Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
....... Race To The Top is going to make NCLB look like a walk in the park.
This is most definitely true. Quite honestly, I voted for Obama for many reasons and would not have voted for McCain/Palin for almost any reason at all: EXCEPT FOR THIS.
NCLB has done more damage to anything other than reading and math than any program in Federal history. School districts are literally destroying every program in the arts, every support structure, everything that is exciting about education to make literally and actually impossible targets all based on a series of tests that take place in 6 mornings during the whole year.
And as the poster says, RTTT is way worse by any known standard of measure. When they are done we will have no functional education system, no good teachers, and no one even remotely interested in going into public education. But it won't happen for about 15-20 years of gradual decline while they make the system just like McDonalds Restaurant's degree of standardization. Sure they make food. But would you want to eat it every day? And compared to a good Italian or French cuisine, god no!
Anyone know where I can get a copy of the chemistry standards? I found physical sceince and earth science but not chemistry. I'm really interested to see how the national standards compare to Michigan standards.
You might have to buy the book as it doesn't appear to be online
they make the system just like McDonalds Restaurant's degree of standardization
I both like and am troubled by this analogy, which is a good one. I call it the franchising of education, as the goal seems to be turning out the same product for every student, much as a Big Mac will be the same whether you are in Pennsylvania or Kansas. The problem is, you can't replicate the franchise experience with kids the way you can with food because the raw ingredients (the kids) are too different.
I haven't looked at these standards yet so I don't know if they are raising or lowering the bar, but it troubles me to see such an emphasis on the standardization of education.
The big thing that standardization should bring about is that kids who move from state to state have a chance to get the same education. As it is now, you can be a year ahead or a year behind or even just have some things you miss because you moved.
Of course, on the high school level Algebra I should be Algebra I should be Algebra I. If you don't have standards, some states teach only parts of Algebra I and call it Algebra I.
As for the original post: I am not against national standards as long as they are good ones and don't dumb things down. I can only speak for the life science section of the science standards, since that is my field. They seem to be ok for the most part.
What I do NOT like is the federal government browbeating states into using them. They want all the states to have the same standards so that they can make comparisons between states. OK fine, BUT, they want to take it further and use punitive measures against states, districts, teachers, and the colleges where the teachers went to school. I thought we learned from NCLB that punitive measures (i.e. withholding funds for poor performance) does NOT improve education in the US; however Race To The Top is going to make NCLB look like a walk in the park. Unfortunately we won't see the effects until Arne Duncan is long gone and someone else will probably get the blame.
Oh wow. THAT explains why the district I was just hired into was doing back flips to get me and why another district cold called me to see if I'd interview with them (both excellent districts). If you really want to integrate science and engineering, you need an engineer.
The big thing that standardization should bring about is that kids who move from state to state have a chance to get the same education. As it is now, you can be a year ahead or a year behind or even just have some things you miss because you moved.
Of course, on the high school level Algebra I should be Algebra I should be Algebra I. If you don't have standards, some states teach only parts of Algebra I and call it Algebra I.
If race to the top was only about standardization, that might be fine. Its not. Its about total control of the school from the federal level.
Frankly federal control can't be any worse than what we have now with state control and hodgepodge district control.
Personally, I prefer control at the federal level. That gives us one standard to attack and fix intead of 50 and 50 states to band together and work towards fixing it.
I see a lot of reference to National Standards in various core areas, e.g. NCTM, NCTE, etc. but nothing about the Common Core. Granted, they have only developed math and language arts, but here in Wyoming, we have adopted the Common Core for these 2 areas and look forward to additional areas being developed. I'm surprised Education World didn't mention them; they are pretty much the national standard now.
And they ARE much more rigorous than existing standards in nearly every state. We spent our summer mapping curriulum to "ramp up" instruction this school year. I look forward to seeing standardized test results next spring.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Common Core?
