Book of the Month
This month I am finally getting back to reading Lucy Caulkins' book Pathways to the Common Core. I will write my notes and main ideas from each chapter here on this blog.
Soo..let's get down to business.
Chapter 1 An Introduction to the Common Core State Standards
A reminder that we can view the standards in a negative or positive light, and an invitation to use what is best in the standards to leverage our work for whole-school reform.
Caulkins says we can view the standards as Curmudgeon or as if they are GOLD
Curmudgeon, eh? You know, we've all been guilty of this type of negative thought when it comes to our field of education. Frankly, it's easy to do and sometimes...it's sort of fun, right? Here are some common thinkings of the Common Core as curmudgeon:
If we really want to tackle the achievement gap, shouldn't we be tackling poverty first and then standards?
The percentage of students living in poverty continues to increase, so why is now a good time to raise the stakes of education? In fact, of all industrialized countries, the US ranks second for students living in extreme poverty.
How can we possible raise standards when conditions that support teaching and learning keep getting worse?
Yeah yeah yeah...budgets are cut. Hawaii lost about a month of instructional time due to HUGE cuts and class sizes have increased EVERYWHERE (not just where we teach).
Underlying the CCSS is the questionable concept that skills that are essential at the college level should be combed backward throughout all the grades.
The design of the CCSS is that the purpose of K-12 education is to prepare students for college. Thus, what happened to the idea that "curriculum reflects children's development?"
While the gridlike design of the document makes it easier to comprehend, this design also leads to questionable content.
Simply stated: the standards for literature reading and informational (the artist formerly known as nonfiction) reading are the same ten anchor standards. Does this make sense?
Who wrote the standards anyway?
The 399 page document does not include an author's name, yet has been approved by two people; David Coleman and Sue Pimentel.
Some documents published after the CCSS were ratified add guidelines for evaluating methods of implementation, contradicting the intention of the standards.
Some of the documents lay out methods of implementation; yet..the standards themselves highlight the idea that the standards define "what all students are expected to know and be able to do, NOT how the teachers should teach".
The CCSS will be expensive.
'Nuff said.
If we assessed America's students now, only 15% would perform at the level suggested by the standards.
So, we should label 85% of students as failures? "Who will pay for the remedial education after everyone fails?"
We do not have enough successes to declare with confidence that we have a research-based One Best Way for K-12 teachers to prepare students for college and career success.
Where are the large-scale reforms that support the CCSS research-based successes? Where are the examples of high-needs schools for which to follow?
Ok, ok. Now don't we feel better. Yes, absolutely these are all easy negatives to bring to light, but what if..just what if we viewed the CCSS in a different light? Let us:
View the CCSS as GOLD:
The CCSS provide an urgently needed wake-up call.
America has gone from providing students with a world-class education to landing in 14th place on the most recent Program for International Student Assessment test for reading.
The world has changed. 25 years ago 95% of jobs required low skills (entry level), yet today these jobs make up only 10% of the United States entire economy.
The CCSS emphasize much higher-level comprehension skills than previous standards.
Think about this, the CCSS are replacing the notorious No Child Left Behind Act! (That's got to be worth something, right?) According to NCLB; comprehension in it's entirety was packed into 5 priorities: phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension...all with equal emphasis. Say what? A brief glance at the CCSS shows a much higher emphasis on comprehension skills.
The CCSS place equal weight on reading and on writing.
With NCLB, zero emphasis was put on writing; in fact, writing was not even mentioned! With the CCSS reading will be assessed using writing! The CCSS show the connection between reading and writing that we as educators always new existed. Writing helps students to build comprehension, duh!
The CCSS stress the importance of critical citizenship.
The CCSS asks us to create a generation of young people who "listen to or read a claim and ask, 'Who is making this claim? What is that person's evidence? What other positions are being promulgated? How can I compare and contrast these different views, think about the biases and assumptions behind them, weigh their warrants, and come to an evidence-based, well-reasoned stance?" Cool.
The CCSS emphasize reading complex texts.
As educators we've known the importance of students learning to handle increasingly more complex texts. Now the makers of the standards and tests are catching up! Haven't we known for years that when our students get answers wrong on a high-stakes test it is more likely that the passage was difficult to read or that the question came further along in the test, rather than the fact that our students couldn't infer or determine the main idea?
The CCSS has a clear design, with central goals and high standards.
As teachers, don't we love our clean, clear cut, organized documents? I know I do ;) The CCSS is just that; they're pretty, they're organized, and they're EASY to navigate!
The CCSS convey that intellectual growth occurs through time, across years, and across disciplines.
The CCSS clearly shows the progression of skill development. While all grade levels consist of the same 10 anchor standards, the grade level specific standard shows the scaffolded support needed to create students who can live up to the anchor standards independently. The message from the CCSS states "Growth takes time; it can't be the job of the fourth-grade teacher, or the tenth-grade teacher, to be sure students reach the expectations for that grade level. Instead, students need to be supported by a spiral curriculum within which teachers across the K-12 spectrum share responsibility for students' progress along trajectories of skill development".
The CCSS call for proficiency, complexity, and independence.
What good is it if a student can attack college level texts ONLY with the support of her classmates and professor. No, she needs to be able to attack these texts by herself. The CCSS supports that growth.
The CCSS support cross-curricular literacy teaching.
YAY!! Thematic units?! Literacy needs to be everywhere, hallelujah!
The CCSS emphasize that every student needs to be given access to this work.
All students, even students with IEPs need to be taught these literacy skills. The CCSS invites teachers to use technology or any other means necessary to support this work.
The CCSS aim to put every state on the same measuring stick.
Wow! What a concept! That makes sense, right...my question..what took so long?
The CCSS respect the professional judgement of classroom teachers.
"The Standards define what all students are expected to know and be able to do, not how teachers should teach". Again I say, finally..Hallelujah!
Wow; now that that is out of the way..stay tuned for the second half of the chapter; Implementing the Common Core. Simply because it is Saturday night..I'm hungry, and a little tired :)