to lag behind all other industrialized nations. Public education is a disaster zone headed in the wrong direction for the last 75 years.

Charter schools achievement and traditional public schools achievements are indistinguishable (http://www.publicschoolreview.com/articles/123)

With that said, you are concerned that it lags behind all industrialized nations, yet our young workforce surpasses all other industrialized countries in many facets. Maybe we are measuring our kids incorrectly on how to be successful in society.

I am also outside educational circles, but I work in a technical field in the computer industry. Since I design/write drivers, I don’t deal often with new hires, though I do occasionally have to read resumés and do technical interviews of prospective employees. I can say that my focus there is more on how they solve real world problems, but I certainly expect good reading, math and critical thinking skills, which will be put to good use during the interview. I have never once cared about their handwriting, and since if I see them, they are interviewing for a technical job, I don’t care if they “dress for success,” and in fact, if they are not right out of school, such dress gets them minus points, as it appears they are trying to impress with something other than a good skill set, since they certainly won’t dress that way on the job.

I took my kids out of a Christian school education when they were in 5th and 7th grades, primarily because of some of the problems expressed here — my kids were doing well at rote memorization (not all that bad for things like multiplication tables, but not great for understanding history, for example) and handwriting, but they didn’t spend enough time on critical thinking skills. Maybe that has changed at that school by now.

When my wife and I (both of us have a B.S. in math, and I have an M.S. in computer science) both started homeschooling, I added courses that I taught in the morning beyond the “traditional” courses that my wife handled. Both of my girls immediately started typing, critical thinking, and 1 year of Latin (for better language understanding). Once they had one semester of typing, I immediately required all assignments that were not math or contained equations to be typed, since 5 and 7 years of handwriting are quite enough. I might think differently if they wanted a career in calligraphy or wanted to work alongside Thomas Jefferson hand copying the Declaration, but since both of those were quite unlikely, skills with computers and typing were much preferred. Critical Thinking, which eventually included logic, fallacies, proving an argument correct and valid, and even having to refute something they had written and taken a position on lasted through until graduation.

I have not seen the entire Common Core curriculum of course, but some of what I have seen (math) looks like it does some really weird things to come up with some answers, and I’m not sure those same skills would really translate to most problems in the real world, at least, not in the world of software engineering.

So at this point, I think I would need to look at a lot more of the curriculum to really evaluate it (and I’m not that motivated since my kids are now in college), but some of the things I’m hearing about Common Core do sound disturbing. However, given my experience as a homeschool teacher, I agree that continuing to stress skills that are less useful (e.g. cursive handwriting beyond enough to read it and to write a signature, I’m looking at you!) will not help all that much in today’s world.

Sadly, David, i agree with your assessment of too many Christian school as well. Frankly, my wife and I have chosen to home school our kids as well. Even if I someday return to a Christian school of excellence, we still believe homeschooling is the best option.

I don’t have a problem with the government setting standards for government programs. Public education, as a taxpayer funded gov’t program, would need to be held accountable and regulated in some way.

However, I oppose CCS because:

• The improper and unconstitutional practice of automatically granting millions Race to the Top funds to states that adopted CCS, even before the standards had even been finalized and accountability measures crafted, and then calling their participation ‘voluntary’. Puhlease.
• The fact that the CCS were NOT a state-led initiative involving teacher and parent input, and the NGA and CCSSO did not have a grant of authority from the states to write these standards. For those of you in Rio Linda, the National Governor’s Association doesn’t actually represent state governors - they are an unelected networking group.
• The copyright issue is also very troublesome, as states are not allowed to change them, and those who own it can change it without any input from states or citizens. “Big philanthropy” writing public policy bypasses the principles of our representative republic.
• In spite of the blahblahblah about standards not dictating curriculum, the extensive embedded pedagogy of the CCS reduces teachers to test proctors.
• CCS assessments do not have an equivalency test for students with special needs.
• Teaching kids to think the exact same thing in the exact same way is NOT teaching critical thinking.
• Just follow the money- Common Core Inc, Bill Gates Foundation, Achieve Inc, College Board, Smarter Balanced, Pearson - and others who stand to make billions with CCS curriculum, tech, and testing. Again, he who writes the paychecks calls the shots, and with CCS, that is not going to be the American citizenry.
• The kind of tracking information that will be compiled on each student is a definite violation of privacy, and FERPA now protects families about as well as a volleyball net can stop a tsunami.

Also see How Common Core’s Standards Have Begun to Damage the School Curriculum by Sandra Stotsky and James Milgram’s Testimony to the Indiana Senate Education Committee.

As more people read and study the standards, they are realizing that CCS is chopped liver presented like it’s caviar. People can say all the livelong day that CCS is an improvement, but they have tons of trouble providing any evidence to support their conclusions.