I just read a shocking article about what Texas is discussing in terms of revamping their Social Studies curriculum and for their textbooks. As a Social Studies teacher, it is appalling that a specific political agenda would influence what is essentially revisionist history.
Check out the article:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/ynews_ts1253
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Friday, March 12, 2010
Conference call with Gene Wilhoit
Just got off of a conference call with CCSSO Executive Director Gene Wilhoit. He wanted to discuss the Common Core State Standards Initiative (CCSSI) and answer questions that teachers had over it. I know I have said this many times before, but it is great to know that those who are creating and pushing for these reforms are reaching out to teachers and want their input. Having never had an audience with people in the position of Gene or Sec. of Education Duncan before this, it is comforting to know that teacher's opinions are still valued when it comes to national educational policies.
The Common Core Standards, as of right now, are just for Language Arts and Math. Science, Art, and others are currently meeting and Social Studies, according to Gene, "will be the trailer to this," merely because there is a lot of disagreement over its content. The CCSSI came out of the very different state standards that are currently in place in terms of proficiency. The goal was to determine what states can agree upon in proficiency and content standards and come up with "common" core standards amongst all states. It was great to hear from Gene that what was agreed upon was the outcome, not the process. "We are not proscribing how one teaches," Gene said.
These new standards are set on what Gene called "a new bar -- college and career-ready expectations." The key questions they kept asking throughout this process was, "What is important to be able to do to be college and career ready?" What they were seeing is that what we currently are teaching and focusing on was not preparing students for college and the career world. It just wasn't applicable to what students needed to be leaving high school with. So it is based on changing the standards to be aligned with the following:
-What is the essential content?
-What are the applications of this content?
It seems like we are going to be moving away from facts in our content areas and in the direction of focusing on specific skills that are more applicable and adapted to the jobs that today's students will be working in. Gene said that it "is not about memorizing facts, but about using it and applying it."
With Language Arts, it was interesting to hear Gene speak about how right now, we are seeing a tiering-down of reading materials starting at middle school, and high school's are currently reading middle school-level material. So the expectations will be increased.
The questions I had were about whether schools were going to be able to hold students back until they show "mastery" in the standards and whether we can actually have the same expectations for students in every part of the country. It seems like a great plan, but in reality there seems to be flaws in its application and enforcement. Can a student in every rural, urban, wealthy, poor, small, and large school, and from different socio-economic backgrounds and communities, really achieve the exact same levels of mastery? We'll see.
The Common Core Standards, as of right now, are just for Language Arts and Math. Science, Art, and others are currently meeting and Social Studies, according to Gene, "will be the trailer to this," merely because there is a lot of disagreement over its content. The CCSSI came out of the very different state standards that are currently in place in terms of proficiency. The goal was to determine what states can agree upon in proficiency and content standards and come up with "common" core standards amongst all states. It was great to hear from Gene that what was agreed upon was the outcome, not the process. "We are not proscribing how one teaches," Gene said.
These new standards are set on what Gene called "a new bar -- college and career-ready expectations." The key questions they kept asking throughout this process was, "What is important to be able to do to be college and career ready?" What they were seeing is that what we currently are teaching and focusing on was not preparing students for college and the career world. It just wasn't applicable to what students needed to be leaving high school with. So it is based on changing the standards to be aligned with the following:
-What is the essential content?
-What are the applications of this content?
It seems like we are going to be moving away from facts in our content areas and in the direction of focusing on specific skills that are more applicable and adapted to the jobs that today's students will be working in. Gene said that it "is not about memorizing facts, but about using it and applying it."
With Language Arts, it was interesting to hear Gene speak about how right now, we are seeing a tiering-down of reading materials starting at middle school, and high school's are currently reading middle school-level material. So the expectations will be increased.
The questions I had were about whether schools were going to be able to hold students back until they show "mastery" in the standards and whether we can actually have the same expectations for students in every part of the country. It seems like a great plan, but in reality there seems to be flaws in its application and enforcement. Can a student in every rural, urban, wealthy, poor, small, and large school, and from different socio-economic backgrounds and communities, really achieve the exact same levels of mastery? We'll see.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Interesting Newsweek article
I read an interesting Newsweek article online and think that it brings up some great points. Check it out:
Why We Must Fire Bad Teachers
Why We Must Fire Bad Teachers
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
Town Meeting Day
Tuesday was Town Meeting Day in many towns across Vermont, and in my town of Grafton, a hot button issue was education spending, which I'm sure was being discussed across the state. The voters are looking for any way to lower their taxes, and I completely see their point, but where some wanted to start was with the school budget. There was a healthy discussion on the costs of education and the declining enrollment, and it centered around the fact that taxes keep rising. There are serious issues at stake here, but the place to start cutting back should not be in education.
One gentleman said that he was willing to see the education in the school drop from "exceptional to good" if it meant that taxes would be lowered. The fact that some people are comfortable with decreasing the quality and standards was a shock. It was good that this gentleman saw the connection that the quality of education was going to decrease if you slashed its funding, but this is not at all where we should be heading when thinking about education.
Another woman made the argument that larger class sizes would lead to better education. This is just proof of what people will say and believe when they are completely fed up with rising taxes.
One gentleman even argued for the so-called Doomsday Budget, which was a completely slashed budget down to the bone, eliminating almost everything, including a literacy coach, and lumping up to three grades together. It is scary when people start to support these type of cuts to education. They are clearly thinking of the present and not at all about the future.
What many of the people who made these proposals need to do is come in to the schools and classrooms and see what is happening on that level on a daily basis. It is easy to talk about these cuts, but it is quite different when you see the role that smaller class sizes play in the quality of education or the essential role that technology needs to continue playing with our students. Supporting education is supporting our students and communities. It is making sure we prepare our students for a world that they will be entering, and that needs technology. We can't hurt the future of our students and communities because our taxes are high. Education needs to be the last place where cuts are made, and then to aspects of the budget not so vitally important to our student's futures like literacy and technology. If voters would come in and see what is happening in our schools, I am sure they would less willing to see these cuts as potential solutions and would fully support their schools and students.
One gentleman said that he was willing to see the education in the school drop from "exceptional to good" if it meant that taxes would be lowered. The fact that some people are comfortable with decreasing the quality and standards was a shock. It was good that this gentleman saw the connection that the quality of education was going to decrease if you slashed its funding, but this is not at all where we should be heading when thinking about education.
Another woman made the argument that larger class sizes would lead to better education. This is just proof of what people will say and believe when they are completely fed up with rising taxes.
One gentleman even argued for the so-called Doomsday Budget, which was a completely slashed budget down to the bone, eliminating almost everything, including a literacy coach, and lumping up to three grades together. It is scary when people start to support these type of cuts to education. They are clearly thinking of the present and not at all about the future.
What many of the people who made these proposals need to do is come in to the schools and classrooms and see what is happening on that level on a daily basis. It is easy to talk about these cuts, but it is quite different when you see the role that smaller class sizes play in the quality of education or the essential role that technology needs to continue playing with our students. Supporting education is supporting our students and communities. It is making sure we prepare our students for a world that they will be entering, and that needs technology. We can't hurt the future of our students and communities because our taxes are high. Education needs to be the last place where cuts are made, and then to aspects of the budget not so vitally important to our student's futures like literacy and technology. If voters would come in and see what is happening in our schools, I am sure they would less willing to see these cuts as potential solutions and would fully support their schools and students.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)