Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Mom to Mom Mom to Mom

Common Core

Posted by on Mar. 13, 2014 at 5:52 PM
  • 13 Replies
I didnt know much about Common Core and was very curious why so many teachers and parents, at least in TN, are so against it. So I read this, the entire thing, about The Common Core.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Core_State_Standards_Initiative
Almost every state has fully adopted the program. Today Tennessee voted to put it off for 2 years.
I think Teach to the Test is whar is a bigger problem than trying to catch our kids up with other countries so they can be competitive and successful, which I beleive is at the root of Common Core.
Many well respected professionals etc have positive hopes and expectations for the program. It has been working in KY, one of the first states to implement it in 2010. It will take a long time I think and will need lots of tweaks along the way but overall it seems to me something needs to done to overhaul our education.system and I havent heard any better ideas.
What do you think, you should read the entire page on wikipedia if you dont know the details.
by on Mar. 13, 2014 at 5:52 PM
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Replies (1-10):
cakklove
by Member on Mar. 13, 2014 at 5:55 PM

I'm a kindergarten mom so I don't really have anything to compare it to.

JodyLane555
by Member on Mar. 13, 2014 at 6:01 PM
It is basically setting federal guidelines /standards on education expectations snd programs, cirriculum etc etc to be carried out nationwide. The goal is to have students better prepared for college and the real world and points out how old fashioned things really are with our current methods and goals. It is backed by Bill Gates, heads of major corporations, governors etc.
Some say it doesnt address specific demographic differences, that it wont change graduation rates or career readiness and more.
Jenn8604
by Bronze Member on Mar. 13, 2014 at 6:09 PM
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/4930714

Uncommon Core Heightens Race and Class Math Divide

Alan Singer 03/10/14 10:30 AM ET
The uproar over high-stakes testing associated with Common Core in New York State and complaints that children are being tested on things they were not taught, has obscured the deepening of racial, ethnic and class divisions in education in New York and the United States. Not only are the tests unfair, but according to a new study by the National Urban Research Group (NURG), math instruction and the educational system in the United States are deeply unfair, especially to Black and Latino students from poorer families.

The study conducted by the National Urban Research Group , The Common Core Promise: A Baseline Assessment of New York City's Implementation of Common Core Learning Standard, utilized data from 198,556 students in New York City Public Middle Schools who were administered the Common Core math assessment in Spring 2013. Based on their analysis of the data, NURG concluded, "If the 2013 Common Core math assessments are sensible proxies for grade-level expectations, then too many students in the New York City public school system are not prepared to meet the rigorous learning benchmarks. This is particularly the case for black students, Hispanic students, and students living in poverty."

The results on the Common Core Math tests are disturbing for all students, but especially disturbing when broken down by race, ethnicity, and social class. While the percentage of New York City middle school students scoring at proficiency level (Level 3 and 4) dropped for all grades and all groups, it was much steeper for students from minority and poorer families. For example, in the sixth grade, Hispanic students recorded the steepest declines. Their proficiency rate dropped from 50.4 percent in 2012 to 17.4 percent in 2013. Black students had the second largest decline amongst sixth graders. Their proficiency rate dropped from 45.8 percent in 2012 to 15.3 percent in 2013. White and Asian sixth graders declined, but not by as much, and their proficiencies rates were significantly higher at 49.6% and 62%. Larger percentages of White and Asian students scored at the highest proficiency level (4) while larger percentages of Black and Hispanic students scored at the "well below proficient" level (1). The report found that proficiency scores were similar for seventh and eighth grade.

The NURG study found other socio-economic factors, especially family income, were important in predicting student success on the math exams. For example, in Manhattan Community School District 2, located in the white upper-middle class neighborhoods below Central Park, including Wall Street, the Upper East Side, and Battery Park City, 52% of sixth graders, 45% of seventh graders, and 48.1% of eighth graders scored at Common Core proficiency. Less than a mile away, a majority of students in Central Harlem Community School District 5 are eligible for federal-assisted free meal programs or reduced priced meals. In Central Harlem, except for one school, sixth graders had a disastrous Common Core math proficient rate of 7.8%, seventh graders 2.8%, and eighth graders 6.9%. Again, the study found similar disparities in the Bronx, Brooklyn, Queens, and Staten Island.

According to the NURG study, "a total number of 51,618 students, more than one-fourth of New York City's middle school population, attend a school where 9 out of 10 students did not meet Common Core middle school math grade-level learning standards expectations. Nearly 90 percent of these lowest performing classrooms are located in three neighborhoods: the Bronx (40 percent), Central Brooklyn (23 percent), and Harlem (8 percent). A majority of families in these predominately African American and Latino neighborhoods of the Bronx (South Bronx), Brooklyn (including Central Brooklyn and Ocean Hill-Brownsville), and Manhattan (Central Harlem) struggle to meet their basic needs.

The NURG study found a striking "notable poverty dimension in percentages of Level 1 students." For example, in Bronx middle schools located in the poorest Congressional District in the United States where 72.3% of all children live in areas of concentrated poverty, 46.8% of sixth graders, 60.1% of seventh graders, and 51.9% of eighth graders scores at Level 1 which means they lack a basic understanding of grade-level Common Core math concepts.

One surprising finding that is despite the extravagant claims made for charter schools in a recent new massive publicity campaign, charter school students from poorer minority families did not score appreciably better than did similar students who attended traditional public schools n the same communities. In the Harlem Village Academy Charter School the passing rate for students on the math proficiency test dropped from 100% in 2012 to 21.3% in 2013, an astronomical decline of 78.7%. Two highly regarded KIPP academies also had declines in student performance of over 50%. Meanwhile the Medgar Evers College Preparatory School in the Crown Heights section of Brooklyn, the Mott Hall School in the Morrisania section of the Bronx, and the Queens Gateway to Health Science Secondary School in the Jamaica section of Queens outperformed neighboring charter schools.

The NURG study concluded that disparities in math performance would continue to grow as minority students from poorer families and communities graduated into high school without an understanding of basic mathematical concepts. It included teacher preparation as one of the factors contributing to unequal student performance, but it neglected to analyze curriculum differences in schools. Because of the pressure to boost student test scores, schools serving poorer and minority students have been transformed into giant test-prep factories, enriching publishers, but not significantly improving student understanding of math. As in the past, as students and teachers become more familiar with the tests, students in these schools will eventually score better - until tests are changed again.

The New York Times headline, "When 81% Passing Suddenly Becomes 18%," comes from then last time tests were changed in 2010, not because of the new Common Core assessments in 2013. That year the citywide proficiency rate in English fell from 69% to 42% and math proficiency rate fell from 82% to 54%.

While this study by the National Urban Research Group highlighted educational inequality in New York State, recent newspaper headlines show the national magnitude of the problem within and between states. For example, Kansas' State Supreme Court recently ruled that funding disparities between Kansas school districts violated the state Constitution. The court ordered the State Legislature to end the spending gap. Meanwhile a report released by the Center for American Progress found systematic underfunding of "higher-poverty districts" in six focus states including Illinois, Texas, New York, Pennsylvania, Missouri, and North Carolina. The study concluded, "children attending school in higher-poverty districts still have substantially less access to state and local revenue than children attending school in lower-poverty districts."

The disparities between states are even greater. In 2010-2011 New York State, Alaska, New Jersey, Vermont, Wyoming, and Connecticut all spend more than $15,000 per pupil, however 25 states spent less than $10,000 per student. The five lowest spenders were Mississippi, Arizona, Oklahoma, Idaho, and Utah.

One problem may be that U.S. politicians really do not want children from poorer minority families to learn to do math. If they could understand these numbers they would be outraged and blatant, systemic educational inequality might not be allowed to continue.
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
Jenn8604
by Bronze Member on Mar. 13, 2014 at 6:14 PM
http://thefederalist.com/2014/03/06/if-anything-common-core-teaches-kids-to-hate-the-constitution/?utm_source=The+Federalist+List&utm_campaign=df3e1845a4-RSS_DAILY_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_cfcb868ceb-df3e1845a4-78902429

If Anything, Common Core Teaches Kids to Hate the Constitution

By Joy Pullmann

One of the fairy tales central-planning lovers spin about Common Core K-12 curriculum and testing mandates is that they will “reinvigorate[e] the democratic purpose of public education.”

“The Common Core identifies three texts—and only three texts—that every American student must read: the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution (Preamble and Bill of Rights), and Abraham Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Address,” Ross Wiener, a vice president at the liberal Aspen Institute, gushes further in The Atlantic.

He lauds the “commitment in the Common Core to the democratic mission of public schools.” When liberals are suddenly super-excited about teaching the Constitution, it’s time to raise the suspicious flag, especially from someone who doesn’t seem to realize that it deliberately restrains our country from operating as a democracy. (For the record, Wiener describes the United States as a democracy 12 times and never anything else. He must have never read about ancient Athens—and neither will kids at Common Core’s behest.)

Should conservatives get equally giddy over Common Core’s “once-in-a-generation opportunity to redefine and reprioritize the special role that schools play in preparing students for active civic participation”? Not unless we like perpetuating public schools as recruitment centers for leftist ground troops.

To borrow a metaphor that my farmer father used when we kids were trying to convince him to let us watch a movie or read a book he thought was destructive to our minds and morals: “If I made delicious brownies and just put a bit of manure in it, would you eat it?” In this case, it’s more like serving kids a steaming pile of manure with brownie inside somewhere—Common Core, of course, being the poo and our founding documents being the brownies. We can get kids to read things they should in school without also forcing them to endure the mediocre-quality education Common Core perpetuates, which will not prepare students for a four-year college or a STEM career. If we agree that people make better citizens with a good education, we have to insist kids get the best we can offer them, which even according to Common Core supporters are the standards of California, Indiana, and Massachusetts, which academically trump Common Core.

Further, Wiener either in ignorance or deliberately he does not mention in what context Common Core would have children read our founding documents. Fortunately for informed debate, Hillsdale College history professor Dr. Terrence Moore has thoroughly examined Common Core’s mandates in this regard, and they are shocking. “The texts have been artfully selected to convey a particular bias against the Founding Fathers,” the former Marine lieutenant writes in his recent book, The Story-Killers. He notes that the first mention of the Constitution is in middle school, and Common Core only recommends that students read the Preamble and First Amendment. From the chapter entitled “Superficiality and Bias”:

The Common Core authors apparently do not think that middle school students, even eighth graders, can handle the Constitution as a whole. So they recommend the Preamble, which, of course, could have already been memorized by fourth graders….As a point of comparison, the Core Knowledge Sequence, a well-known K-8 curriculum put out by the Core Knowledge Foundation, requires eighth graders to study the entire Constitution…the entire Bill of Rights and Amendments 13 and 19, and the Marbury v. Madison decision.

While the Preamble and First Amendment are listed at the top of [Common Core’s] list of 6 -8 informational texts, a modern book called Words We Live By: Your Annotated Guide to the Constitution by Linda R. Monk is listed below…On page 95 of Appendix B, where a selection is given from Monk’s guide, we find what the Common Core authors want students to think about the Constitution: ‘…For a sense of the evolving nature of the Constitution, we need look no further than the first three words of the document’s preamble: “We the People.” When the Founding Fathers used this phrase in 1787, they did not have in mind the majority of America’s citizens…’ [The quotation continues in this fashion.] So there you have it —from the Supreme Court’s ‘first African American’ justice. The Founding Fathers were misogynists and racists. Thus, the nature of the Constitution must be ‘evolving.’

Moore goes on to show how Monk’s work is a biased liberal hatchet job against history and how Common Core repeats this exercise later when recommending another similar work to interpret the Bill of Rights for students, which essentially rips into the founders for “hypocrisy, deception, and racism.” See more here. No contrary interpretation of these founding documents is recommended by Common Core, not even the careful vindication of Abraham Lincoln some decades later. So, yes, Common Core requires kids to read the Constitution et al, but in a manner that will predispose impressionable children against it. So that’s why “conservatives” like Jeb Bush and Mike Huckabee support Common Core, right? Like other folks, they continue to project their curricular fantasies onto Common Core rather than reading what it actually says.

The Constitution-hating inside Common Core makes Wiener’s suggestion that “citizenship should be part of how students are tested on the standards” rather frightening, especially since many of the same people and groups that wrote the standards are now writing its tests. Indeed, his sudden concern for highlighting the “good” in Common Core looks especially self-serving when you notice that Aspen is a long-time recipient of money from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and the latter has essentially bankrolled Common Core from the get-go, including a fancy-pantsy, hush-hush, millions-of-dollars communications push this spring. Those well-paid, well-connected op-ed placers are working overtime.

Wiener also makes a number of high-minded, conservative-sounding but empty statements about “educating young people for citizenship” and “studying seminal documents of our democracy,” but no matter how you dress it up, poop is still poop and my kids ain’t eating it.

Joy Pullmann is an education research fellow at The Heartland Institute and a 2013 Robert Novak journalism fellow for in-depth reporting on Common Core.
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
Jenn8604
by Bronze Member on Mar. 13, 2014 at 6:21 PM
http://www.cato.org/blog/budget-proposal-its-not-just-about-core-coercion-anymore

Common Core End Game by Neal McCluskey

For far too long a big part of the Common Core debate has been about establishing simple fact: the federal government provided serious coercion to get states to adopt the Core, and the Core’s creators asked for such arm twisting. Indeed, just yesterday, Andy Smarick at the Core-supporting Thomas B. Fordham Institute lamented that the write-up for President Obama’s education budget proposal gives the administration credit for widespread Core adoption. Wrote Smarick: “The anti-Common Core forces will likely use this language as evidence that Common Core was federally driven.” Of course it was federally driven, by Race to the Top (RTTT) and No Child Left Behind (NCLB) waivers! But the budget proposal tells us far more than that.

The big story in the proposal is – or, at least, should be – that the president almost certainly wants to make the Core permanent by attaching annual federal funding to its use, and to performance on related tests. Just as the administration called for in its 2010 NCLB reauthorization proposal, POTUS wants to employ more than a one-time program, or temporary waivers, to impose “college and career-ready standards,” which–thanks to RTTT and waivers–is essentially synonymous with Common Core. In fact, President Obama proposes changing Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act – of which NCLB is just the most recent reauthorization – to a program called “College- and Career-Ready Students,” with an annual appropriation of over $14 billion.

This was utterly predictable. Core opponents, who are so often smeared as conspiracy mongers, know full well both what the President has proposed in the past, and how government accumulates power over time. RTTT was the foot in the door, and once most states were using the same standards and tests, there was little question what Washington would eventually say: “Since everyone’s using the same tests and standards anyway, might as well make federal policy based on that.” Perhaps given the scorching heat the Common Core has been taking lately, most people didn’t expect the administration to make the move so soon, but rational people knew it would eventually come. Indeed, the “tripod” of standards, tests, and accountability that many Core-ites believe is needed to make “standards-based reform” function, logically demands federal control. After all, a major lesson of NCLB is that states will not hold themselves accountable for setting and clearing high academic bars.

While it’s a crucial fact, the full story on the Common Core isn’t that the feds coerced adoption. It is that the end game is almost certainly complete federal control by connecting national standards and tests to annual federal funding. And that, it is now quite clear, is no conspiracy theory.
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
JodyLane555
by Member on Mar. 13, 2014 at 6:42 PM
isnt that the whole point?? to level the playing field for ALL students? Its so unequal now and it will take time but isnt the ultimate goal to CHANGE the status quo??

Quoting Jenn8604: http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/4930714

Uncommon Core Heightens Race and Class Math Divide

Alan Singer 03/10/14 10:30 AM ET
The uproar over high-stakes testing associated with Common Core in New York State and complaints that children are being tested on things they were not taught, has obscured the deepening of racial, ethnic and class divisions in education in New York and the United States. Not only are the tests unfair, but according to a new study by the National Urban Research Group (NURG), math instruction and the educational system in the United States are deeply unfair, especially to Black and Latino students from poorer families.

The study conducted by the National Urban Research Group , The Common Core Promise: A Baseline Assessment of New York City's Implementation of Common Core Learning Standard, utilized data from 198,556 students in New York City Public Middle Schools who were administered the Common Core math assessment in Spring 2013. Based on their analysis of the data, NURG concluded, "If the 2013 Common Core math assessments are sensible proxies for grade-level expectations, then too many students in the New York City public school system are not prepared to meet the rigorous learning benchmarks. This is particularly the case for black students, Hispanic students, and students living in poverty."

The results on the Common Core Math tests are disturbing for all students, but especially disturbing when broken down by race, ethnicity, and social class. While the percentage of New York City middle school students scoring at proficiency level (Level 3 and 4) dropped for all grades and all groups, it was much steeper for students from minority and poorer families. For example, in the sixth grade, Hispanic students recorded the steepest declines. Their proficiency rate dropped from 50.4 percent in 2012 to 17.4 percent in 2013. Black students had the second largest decline amongst sixth graders. Their proficiency rate dropped from 45.8 percent in 2012 to 15.3 percent in 2013. White and Asian sixth graders declined, but not by as much, and their proficiencies rates were significantly higher at 49.6% and 62%. Larger percentages of White and Asian students scored at the highest proficiency level (4) while larger percentages of Black and Hispanic students scored at the "well below proficient" level (1). The report found that proficiency scores were similar for seventh and eighth grade.

The NURG study found other socio-economic factors, especially family income, were important in predicting student success on the math exams. For example, in Manhattan Community School District 2, located in the white upper-middle class neighborhoods below Central Park, including Wall Street, the Upper East Side, and Battery Park City, 52% of sixth graders, 45% of seventh graders, and 48.1% of eighth graders scored at Common Core proficiency. Less than a mile away, a majority of students in Central Harlem Community School District 5 are eligible for federal-assisted free meal programs or reduced priced meals. In Central Harlem, except for one school, sixth graders had a disastrous Common Core math proficient rate of 7.8%, seventh graders 2.8%, and eighth graders 6.9%. Again, the study found similar disparities in the Bronx, Brooklyn, Queens, and Staten Island.

According to the NURG study, "a total number of 51,618 students, more than one-fourth of New York City's middle school population, attend a school where 9 out of 10 students did not meet Common Core middle school math grade-level learning standards expectations. Nearly 90 percent of these lowest performing classrooms are located in three neighborhoods: the Bronx (40 percent), Central Brooklyn (23 percent), and Harlem (8 percent). A majority of families in these predominately African American and Latino neighborhoods of the Bronx (South Bronx), Brooklyn (including Central Brooklyn and Ocean Hill-Brownsville), and Manhattan (Central Harlem) struggle to meet their basic needs.

The NURG study found a striking "notable poverty dimension in percentages of Level 1 students." For example, in Bronx middle schools located in the poorest Congressional District in the United States where 72.3% of all children live in areas of concentrated poverty, 46.8% of sixth graders, 60.1% of seventh graders, and 51.9% of eighth graders scores at Level 1 which means they lack a basic understanding of grade-level Common Core math concepts.

One surprising finding that is despite the extravagant claims made for charter schools in a recent new massive publicity campaign, charter school students from poorer minority families did not score appreciably better than did similar students who attended traditional public schools n the same communities. In the Harlem Village Academy Charter School the passing rate for students on the math proficiency test dropped from 100% in 2012 to 21.3% in 2013, an astronomical decline of 78.7%. Two highly regarded KIPP academies also had declines in student performance of over 50%. Meanwhile the Medgar Evers College Preparatory School in the Crown Heights section of Brooklyn, the Mott Hall School in the Morrisania section of the Bronx, and the Queens Gateway to Health Science Secondary School in the Jamaica section of Queens outperformed neighboring charter schools.

The NURG study concluded that disparities in math performance would continue to grow as minority students from poorer families and communities graduated into high school without an understanding of basic mathematical concepts. It included teacher preparation as one of the factors contributing to unequal student performance, but it neglected to analyze curriculum differences in schools. Because of the pressure to boost student test scores, schools serving poorer and minority students have been transformed into giant test-prep factories, enriching publishers, but not significantly improving student understanding of math. As in the past, as students and teachers become more familiar with the tests, students in these schools will eventually score better - until tests are changed again.

The New York Times headline, "When 81% Passing Suddenly Becomes 18%," comes from then last time tests were changed in 2010, not because of the new Common Core assessments in 2013. That year the citywide proficiency rate in English fell from 69% to 42% and math proficiency rate fell from 82% to 54%.

While this study by the National Urban Research Group highlighted educational inequality in New York State, recent newspaper headlines show the national magnitude of the problem within and between states. For example, Kansas' State Supreme Court recently ruled that funding disparities between Kansas school districts violated the state Constitution. The court ordered the State Legislature to end the spending gap. Meanwhile a report released by the Center for American Progress found systematic underfunding of "higher-poverty districts" in six focus states including Illinois, Texas, New York, Pennsylvania, Missouri, and North Carolina. The study concluded, "children attending school in higher-poverty districts still have substantially less access to state and local revenue than children attending school in lower-poverty districts."

The disparities between states are even greater. In 2010-2011 New York State, Alaska, New Jersey, Vermont, Wyoming, and Connecticut all spend more than $15,000 per pupil, however 25 states spent less than $10,000 per student. The five lowest spenders were Mississippi, Arizona, Oklahoma, Idaho, and Utah.

One problem may be that U.S. politicians really do not want children from poorer minority families to learn to do math. If they could understand these numbers they would be outraged and blatant, systemic educational inequality might not be allowed to continue.
JodyLane555
by Member on Mar. 13, 2014 at 6:43 PM
This is a completely biased point of view. period.

Quoting Jenn8604: http://thefederalist.com/2014/03/06/if-anything-common-core-teaches-kids-to-hate-the-constitution/?utm_source=The+Federalist+List&utm_campaign=df3e1845a4-RSS_DAILY_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_cfcb868ceb-df3e1845a4-78902429

If Anything, Common Core Teaches Kids to Hate the Constitution

By Joy Pullmann

One of the fairy tales central-planning lovers spin about Common Core K-12 curriculum and testing mandates is that they will “reinvigorate[e] the democratic purpose of public education.”

“The Common Core identifies three texts—and only three texts—that every American student must read: the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution (Preamble and Bill of Rights), and Abraham Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Address,” Ross Wiener, a vice president at the liberal Aspen Institute, gushes further in The Atlantic.

He lauds the “commitment in the Common Core to the democratic mission of public schools.” When liberals are suddenly super-excited about teaching the Constitution, it’s time to raise the suspicious flag, especially from someone who doesn’t seem to realize that it deliberately restrains our country from operating as a democracy. (For the record, Wiener describes the United States as a democracy 12 times and never anything else. He must have never read about ancient Athens—and neither will kids at Common Core’s behest.)

Should conservatives get equally giddy over Common Core’s “once-in-a-generation opportunity to redefine and reprioritize the special role that schools play in preparing students for active civic participation”? Not unless we like perpetuating public schools as recruitment centers for leftist ground troops.

To borrow a metaphor that my farmer father used when we kids were trying to convince him to let us watch a movie or read a book he thought was destructive to our minds and morals: “If I made delicious brownies and just put a bit of manure in it, would you eat it?” In this case, it’s more like serving kids a steaming pile of manure with brownie inside somewhere—Common Core, of course, being the poo and our founding documents being the brownies. We can get kids to read things they should in school without also forcing them to endure the mediocre-quality education Common Core perpetuates, which will not prepare students for a four-year college or a STEM career. If we agree that people make better citizens with a good education, we have to insist kids get the best we can offer them, which even according to Common Core supporters are the standards of California, Indiana, and Massachusetts, which academically trump Common Core.

Further, Wiener either in ignorance or deliberately he does not mention in what context Common Core would have children read our founding documents. Fortunately for informed debate, Hillsdale College history professor Dr. Terrence Moore has thoroughly examined Common Core’s mandates in this regard, and they are shocking. “The texts have been artfully selected to convey a particular bias against the Founding Fathers,” the former Marine lieutenant writes in his recent book, The Story-Killers. He notes that the first mention of the Constitution is in middle school, and Common Core only recommends that students read the Preamble and First Amendment. From the chapter entitled “Superficiality and Bias”:

The Common Core authors apparently do not think that middle school students, even eighth graders, can handle the Constitution as a whole. So they recommend the Preamble, which, of course, could have already been memorized by fourth graders….As a point of comparison, the Core Knowledge Sequence, a well-known K-8 curriculum put out by the Core Knowledge Foundation, requires eighth graders to study the entire Constitution…the entire Bill of Rights and Amendments 13 and 19, and the Marbury v. Madison decision.

While the Preamble and First Amendment are listed at the top of [Common Core’s] list of 6 -8 informational texts, a modern book called Words We Live By: Your Annotated Guide to the Constitution by Linda R. Monk is listed below…On page 95 of Appendix B, where a selection is given from Monk’s guide, we find what the Common Core authors want students to think about the Constitution: ‘…For a sense of the evolving nature of the Constitution, we need look no further than the first three words of the document’s preamble: “We the People.” When the Founding Fathers used this phrase in 1787, they did not have in mind the majority of America’s citizens…’ [The quotation continues in this fashion.] So there you have it —from the Supreme Court’s ‘first African American’ justice. The Founding Fathers were misogynists and racists. Thus, the nature of the Constitution must be ‘evolving.’

Moore goes on to show how Monk’s work is a biased liberal hatchet job against history and how Common Core repeats this exercise later when recommending another similar work to interpret the Bill of Rights for students, which essentially rips into the founders for “hypocrisy, deception, and racism.” See more here. No contrary interpretation of these founding documents is recommended by Common Core, not even the careful vindication of Abraham Lincoln some decades later. So, yes, Common Core requires kids to read the Constitution et al, but in a manner that will predispose impressionable children against it. So that’s why “conservatives” like Jeb Bush and Mike Huckabee support Common Core, right? Like other folks, they continue to project their curricular fantasies onto Common Core rather than reading what it actually says.

The Constitution-hating inside Common Core makes Wiener’s suggestion that “citizenship should be part of how students are tested on the standards” rather frightening, especially since many of the same people and groups that wrote the standards are now writing its tests. Indeed, his sudden concern for highlighting the “good” in Common Core looks especially self-serving when you notice that Aspen is a long-time recipient of money from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and the latter has essentially bankrolled Common Core from the get-go, including a fancy-pantsy, hush-hush, millions-of-dollars communications push this spring. Those well-paid, well-connected op-ed placers are working overtime.

Wiener also makes a number of high-minded, conservative-sounding but empty statements about “educating young people for citizenship” and “studying seminal documents of our democracy,” but no matter how you dress it up, poop is still poop and my kids ain’t eating it.

Joy Pullmann is an education research fellow at The Heartland Institute and a 2013 Robert Novak journalism fellow for in-depth reporting on Common Core.
Jenn8604
by Bronze Member on Mar. 13, 2014 at 6:43 PM
It WON'T is the problem. It will INCREASE the divide. Not decrease it.

Quoting JodyLane555: isnt that the whole point?? to level the playing field for ALL students? Its so unequal now and it will take time but isnt the ultimate goal to CHANGE the status quo??

Quoting Jenn8604: http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/4930714

Uncommon Core Heightens Race and Class Math Divide

Alan Singer 03/10/14 10:30 AM ET
The uproar over high-stakes testing associated with Common Core in New York State and complaints that children are being tested on things they were not taught, has obscured the deepening of racial, ethnic and class divisions in education in New York and the United States. Not only are the tests unfair, but according to a new study by the National Urban Research Group (NURG), math instruction and the educational system in the United States are deeply unfair, especially to Black and Latino students from poorer families.

The study conducted by the National Urban Research Group , The Common Core Promise: A Baseline Assessment of New York City's Implementation of Common Core Learning Standard, utilized data from 198,556 students in New York City Public Middle Schools who were administered the Common Core math assessment in Spring 2013. Based on their analysis of the data, NURG concluded, "If the 2013 Common Core math assessments are sensible proxies for grade-level expectations, then too many students in the New York City public school system are not prepared to meet the rigorous learning benchmarks. This is particularly the case for black students, Hispanic students, and students living in poverty."

The results on the Common Core Math tests are disturbing for all students, but especially disturbing when broken down by race, ethnicity, and social class. While the percentage of New York City middle school students scoring at proficiency level (Level 3 and 4) dropped for all grades and all groups, it was much steeper for students from minority and poorer families. For example, in the sixth grade, Hispanic students recorded the steepest declines. Their proficiency rate dropped from 50.4 percent in 2012 to 17.4 percent in 2013. Black students had the second largest decline amongst sixth graders. Their proficiency rate dropped from 45.8 percent in 2012 to 15.3 percent in 2013. White and Asian sixth graders declined, but not by as much, and their proficiencies rates were significantly higher at 49.6% and 62%. Larger percentages of White and Asian students scored at the highest proficiency level (4) while larger percentages of Black and Hispanic students scored at the "well below proficient" level (1). The report found that proficiency scores were similar for seventh and eighth grade.

The NURG study found other socio-economic factors, especially family income, were important in predicting student success on the math exams. For example, in Manhattan Community School District 2, located in the white upper-middle class neighborhoods below Central Park, including Wall Street, the Upper East Side, and Battery Park City, 52% of sixth graders, 45% of seventh graders, and 48.1% of eighth graders scored at Common Core proficiency. Less than a mile away, a majority of students in Central Harlem Community School District 5 are eligible for federal-assisted free meal programs or reduced priced meals. In Central Harlem, except for one school, sixth graders had a disastrous Common Core math proficient rate of 7.8%, seventh graders 2.8%, and eighth graders 6.9%. Again, the study found similar disparities in the Bronx, Brooklyn, Queens, and Staten Island.

According to the NURG study, "a total number of 51,618 students, more than one-fourth of New York City's middle school population, attend a school where 9 out of 10 students did not meet Common Core middle school math grade-level learning standards expectations. Nearly 90 percent of these lowest performing classrooms are located in three neighborhoods: the Bronx (40 percent), Central Brooklyn (23 percent), and Harlem (8 percent). A majority of families in these predominately African American and Latino neighborhoods of the Bronx (South Bronx), Brooklyn (including Central Brooklyn and Ocean Hill-Brownsville), and Manhattan (Central Harlem) struggle to meet their basic needs.

The NURG study found a striking "notable poverty dimension in percentages of Level 1 students." For example, in Bronx middle schools located in the poorest Congressional District in the United States where 72.3% of all children live in areas of concentrated poverty, 46.8% of sixth graders, 60.1% of seventh graders, and 51.9% of eighth graders scores at Level 1 which means they lack a basic understanding of grade-level Common Core math concepts.

One surprising finding that is despite the extravagant claims made for charter schools in a recent new massive publicity campaign, charter school students from poorer minority families did not score appreciably better than did similar students who attended traditional public schools n the same communities. In the Harlem Village Academy Charter School the passing rate for students on the math proficiency test dropped from 100% in 2012 to 21.3% in 2013, an astronomical decline of 78.7%. Two highly regarded KIPP academies also had declines in student performance of over 50%. Meanwhile the Medgar Evers College Preparatory School in the Crown Heights section of Brooklyn, the Mott Hall School in the Morrisania section of the Bronx, and the Queens Gateway to Health Science Secondary School in the Jamaica section of Queens outperformed neighboring charter schools.

The NURG study concluded that disparities in math performance would continue to grow as minority students from poorer families and communities graduated into high school without an understanding of basic mathematical concepts. It included teacher preparation as one of the factors contributing to unequal student performance, but it neglected to analyze curriculum differences in schools. Because of the pressure to boost student test scores, schools serving poorer and minority students have been transformed into giant test-prep factories, enriching publishers, but not significantly improving student understanding of math. As in the past, as students and teachers become more familiar with the tests, students in these schools will eventually score better - until tests are changed again.

The New York Times headline, "When 81% Passing Suddenly Becomes 18%," comes from then last time tests were changed in 2010, not because of the new Common Core assessments in 2013. That year the citywide proficiency rate in English fell from 69% to 42% and math proficiency rate fell from 82% to 54%.

While this study by the National Urban Research Group highlighted educational inequality in New York State, recent newspaper headlines show the national magnitude of the problem within and between states. For example, Kansas' State Supreme Court recently ruled that funding disparities between Kansas school districts violated the state Constitution. The court ordered the State Legislature to end the spending gap. Meanwhile a report released by the Center for American Progress found systematic underfunding of "higher-poverty districts" in six focus states including Illinois, Texas, New York, Pennsylvania, Missouri, and North Carolina. The study concluded, "children attending school in higher-poverty districts still have substantially less access to state and local revenue than children attending school in lower-poverty districts."

The disparities between states are even greater. In 2010-2011 New York State, Alaska, New Jersey, Vermont, Wyoming, and Connecticut all spend more than $15,000 per pupil, however 25 states spent less than $10,000 per student. The five lowest spenders were Mississippi, Arizona, Oklahoma, Idaho, and Utah.

One problem may be that U.S. politicians really do not want children from poorer minority families to learn to do math. If they could understand these numbers they would be outraged and blatant, systemic educational inequality might not be allowed to continue.
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
JodyLane555
by Member on Mar. 13, 2014 at 6:45 PM
if this is true then thats really messed up.....


While it’s a crucial fact, the full story on the Common Core isn’t that the feds coerced adoption. It is that the end game is almost certainly complete federal control by connecting national standards and tests to annual federal funding. And that, it is now quite clear, is no conspiracy theory. rep

Quoting Jenn8604: http://www.cato.org/blog/budget-proposal-its-not-just-about-core-coercion-anymore

Common Core End Game by Neal McCluskey

For far too long a big part of the Common Core debate has been about establishing simple fact: the federal government provided serious coercion to get states to adopt the Core, and the Core’s creators asked for such arm twisting. Indeed, just yesterday, Andy Smarick at the Core-supporting Thomas B. Fordham Institute lamented that the write-up for President Obama’s education budget proposal gives the administration credit for widespread Core adoption. Wrote Smarick: “The anti-Common Core forces will likely use this language as evidence that Common Core was federally driven.” Of course it was federally driven, by Race to the Top (RTTT) and No Child Left Behind (NCLB) waivers! But the budget proposal tells us far more than that.

The big story in the proposal is – or, at least, should be – that the president almost certainly wants to make the Core permanent by attaching annual federal funding to its use, and to performance on related tests. Just as the administration called for in its 2010 NCLB reauthorization proposal, POTUS wants to employ more than a one-time program, or temporary waivers, to impose “college and career-ready standards,” which–thanks to RTTT and waivers–is essentially synonymous with Common Core. In fact, President Obama proposes changing Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act – of which NCLB is just the most recent reauthorization – to a program called “College- and Career-Ready Students,” with an annual appropriation of over $14 billion.

This was utterly predictable. Core opponents, who are so often smeared as conspiracy mongers, know full well both what the President has proposed in the past, and how government accumulates power over time. RTTT was the foot in the door, and once most states were using the same standards and tests, there was little question what Washington would eventually say: “Since everyone’s using the same tests and standards anyway, might as well make federal policy based on that.” Perhaps given the scorching heat the Common Core has been taking lately, most people didn’t expect the administration to make the move so soon, but rational people knew it would eventually come. Indeed, the “tripod” of standards, tests, and accountability that many Core-ites believe is needed to make “standards-based reform” function, logically demands federal control. After all, a major lesson of NCLB is that states will not hold themselves accountable for setting and clearing high academic bars.

While it’s a crucial fact, the full story on the Common Core isn’t that the feds coerced adoption. It is that the end game is almost certainly complete federal control by connecting national standards and tests to annual federal funding. And that, it is now quite clear, is no conspiracy theory.
JodyLane555
by Member on Mar. 13, 2014 at 6:46 PM
How? I dont see it?

Quoting Jenn8604: It WON'T is the problem. It will INCREASE the divide. Not decrease it.

Quoting JodyLane555: isnt that the whole point?? to level the playing field for ALL students? Its so unequal now and it will take time but isnt the ultimate goal to CHANGE the status quo??

Quoting Jenn8604: http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/4930714

Uncommon Core Heightens Race and Class Math Divide

Alan Singer 03/10/14 10:30 AM ET
The uproar over high-stakes testing associated with Common Core in New York State and complaints that children are being tested on things they were not taught, has obscured the deepening of racial, ethnic and class divisions in education in New York and the United States. Not only are the tests unfair, but according to a new study by the National Urban Research Group (NURG), math instruction and the educational system in the United States are deeply unfair, especially to Black and Latino students from poorer families.

The study conducted by the National Urban Research Group , The Common Core Promise: A Baseline Assessment of New York City's Implementation of Common Core Learning Standard, utilized data from 198,556 students in New York City Public Middle Schools who were administered the Common Core math assessment in Spring 2013. Based on their analysis of the data, NURG concluded, "If the 2013 Common Core math assessments are sensible proxies for grade-level expectations, then too many students in the New York City public school system are not prepared to meet the rigorous learning benchmarks. This is particularly the case for black students, Hispanic students, and students living in poverty."

The results on the Common Core Math tests are disturbing for all students, but especially disturbing when broken down by race, ethnicity, and social class. While the percentage of New York City middle school students scoring at proficiency level (Level 3 and 4) dropped for all grades and all groups, it was much steeper for students from minority and poorer families. For example, in the sixth grade, Hispanic students recorded the steepest declines. Their proficiency rate dropped from 50.4 percent in 2012 to 17.4 percent in 2013. Black students had the second largest decline amongst sixth graders. Their proficiency rate dropped from 45.8 percent in 2012 to 15.3 percent in 2013. White and Asian sixth graders declined, but not by as much, and their proficiencies rates were significantly higher at 49.6% and 62%. Larger percentages of White and Asian students scored at the highest proficiency level (4) while larger percentages of Black and Hispanic students scored at the "well below proficient" level (1). The report found that proficiency scores were similar for seventh and eighth grade.

The NURG study found other socio-economic factors, especially family income, were important in predicting student success on the math exams. For example, in Manhattan Community School District 2, located in the white upper-middle class neighborhoods below Central Park, including Wall Street, the Upper East Side, and Battery Park City, 52% of sixth graders, 45% of seventh graders, and 48.1% of eighth graders scored at Common Core proficiency. Less than a mile away, a majority of students in Central Harlem Community School District 5 are eligible for federal-assisted free meal programs or reduced priced meals. In Central Harlem, except for one school, sixth graders had a disastrous Common Core math proficient rate of 7.8%, seventh graders 2.8%, and eighth graders 6.9%. Again, the study found similar disparities in the Bronx, Brooklyn, Queens, and Staten Island.

According to the NURG study, "a total number of 51,618 students, more than one-fourth of New York City's middle school population, attend a school where 9 out of 10 students did not meet Common Core middle school math grade-level learning standards expectations. Nearly 90 percent of these lowest performing classrooms are located in three neighborhoods: the Bronx (40 percent), Central Brooklyn (23 percent), and Harlem (8 percent). A majority of families in these predominately African American and Latino neighborhoods of the Bronx (South Bronx), Brooklyn (including Central Brooklyn and Ocean Hill-Brownsville), and Manhattan (Central Harlem) struggle to meet their basic needs.

The NURG study found a striking "notable poverty dimension in percentages of Level 1 students." For example, in Bronx middle schools located in the poorest Congressional District in the United States where 72.3% of all children live in areas of concentrated poverty, 46.8% of sixth graders, 60.1% of seventh graders, and 51.9% of eighth graders scores at Level 1 which means they lack a basic understanding of grade-level Common Core math concepts.

One surprising finding that is despite the extravagant claims made for charter schools in a recent new massive publicity campaign, charter school students from poorer minority families did not score appreciably better than did similar students who attended traditional public schools n the same communities. In the Harlem Village Academy Charter School the passing rate for students on the math proficiency test dropped from 100% in 2012 to 21.3% in 2013, an astronomical decline of 78.7%. Two highly regarded KIPP academies also had declines in student performance of over 50%. Meanwhile the Medgar Evers College Preparatory School in the Crown Heights section of Brooklyn, the Mott Hall School in the Morrisania section of the Bronx, and the Queens Gateway to Health Science Secondary School in the Jamaica section of Queens outperformed neighboring charter schools.

The NURG study concluded that disparities in math performance would continue to grow as minority students from poorer families and communities graduated into high school without an understanding of basic mathematical concepts. It included teacher preparation as one of the factors contributing to unequal student performance, but it neglected to analyze curriculum differences in schools. Because of the pressure to boost student test scores, schools serving poorer and minority students have been transformed into giant test-prep factories, enriching publishers, but not significantly improving student understanding of math. As in the past, as students and teachers become more familiar with the tests, students in these schools will eventually score better - until tests are changed again.

The New York Times headline, "When 81% Passing Suddenly Becomes 18%," comes from then last time tests were changed in 2010, not because of the new Common Core assessments in 2013. That year the citywide proficiency rate in English fell from 69% to 42% and math proficiency rate fell from 82% to 54%.

While this study by the National Urban Research Group highlighted educational inequality in New York State, recent newspaper headlines show the national magnitude of the problem within and between states. For example, Kansas' State Supreme Court recently ruled that funding disparities between Kansas school districts violated the state Constitution. The court ordered the State Legislature to end the spending gap. Meanwhile a report released by the Center for American Progress found systematic underfunding of "higher-poverty districts" in six focus states including Illinois, Texas, New York, Pennsylvania, Missouri, and North Carolina. The study concluded, "children attending school in higher-poverty districts still have substantially less access to state and local revenue than children attending school in lower-poverty districts."

The disparities between states are even greater. In 2010-2011 New York State, Alaska, New Jersey, Vermont, Wyoming, and Connecticut all spend more than $15,000 per pupil, however 25 states spent less than $10,000 per student. The five lowest spenders were Mississippi, Arizona, Oklahoma, Idaho, and Utah.

One problem may be that U.S. politicians really do not want children from poorer minority families to learn to do math. If they could understand these numbers they would be outraged and blatant, systemic educational inequality might not be allowed to continue.
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)