This is for every teacher who refuses to be blamed for the failure of our society to erase poverty and inequality, and refuses to accept assessments, tests and evaluations imposed by those who have contempt for real teaching and learning.
Reading is great, joining is better - please sign in. For BATs, by BATs, we do not sell data!
BAT Store
Click image for link
We have now gotten a US Made and Union shop to sell us BAT shirts in all designs at a low cost.
Bumper stickers are coming soon and we hope to add more shirt types (tank, polo) if there is interest in the t-shirts!
Over and over on the fb page we discuss opinions about CC. Some people believe that the standards "aren't that bad" and do not understand why BadAss Teachers are so against them. So, here's my idea list your thoughts/ facts about CC but state first whether you think it is Pro or a Con. Maybe we can get some good intelligent discussion going here and Keep it off the FB page.
I am CON - the CCSS are the foundation upon which all the other reforms are built. If you can dismantle the implementation of these standards, the testing, evaluations, scripting, and depersonalization of education will fall apart. This whole reform scheme works against all previous theories and beliefs about teaching children. The standards are not about educating; they are about controlling and narrowing what children should learn.
Post by petraarkanian on Aug 18, 2013 20:31:02 GMT -5
Not changing the standards- adding to them. If something's missing, add it. Not enough poetry? Add it. The standards are still the same, you've just supplemented.
From Mark Naison - The simplest argument against the Common Core Standards- they cost school districts large amounts of money to implement; and put those funds in the hands of test companies and consultants. Whatever its original intentions, it has morphed into a huge fund transfer from the public to the private sphere
Post by I'd rather be cruisin' on Aug 20, 2013 7:43:48 GMT -5
CON-I teach severe language impaired, IND and ASD (autism spectrum disorders) whose numbers are growing at an alarming rate. The Speaking and Listening strands of common core are designed so that my students will NEVER master them. And I've read that only 1% of all students will be allowed to take an alternate assessment (when the definition of intellectually disabled is an IQ of below 70 which is 2% of the population). So my students will be held back in Kdg. for the rest of their lives? what's the plan for the kids who will never pass the standards? I can't envision a way for my nonverbal or low verbal ASD students (who may actually be very smart) to master these standards. So they will fail year in and year out. And why should they have to take a test (and lose instructional time) for something that measures what we already know-that they can't formulate thoughts in the same way as others? Not to mention MY tax dollars being spent to tell MY students they're failures and sub-standard...that's definitely the message I want sent with my money...NOT!!!!! We already have huge discrimination going on in my schools where our Sp. Ed. students generate a lot of money and yet those classes have the least amount of materials, technology (if they're lucky), and supports. Administrators are taking the sp. ed. money and pouring it into the gen. ed. kids and who can blame them since that's what is valued-or at least that's the message being clearly sent. Where the state used to pay for our special staff (SLPs, OTs, PTs, Behaviorists, staffing specialists, etc), we now have to use IDEA funds for those salaries so we have no extra money for curriculum, materials, Assistive devices, etc. for those kids. So where is the state money going that used to pay these salaries? I'm guessing straight into Pearson's pocket.
36 years in Public education. 9 years in self contained K-12 Hearing Impaired class; 4 years in self-contained K-5 SLI class (severe language impaired); 23 years SLP, the last 6 years in Middle and High schools.
On ENgageny we can even download our scripts. We are soooooo lucky. (heavy sarcasm)
In NH, it hasn't yet been implemented. I was told at a SB meeting last week that there will be no curriculum, which is laughable. If PEARSON is selling the assessments, you know they will be making the textbooks. Are you saying that you download scripts-/lesson plans?
Although the ELA standards for high school are things that most competent teachers do anyway, the CCSS juggernaut should be resisted due to the nefarious circumstances of its creation, those who created it, the lack of piloting, how it was forced down for above, and the ultimate purpose for it. It is a Trojan Horse. "Timeo Danaos et Dona ferentes."
There are definite cons to the common core-but it seems most of the cons revolve around the testing, cost, etc. My thought is, with the current trends in education, that no matter what curriculum a state adopts, there will be significant costs and concerns around the testing...
I am glad to see that there has been a reduction in the breadth of math covered in each grade level. I have always been a proponent of spending more time on less topics rather than having to spend the first 9 weeks (or more) reviewing material from the previous year that was forgotten because there was not time to really develop a conceptual understanding.
My biggest concern regarding the Common Core is the rush to implement-the math standards are a drastic change from what we have done in the past-and we need time for learning best practices to implement-and our students need time to adjust to the more conceptually-based focus. I have seen wonderful work by early grade students who started with Common Core in kindergarten-their ability to explain their reasoning in their answers, show alternate methods, etc. was eye opening to me. However, I have seen upper elementary and middle school students dropped into this curriculum without the benefit of the preceding foundation who have struggled mightily.
I am not as familiar with the Language Arts Common Core-aside from seeing a PARCC Assessment Sample that could never be completed in the allotted time to any level of competency-even by Language Arts teachers/professors.
I'd rather be cruising, I couldn't agree with you more. If your students were able to do the grade level material then they wouldn't be in sped would they? It seems so simple, so why has the govt made it all so difficult. If we really need to test these kids to prove that we are not just sitting on our hands, then at least let it be a test that starts easy and increases with difficulty so that they can feel like they got something right. My swds are reading 2-3 years below grade level. They can not read the test, so they just guess on all of it. It shows nothing of the growth that they have made. It does not give them the opportunity to show how they have improved in their reading. I can read the math test, but often the questions are confusing, and have multiple steps involved. It is very frustrating for them and for me. I HATE when we get to the end of the year and have to torture them with the tests.