logo
g Text Version
Beauty & Self
Books & Music
Career
Computers
Education
Family
Food & Wine
Health & Fitness
Hobbies & Crafts
Home & Garden
Money
News & Politics
Relationships
Religion & Spirituality
Sports
Travel & Culture
TV & Movies

dailyclick
Bored? Games!
Nutrition
Postcards
Take a Quiz
Rate My Photo

new
Creativity
Family Travel
Southwest USA
Irish Culture
Home Finance
Comedy Movies
Romance Novels


dailyclick
All times in EST

Full Schedule
g
g School Reform Site

BellaOnline's School Reform Editor

g

Common Core Misinterpretation


One of the saddest things about the Common Core Standards is that classroom teachers are being coached in what to do by bureaucrats who seem to be foggy on the new guidelines and how they differ from standards teachers are already following.

A recent newspaper description of what is being done to prepare English teachers for CCSS in my state is typical of what is going on in the other 45 states that have agreed to implement the new standards. State and federal administrators are holding workshops for teachers.

New Recommendations Not So New
In the account I read, the teachers are described as “nervous” about the new reading guidelines and “concerned” about the recommendations to read “deeply.”

According to the article, the administrators are teaching local teachers “to judge the quality and complexity of books and articles.” It seems to me that teachers who are already employed as English instructors probably have the training and experience to do this.

One of the official CCSS "coaches" says that the Common Core language arts standards “expect students to justify their opinions and points of view with evidence.”

I have been an English teacher since the 1960s--well before NCLB and before CCSS--and during the entire time I have expected my students to justify their opinions and points of view with evidence. That’s what teachers do who teach the 5-paragraph essay form.

Scary Views on "Good Reading"
An administrator who boasts the title Director of Federal Programs and Special Programs for her district makes three statements about reading that should send a chill down the spine of every parent and English teacher in the land:

1. “In the past, we equated good reading with lots of reading.”

2. “Kids can get more out of snippets of literature versus reading 1,000 pages.”

3. “Good reading now is looking at reading as a means of gaining background knowledge of information.”

First, “good reading” is what it has always been: well-written content that expands the reader’s experience of the human condition. The implication that “lots of reading” is an old-fashioned idea best discarded is ridiculous. The more good reading students engage in, the more educated and civilized they become.

Second, to say that students “can get more out of snippets of literature versus reading 1,000 pages” is the kind of nonsense one would expect to read on an adolescent's blog. Moreover, it completely misrepresents the Common Core directive regarding “close reading.”

Third, to talk about “background knowledge” and “information” in the same breath, as if they meant different things, reveals a weakness of vocabulary on the part of the speaker. She seems to be implying that with the advent of the Common Core Standards, classical literature has become irrelevant and that the only “good” reading is reading that imparts specific, immediately useful information--like what you’d find in a phone book or service manual.

This is the kind of nonsense and misinformation that is being conveyed to classroom teachers around the country as their states prepare to implement the Common Core Standards.

Parents and Teachers Need to Inform Themselves
It will be a grave and irreparable loss to American education if the last tie our children have to a world of ethical and civil behavior and rich linguistic expression is severed by an inane shift to “informational text” only.

Parents and language arts teachers who do not want to see the English curriculum gutted of content that nourishes the mental development of the children in their care cannot afford to get their information at second hand. They must plod through the standards for themselves in order to separate fact from the half-digested misinformation going the rounds through official channels.



Add Common+Core+Misinterpretation to Twitter Add Common+Core+Misinterpretation to Facebook Add Common+Core+Misinterpretation to MySpace Add Common+Core+Misinterpretation to Del.icio.us Digg Common+Core+Misinterpretation Add Common+Core+Misinterpretation to Yahoo My Web Add Common+Core+Misinterpretation to Google Bookmarks Add Common+Core+Misinterpretation to Stumbleupon Add Common+Core+Misinterpretation to Reddit




RSS | Related Articles | Editor's Picks Articles | Top Ten Articles | Previous Features | Site Map


For FREE email updates, subscribe to the School Reform Newsletter


Past Issues


print
Printer Friendly
bookmark
Bookmark
tell friend
Tell a Friend
forum
Forum
email
Email Editor


Content copyright © 2014 by Maeve Maddox. All rights reserved.
This content was written by Maeve Maddox. If you wish to use this content in any manner, you need written permission. Contact Maeve Maddox for details.

g


g features
Firing Teachers Won't Improve U.S. Education

The Testing Opt-Out Movement

Criticism of Reform Not Welcome

Archives | Site Map

forum
Forum
email
Contact

Past Issues
memberscenter


vote
Poetry
Daily
Weekly
Monthly
Less than Monthly



BellaOnline on Facebook
g


| About BellaOnline | Privacy Policy | Advertising | Become an Editor |
Website copyright © 2014 Minerva WebWorks LLC. All rights reserved.


BellaOnline Editor