Common Core Standards - Fremont,CA

Please allow my child to take EASIER tests in school?

Nah...I'm trying to raise smart childrens. Go ahead an' teach 'em the BIG words.

My experience with CCSS (common core state standards) is from a math perspective (HS math - Kansas).

The problem that I see with any standards is that by the time students who started their schooling with CCSS reach me (however many years later), our government has usually switched to another system. For me, this means many, many years of piecing together and filling gaps on what the old standards covered vs. what the new standards cover.

CCSS really focus on problems based learning (PBL), which is actually really important, and ideally should better prepare our students for the future. PBL means a lot of things, but ultimately the goal of PBL is for students to have more discovery and application of the information they learn. In the math world, this kind of means more story problem type situations to focus on. As I type this, I can collectively hear the groans from people reading this thinking, "Ugh, I hate story problems!" Ultimately, though, story problems are the real life applications of the math that we are supposed to be learning. It's why my students learn early on that when they complain about "When am I ever going to use this?," they will probably end up with some big 'life' situation where it is applied (which leads to a story problem, which....ah, there's that collective groan again). :)

The standards are very tough. I am confident in my teaching abilities to be able to guide my students through this process, but as I mentioned, I will be filling in a lot of gaps as we transition from the old standards to the new. For example, I *believe* (don't 100% take my word on this, because I am HS...we were talking about this as a district a few months ago) that our district on the 'old' standards typically puts a lot of focus on fractions in 4th and 5th grades. With CCSS, I believe that now the huge focus on fractions is actually in 3rd and 4th grades, with mastery obtained before entering 5th grade. *IF* this is true (and it is true, but I might be off on the specific grade levels), then those teachers have to be really careful. Let's say your child was in 4th grade this year and got a basic intro to fractions, with the intention of spending a lot of time on fractions and mastery during this upcoming year (5th grade). Well, if last year your child was on the old state standards and the school decided to switch everything to CCSS, then your child would actually MISS all of the in depth fraction information, because it is no longer taught in 5th grade, but in 4th grade. This will be happening in lots of cases, and we teachers know when this happens so that we can make sure to cover that ground with students. This is where filling in the gaps will come in to play.

At the high school level, there are a ton of Algebra 2 and Trig standards on the 10th grade test. Currently at our school, unless a child decides to double up and take multiple math classes at the same time, the absolute earliest that a student can take Algebra 2 is 10th grade. The absolute earliest that a student can take Trig is 2nd semester of 11th grade. SO, if we are now having tested indicators on the 10th grade test over these things, then I'm going to need to do what I can to cover more material earlier on so that my students are prepared. Our Geometry classes actually teach a small amount of Trig towards the end of the courses, and we'll make sure to review in Algebra 2.

Obviously every subject is going to be different....I just happen to know more about the math since it is my specialty. :) I will say that with a large majority of the states in the US adopting the CCSS, this *should* be MUCH better for students who are moving between states. In the past, when each state had their own standards, there were sometimes very little similarities between what was taught in (for example) Algebra 1 at Ohio vs. Algebra 1 at Kansas (once again, made up...hope that makes sense).

Also, when they say CCSS, that means that MOST of the standards are going to be the same for all of the states that adopt them, BUT every state has a small percentage of the standards that they can adjust/add to in order to better fit that state's particular needs.

My oldest will be in first grade this year, so I'm new to pretty much everything. Also, I attended private schools, so I was not required to take the IGAP or ISAT or whatever the state test was called at the time. But I still know a great deal about it, as my dad worked for the ISBE (Illinois State Board of Education) and help create and develop the tests.

When I was growing up, they were called "State Standards," and students either exceeded the standards, met the standards or did not exceed the standards. Later, the test became known as IGAP (Illinois Goals Assessment Program) and rather that "State Standards" we had "State Goals. A few years later the test became known as ISAT (Illinois Standard Achievement Test), and at some point they were no longer talking about "State Standards" or "State Goals" but "Benchmarks."

Each time there was a name change, there were some improvements made as well. I know teachers are always striving to do better. But most of the teacher I talked to said it was basically the same thing with a different name.

From what the previous posters wrote, it does sound like the "Common Core" is a more significant change than any of those I mentioned. Also, am I right in guessing that this is about making things consistent from state to state, whereas everything I mentioned above is specifically about Illinois?

How do I say this without sounding cynical? This is something teachers deal with all the time. It is always their job to go to meetings and learn what the new standards are and discuss how best to implement them.

As a parent, my job is to support and encourage my child and work with his/her teacher. It's not my job to worry about standards or goals or benchmarks or common core standards. I know that as long I work with my kids to help them learn how to be good students and good learners with inquisitive minds and a basic knowledge of how to find out more, they will be in great shape.

When I first heard about CCS, my son was 3 or so and I was teaching preschool. The early childhood ed community spoke out against these standards (fearing implications of teaching too much too early in the preschool years as well)and frankly, I was worried that kindergarten would be too much, too soon for my own son.

Fast-forward a couple years and we are on the other side of kindergarten. Not once have I felt things were ' too hard' for my son intellectually. His teacher was excellent at explaining the standards, and when I had questions for her, she has been able to give me good information as to what the requirements actually are/how they are implemented. Believe me, on paper they look far more imposing than what is actually taught. I like that the new report cards reflect mastery and fluency and facility--- what's actually happening instead of a letter grade which may be 'on the curve' (which is a terrible way to grade, IMO). I'm excited that the benchmarks are laid out so transparently for children, and I do think that while they are daunting if you are just reading the text, if one takes time to ask the teacher to explain "how do you assess this? how do you facilitate their learning this? can you give me some examples?" the answers received are age-appropriate to their level of learning. My son's teacher was also able to cite certain theories as well which were behind the teaching, which I appreciated.

I don't remember reading alone and with any proficiency until I was in second grade; I was concerned that my son would not be able to fulfill the reading standards by the end of kindergarten. I'm glad my fears were so unfounded...Kiddo had fulfilled the grade-level requirements in all subjects by the end of the year.

In later years, I can see where some families might be upset by some of the standards. For example, if you are insistent that your child be taught Intelligent Design instead of evolution, this might be a sticky point as CCS teaches the latter. So, there may be some parents or schools with a philosophical opposition to this. Believe me, I was also philosophically opposed to teaching too much, too early, but my experience has proven me wrong as well. I did not have to teach anything out of the ordinary or extra-special to prep my son for kindergarten. We didn't drill the alphabet or numbers or site words or any of the stuff people worry about... and my son did fine. He was ready, his teacher was competent and knew her curriculum, and he really thrived despite a vision disability.

This summer, we have hired his kindergarten teacher to tutor him once a week to keep his skills sharp (because kids lose so much learning over summer) and come next year, we'll be helping him along or finding help for him if he needs it. As my son's parent, it's my job to assist him when he needs help in any realm of life, be it social, personal or academic. I'll continue to do this as we go forward. If you look at the standards for recitation and testing in the 1800's, you might find our contemporary educational system rather relaxed and loose. Raising the standard up isn't a bad thing, especially if we are seeing that kids can meet those benchmarks without added stress and strain. I didn't see that. Instead, I saw kids who were happy and proud learners when I worked at the school.

I admit I haven't studied exactly what they are but from what I have heard they are hard if your kids is below average, fine if they are average, and boring if your kid is smart. The problem is that factoid is carved in stone, it does not allow the teacher the ability to adapt it to the individual child's needs.

So if you are below average you will fall further behind, if you are average you are going to think you are brilliant and the parents of actual gifted kids will be pulling them out of public schools and putting them in private schools where they don't have to deal with government regulations.

Like I said though, this is based on articles I have read, if have not actually read the guidelines so I could be way off in this assessment.
__________________________
Hey Mom2many, it was six ish in the morning and I actually tried to think of a different term. My brain did kick in towards the end and I went with below average...

Really though, do we have to be PC all the time?

I don't have a problem with the over all standards, but what happens to those who are 'stupid' as one said.....really who says that? Or those who are gifted?

My boys tend to fall on the below average in language until about the 5th grade, my girls the complete opposite, they are advanced. The girls get bored and the boys get further and further behind. How does that help either set of kids?

I homeschool for this very reason, and while we have to take the state testing I don't put a lot of weight in them. By high school all of my kids scores are banked and they no longer need to take them with the exception of my learning disabled son who sadly almost didn't get to graduate because of these test's. That's after putting his schooling on hold his senior year because of bi-polar onset and taking a second year of his senior year, and all that boy wanted was to graduate. That's it, but they do not offer any wiggle room.

Bleh, I could go on and on but won't.

I am the parent of a gifted second grader (starting second grade this Fall) and I have no intention of pulling him out of school. From reading through the standards, they seem problem/reasoning based and seem to identify a large number of abilities that children should master through their curriculum. I do NOT see that it forces teachers to teach in a particular way at all. For example - children should be able to recognize and identify parts of a story (plot, characters) and make inferences from them. The goals seem very logical to me (I kind of thought teachers are already teaching kids this stuff). In no way do I think that this will be stifling to gifted kids. I am not sure how the standards will be assessed. I am a LOT more concerned that schools will continue to waste my kid's time on all the standardized testing than that he learn what is in the common core.

the wording on some of the common core standards make them sound tougher than they are. for instance...kindergarteners must write an opinion paper. but the example is.. my favorite book is... which the kid could fill in with a book title and one detail.. (my favorite book is snow white.. the dwarves are cute. )

the common core is a wonderful thing for education. If we went to level the playing field.. so that every child in every school in every state gets a good fair and equitable education... we need a national standard. so that billy in rural new mexico learns the same things in each grade as sally in new York city.

it does nto tell the teachers how to teach.. just the basic material that must be covered in each grade.

The language arts does have a standard that kids are supposed to read more nonfiction.. This does nto stop them from reading famous literary classics.. but they also need to be able read understand and process scientific and factual texts. This is the kind of things kids will read when they have jobs and careers.. not many people read beowolf as part of their job.. but many folks read medical journals.. and other scientific texts...

Most countries have a national standard for education.. I totally support the common core.

So far I am pleased with them. Our school has struggles meeting goals in our Bi-Lingual classes (dual language school) because the tests are only offered in English. Our students that are raised in a Spanish speaking home that are part of the program are still tested in English no matter how much English they are using in the class room. To give you an idea they start off in Kinder & 1st grade with a 10-15% English requirement. That means that the class spends that percentage of their learning day using English, the remainder is in Spanish, the goal is that by 6th grade they are fluent in both languages. Our students that are English speaking and in the program do the opposite, again with the goal of fluency in both languages. Our neighboring district does a similar program with Mandarin Chinese. Our school is working the "kinks" out with that situation because the classes that are behind tend to be the classes that are not proficient in English. My son and his kindergarten class flourished and all students met or exceeded the CC standards upon promotion. I also feel that those parents were involved in the class and their students and that makes a HUGE difference in any child's learning.

My son likes/needs the challenge. No to sound braggy here, but he left kindergarten reading at a level "F" this is a 1st grade reading level expectation. My son also has some 2nd and 3rd grade math skills because he was able to move forward on his own in his classroom. The way many of the teachers use and interpreted the achievement of the CC standards means a more independent learning/teaching style. We have a number of mixed grade classes because the CC standards allow for that. Just because the student is of age to be in 1st grade does not mean that their brain is that of a 1st grader and the grade 1/2 classes give those students more one on one and small group time with the teacher along with independent studies and more challenging work. It works well for those students who are ahead of the curve but do not quite make the "Gifted" program as much as for those that are behind and need more of a nudge and one on one attention.

I am no expert in the CC standards and am learning more about them with each year and expectation but I am glad we are pushing our kids - I just wish recess and break time was just a big of a priority.

It's one of the reasons I am even more thankful to homeschool.