Common core is a set of standards, not a curriculum.

The math issues that you've seen on the internet and maybe with your child's homework are not necessarily part of common core. There are a couple of important points here--first, in terms of training teachers and such, yes, common core was a disaster. The roll out was poorly done. Second, the "way we learned math" sucked for most students, and the evidence of that is in the US performance globally on math tests.

The basic idea, one many teachers seemed to miss, was that this approach to math was intended to give students a range of options in solving a problem. There wasn't one right way to do a problem, students could explore different methods and use one that worked for them. This of course did require some understanding of why the various methods work, but there's nothing bizarre or magical about it. You can memorize 7+8=15, or you can figure it out by reasoning that 7+3=10 and 8-3=5, and 10+5=15. Basically, in order to master math, you need to do more than memorize a matrix, you need to understand why it works. The neat thing is that you're getting an early introduction into how algebra works (x+y=(x-z)+(y+z)) so the move from arithmetic to algebra isn't quite so jarring. Number lines and other techniques work well for different kids as well.

The problem it seems to me occur when parents try to help their children (which I'm against doing--I think parents should be discouraged from helping with homework, indeed, I don't think there should be homework at least before Jr. High but never mind that) and it seems that teachers were insisting that students use one particular method and that other approaches were "wrong" which is exactly the opposite of what was supposed to be done.

To keep PARCC and dump common core makes no sense at all--if you keep PARCC, you're keeping common core, no matter what the governor says.

Interestingly, and perhaps somewhat under reported, is that PARCC was (and may still end up) to effectively replace the ACT and the SAT. If everyone in the nation was going to be evaluated according to the same set of standards, then the need for the ACT and the SAT would go away. The impact of this would be pretty interesting, but I think it might ever so slightly level the playing field, as the kind of SAT/ACT prep courses available to upper income kids would mean less. Obviously, they could do the same thing for PARCC, but since everyone would be dealing with PARCC from day 1, it probably wouldn't give such a huge advantage to those programs.

TenuredVulture wrote:The basic idea, one many teachers seemed to miss, was that this approach to math was intended to give students a range of options in solving a problem.

But it's not applied that way, at least in this state. And it's not the fault of the teachers but of the administrators. As you mentioned:

"it seems that teachers were insisting that students use one particular method and that other approaches were "wrong" which is exactly the opposite of what was supposed to be done."

That is how they've been instructed to teach and grade, by administrators, and if they don't do it that way they will be reviewed negatively and replaced with someone who will.

momadance wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:The basic idea, one many teachers seemed to miss, was that this approach to math was intended to give students a range of options in solving a problem.

But it's not applied that way, at least in this state. And it's not the fault of the teachers but of the administrators. As you mentioned:

"it seems that teachers were insisting that students use one particular method and that other approaches were "wrong" which is exactly the opposite of what was supposed to be done."

That is how they've been instructed to teach and grade, by administrators, and if they don't do it that way they will be reviewed negatively and replaced with someone who will.

I don't doubt it. The roll out, which was screwed up, was of course the responsibility of administrators, not teachers. Given that I've not heard from our patrons much on this, I'm optimistic that our district didn't actually screw this up too badly. One thing that's hugely frustrating to us is that the state sets goals for our district, under No Child, but those goals have changed several times in the past 5 years or so, and now with PARCC, we will not get results under maybe December at the earliest, and it's not clear how useful that information will be since we have no point of comparison. However, the state (AR) is considering dumping PARCC anyway. Of course, some will cheer this, but they'll be doing for dumb Michelle Malkin reasons, not because they're really interested in improving education.

There's no doubt in my mind that the PARCC testing itself takes far too much time, the transition to computerized testing from paper and pencil has been a hassle (and if it's computerized, why do we have to wait so long for the results?) But it seems to me if teaching to the test is necessary, something other than the test may be at issue here. That is, if you have a good understanding of the material, and the test is well designed, then you should be able to succeed on the test with minimal preparation.

It's not just Jersey, Maryland is the same way.

And every one of my daughter's teachers have said it's crap system, and that the adminstrators of the state education system were bought off by the Feds to implement this system. I think Maryland received close to a quarter billion dollars to implement this mess.

Good; I am glad the topic is actually being discussed now. First, there are nearly 600 school districts in NJ; they do not all operate like Atlantic City. If a teacher's job there is to get kids to pass PARCC rather than actually educate them, I am sad for both the teachers and their students. BUT, that situation is not the fault of the Common Core, it is the fault of Atlantic City's school administration.

Second, as TV so perfectly stated, the Common Core is nothing more than a set standards - i.e. Common Core State STANDARDS - that enumerate what a student is expected to know at each step through their educational journey. They are not a curriculum. In fact, my district's teachers all spent time writing THEIR OWN curriculum for their classes. Now, it was based on the expectations of the CCSS but they more or less had carte blanche to meet the standards in whatever way they wanted. How is it a bad thing to expect a second grader to be able to use a ruler or know how much two quarters and a dime makes or to expect an eighth grader to know how to measure the volume of a cylinder?

Third, this nonsense about the Common Core LOWERING the educational standards of our state needs to stop. New Jersey has had and continues to have some of the best schools in the country. The point of Common Core was to RAISE the educational standards of the states that are leap years behind states like New Jersey and Massachusetts. I know plenty of teachers and I would be hard-pressed to name more than one or two that are strongly opposed to the Common Core.

Lastly, we can all debate CCSS and PARCC until we are blue in the face but that debate may never include the biggest problem facing public education in New Jersey and across the country - poverty. Until somebody solves that issue, urban districts will always lag behind suburban districts and the white / non-white educational gap will persist. Sad but true.

Hastert was allegedly paying hush money to someone he sexually abused while he was a high school coach

pacino wrote:Hastert was paying hush money to someone he sexually abused while he was a high school coach

well I hope bad things happen to him

Much, much worse than I imagined. And I consider myself pretty good at imagining bad things.

TenuredVulture wrote:Much, much worse than I imagined. And I consider myself pretty good at imagining bad things.

The curse of being a Phillies fan.

For Squire and Bucky, here's a good article on the absurdity of structuring laws.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2014/03/24/the-federal-structuring-laws-are-smurfin-ridiculous/

Yeah, I see what Squire means now. I was naively assuming that the structuring had to be an attempt to avoid something else (i.e. be a 'secondary' offense) and not a crime with no other nefarious circumstances. We suck.

Really glad O'Malley has jumped in. Will probably be the Dem front runner for 2020 if Hilary loses.

Boy I doubt that

@notjessewalker: Nebraska gov says the repeal of the death penalty won't stop the state from proceeding with 10 executions

What an asshole.

uhm, hows that work

pacino wrote:uhm, hows that work

Anyone can build a guillotine, silly. Not rocket surgery.

Better yet: firing squad. Worked well in Cleveland

jerseyhoya wrote:Boy I doubt that

Well you wrong homie. O'Malley will have a strong pedigree and good name recognition if he can push Bernie Sanders to the side to be the annoyance in the race.

Someone who has done something more relevant in the 2014-2020 time span than having his replacement being a Republican in a deep blue state and then losing handily to Hillary will be the frontrunner in 2020.