What do you think about the traditional grading school system, do you think they should change it to pass/fail only?
I'm not in love with the current system, but going to pass/fail almost certainly isn't the answer. One idea to perhaps make it better is to go to standards-based grading (for a solid primer on the idea read Spencer (2012). Standards-based grading. Education Digest, 78(3), 4-10.). Standards-based grading, according to Spencer, "derives from the idea that teachers ought to have clearly defined academic goals for their students, be able to determine if they've met them, and then communicate that to students and parents." I'm not sold on standards-based grading, but the idea is intriguing.If I were practicing standards-based grading, I may send home a note that says:CCSS.ELA-Literacy.L.8.1a, Explain the function of verbals (gerunds, participles, infinitives) in general and their function in particular sentences: Jimmy has a good grasp of verbals and their usage in his writing, but he is unable to explain their function or use. We will continue to work with him in preparation for standardized testing.CCSS.ELA-Literacy.L.8.1b, Form and use verbs in the active and passive voice: Jimmy has no problem distinguishing between and using both active and passive voice.etc.Basically the idea is you rate students on how close they are to meeting the actual course goals; in the above example I used those set forth by the Common Core State Standards.What intrigues me about the idea is it enables you to clearly spell out in a meaningful way:1. What you expect the student to learn during this course.2. What the student has or hasn't learned so far.3. A plan of action to help the student reach all the goals set forth in #1.
Why did the schools in America switch to common core when as parents we have no clue how it works?
Common core is nothing really that new. It is just a set of standards.For example, here are three examples from Middle School Science:CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RST.6-8.1Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of science and technical texts.CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RST.6-8.2Determine the central ideas or conclusions of a text; provide an accurate summary of the text distinct from prior knowledge or opinions.CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RST.6-8.3Follow precisely a multistep procedure when carrying out experiments, taking measurements, or performing technical tasks.Really nothing new, groundbreaking, or scary.Common core or the “common part” just means that all states have the same standards so we can measure a student in AL against a student in NY.Curriculum is where the rubber hits the road. Curriculum is how to “teach the standards” and this gets confused with Common Core all the time. For example, the new “common core math”source: “That’s not how I learned it!” | Making Sense of Common Core Math - Lindamood-BellThis is not common core, old school, new school. Here is the standard from 3rd grade.Apply properties of operations as strategies to multiply and divide.Examples: If 6 × 4 = 24 is known, then 4 × 6 = 24 is also known. (Commutative property of multiplication.) 3 × 5 × 2 can be found by 3 × 5 = 15, then 15 × 2 = 30, or by 5 × 2 = 10, then 3 × 10 = 30. (Associative property of multiplication.) Knowing that 8 × 5 = 40 and 8 × 2 = 16, one can find 8 × 7 as 8 × (5 + 2) = (8 × 5) + (8 × 2) = 40 + 16 = 56. (Distributive property.)Nowhere does the standard say make a whacky rectangle and write numbers all around it. This is how the textbook creator and interpreter of the standard chose to teach kids how to learn the standard of multiplication.Also, Common Core does not include any booklists of books to read.Common core is just standards like, think, reason, multiply, divide, cite evidence etc…Where Common Core got a bad reputation isIt was forced down everyones throatsText book manufacturers slapped a sticker on the cover of the old textbooks that said, “Now with Common Core”I defy you to go into the Common Core standards and find anything you disagree with as a parent.However, if you look at the curriculum in your child’s textbook and teaching methods, you may find plenty that is wacky or disagreeable.
Is the Common Core left-wing or right-wing?
I agree with Max Morris; they are neither, and both.They are left-wing because they try to impose an equal standard on every child, which is very much a left-wing idea. By educating according to these common standards, you create a more equal, homogeneous society built on the same body of knowledge.They are right-wing because they allow children to compete against others on a national level, which is very much a right-wing idea. By educating according to these common standards, you provide the basis for objectively measuring and comparing individual academic performance.Thanks for A2A!
Can you, as an adult, do common core math?
Thanks for the a2a.Why yes, yes I can. You see, common core math really isn't all that different as per the actual math goes. The approach is different.In general common core math strives to bridge concrete reasoning (actually counting something, actually making 3 groups of 8 using manipulatives) and abstract algorithmic or algebraic reasoning with picture representations. For all who say CCSS isn't research based, tons if research on this process. And I would argue that many of my old school teachers would say “stuck? Draw a picture if what is happening”. The approach was there even then. It just now has a much greater focus.How much greater?As per the standards, students under 4th grade are supposed to do all math either using concrete methods, pictorial representations, or “strategies” (think of this like doubling tax to find tip)In 4th grade, addition and subtraction algorithms are on the table (aka the old way)In 5th multiplication algorithms are in the table (aka the old way)In 6th grade the division algorithms are allowed (aka… yup, the old way).So by 6th grade students *can*, according to the standards, do it the old way. But they have a bevy of other skills and strategies that they wouldn't otherwise have.So why so much drama? Curriculum publishers jump so fast to make curricula so they can be first. They put their spin on it, and interpreted standards and specifications before anyone really understood it. Then they state things like: you must use X strategy for this problem. This is not how students will be assessed (as I have graded open response and performance task for two years… the only place that how a student solves a problem that could be done). It is also against the mathematical practices that say to find patterns in multiple ways of thinking, to use appropriate skills strategically, to attend to precision etc etc.