Hello Everyone.
I know. Back so soon. Just think of this post as an addition to my 3rd post reviewing Diane Ravitch's article.
I'll try to keep this review on Valerie Strauss's article (Washington Post) short and sweet.
In Strauss's article "The Common Core's Fundamental Trouble" she conveys her fears that the Common Core State Standards will fall doom just as the 2001, No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) did. She says that the resources needed to assess these standards of the CCSS are not available to many schools (i.e. computers and such). And like Diane Ravitch (refer to previous post), Strauss says there is not enough evidence or research to prove that the CCSS is as successful as they are claiming.
She writes:
"... the new Common Core tests will be considerably harder than current state assessments, leading to sharp drops in scores and proficiency. We have seen this show before. The entire country just finished a decade-long experiment in standards-based, test-driven school reform called No Child Left Behind..."
Strauss said that after nearly a decade with NCLB, it proved to be a "dismal failure" since more than half of the schools in the US were considered "failing schools." Strauss's biggest concern was that we are basically repeating history. Instead of seeing where we failed with NCLB, we just end up making an even more difficult system. Instead of CCSS preparing children to be "college and career ready" - it may just drive them right out of school, thus increasing the dropout rates.
MY RESPONSE: I can definitely see Strauss's (as well as many teachers, parents, and other school administrators) concerns for the CCSS. Some of it concerns me too. I do not believe that we should be drilling the idea of successful test scores and "pass this, pass that" into our children. Yes, I want my children to pass and be successful on their assessments and understand the material and content, as well as grasp the deeper meanings of their writing and reading and such. But not to the point that it makes children want to give up because it's too hard.
As much negativity as I have been hearing about Common Core in my classes, I was interested to see what elementary and secondary teachers (that I know personally) had to say about the CCSS. I posted a status on my Facebook page and received many positive comments about the program. These are teachers who are already working with the new standards, and they really seem to like it.
Here's one of the comments I received:
"I am on year 3 of implementing CCSS, and I love it. It does require a different mindset because it requires each grade level to focus on less objectives, but to go deeper in each skill. Instead of just touching the surface of addition, for example, we teach addition concepts from basic to very advanced. CCSS also requires instruction to occur across the curriculum, which is great for building reading fluency and comprehension while reading non-fiction Science text. I could go on and on.... I like CCSS, and I think it will help improve MS education."
Just by my posting and reading the comments, my mind is starting to be a little more open to the idea of Common Core. I am not completely sold just yet, but I will definitely continue to do my research and be more open-minded to it.
Until next time,
Emily
Wednesday, August 28, 2013
Review: The Biggest Fallacy of the Common Core Standards (An article by Diane Ravitch) - 3
Hello All!
Back once more!
And with another review. This time around, I will be reviewing an article written by Diane Ravitch of the Huffington Post.
In her article "The Biggest Fallacy of the Common Core Standards" Ravitch takes a stand against the new educational system that 45 of the 50 States are now transitioning into. The Common Core State Standards. The Common Core boosters and promoters claim that the CCSS will help students become "college and career ready."
Ravitch's biggest problem with the CCSS is that the advocates for the program really have no substantial evidence as to whether or not the Common Core is as successful as they are claiming it to be. Many big-time corporations have put out advertisements (in favor of CCSS) dramatically claiming that the US economy will be in trouble if every state does not abide with the Common Core Standards.
"A report from the Council on Foreign Relations last year (chaired by Joel Klein and Condoleeza Rice) warned that our national security was at risk unless we adopt the Common Core standards." -Diane Ravitch
Even with these claims, Ravitch is not buying into this new program. Because the program is so new, she worries that there little to no evidence to prove that it will help of these national problems or help prepare students for their college and "real-world" careers.
MY RESPONSE: Ravitch has some really great points in her article. I will say that these major corporations and the foreign relations council are being quite dramatic about the importance of the CCSS. It is a bit extreme and presumptious to say that our nation's security and economy lies in standardized benchmarks and test scores. I certainly hope that is not how we portray this new system to our students. No pressure or anything, right kids? If you don't pass this test, welcome to the Great, Great Depression. These are some bold claims being made by these different organizations as well as the promoters of the CCSS, especially if they do not have any evidence to back them up.
Ravitch raises a great question in her article that really stuck out to me:
"Can anyone explain how the nation can adopt national standards without any evidence whatever that they will improve achievement, enrich education, and actually help to prepare young people -- not for the jobs of the future, which are unknown and unknowable --but for the challenges of citizenship and life?"
Exactly. To me, that is THE most important thing we, as educators, should be teaching our children: The importance of being the best citizen they can be and helping them reach their full potential as well as preparing them for the different challenges in life.
Jobs are fleeting. Who knows what jobs may still exist by the time our students are old enough to have one? Instead, we should emphasize the valuable lessons, things that our children can take with them no matter where they go in life. Things that they will always be able to hold onto no matter if there are zero or a million jobs left in the world.
As much as I believe students should be challenged in their academics, I do not believe the claims that are being thrown out there should be WHY we are challenging them.
Until next time,
Emily
Back once more!
And with another review. This time around, I will be reviewing an article written by Diane Ravitch of the Huffington Post.
In her article "The Biggest Fallacy of the Common Core Standards" Ravitch takes a stand against the new educational system that 45 of the 50 States are now transitioning into. The Common Core State Standards. The Common Core boosters and promoters claim that the CCSS will help students become "college and career ready."
Ravitch's biggest problem with the CCSS is that the advocates for the program really have no substantial evidence as to whether or not the Common Core is as successful as they are claiming it to be. Many big-time corporations have put out advertisements (in favor of CCSS) dramatically claiming that the US economy will be in trouble if every state does not abide with the Common Core Standards.
"A report from the Council on Foreign Relations last year (chaired by Joel Klein and Condoleeza Rice) warned that our national security was at risk unless we adopt the Common Core standards." -Diane Ravitch
Even with these claims, Ravitch is not buying into this new program. Because the program is so new, she worries that there little to no evidence to prove that it will help of these national problems or help prepare students for their college and "real-world" careers.
MY RESPONSE: Ravitch has some really great points in her article. I will say that these major corporations and the foreign relations council are being quite dramatic about the importance of the CCSS. It is a bit extreme and presumptious to say that our nation's security and economy lies in standardized benchmarks and test scores. I certainly hope that is not how we portray this new system to our students. No pressure or anything, right kids? If you don't pass this test, welcome to the Great, Great Depression. These are some bold claims being made by these different organizations as well as the promoters of the CCSS, especially if they do not have any evidence to back them up.
Ravitch raises a great question in her article that really stuck out to me:
"Can anyone explain how the nation can adopt national standards without any evidence whatever that they will improve achievement, enrich education, and actually help to prepare young people -- not for the jobs of the future, which are unknown and unknowable --but for the challenges of citizenship and life?"
Exactly. To me, that is THE most important thing we, as educators, should be teaching our children: The importance of being the best citizen they can be and helping them reach their full potential as well as preparing them for the different challenges in life.
Jobs are fleeting. Who knows what jobs may still exist by the time our students are old enough to have one? Instead, we should emphasize the valuable lessons, things that our children can take with them no matter where they go in life. Things that they will always be able to hold onto no matter if there are zero or a million jobs left in the world.
As much as I believe students should be challenged in their academics, I do not believe the claims that are being thrown out there should be WHY we are challenging them.
Until next time,
Emily
Monday, August 26, 2013
"How Teachers are Integrating Technology into Common Core" -2
Hello All,
I am back again. This time around, I will be reviewing Fred Sitkin's article, "How Teachers are Integrating Technology into Common Core," from www.edudemic.com.
In today's day and age, children and technology have become rather close. And I do not like it. I get quite aggravated when I am in the store and see an 8 year-old with their face buried in their iPhone. For one, I did not get my first phone until I was a freshman in high school. It was a flip phone. Standard texting and calling. No Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Vine, or any other insanely popular social app that is the sole joy of every smartphone owner's existence these days. Secondly, when I was 8 years old, I was either outside playing H.O.R.S.E with my brother, trying (and failing) to ride my bike, or trying to recreate my own "Out of the Box" experience (it was a show, look it up). So, you get the picture. Today's technology has kind of inhibited children's creativity. Kids would rather spend endless hours on their phones or tablets making odd faces for a couple of "likes" instead of taking advantage of all the world has to offer.
However, there is a bright side to a child's interactions with technology. This may come as a surprise to most kids, but there is such a thing as learning with technology. Whoa. Hold the phone (look that up too). Learning? With technology? Yes. And I am here to tell you, it is a pretty nifty change that is coming to a school near you.
In Fred Sitkin's article, he talks about how technology is becoming rather popular in the classroom these days. All across the United States, teachers are transitioning into a new system called the Common Core State Standards. In a nutshell, Common Core is a bunch of standards that students are expected to have successfully learned in order to advance to the next grade level. Sitkin believes the transition to CCSS and the "wave of educational technology" could not have come at a better time. He discusses how the Core is involving more technology in a child's learning environment. More schools are bringing iPads into the classrooms because it can help teachers recognize where a student may be struggling. How? You may be wondering.
Sitkin explains:
"With [apps such as] iBooks, student can interact with text by writing notes and sharing those notes with their peers and teachers. They can define unfamiliar words as they read them or even have the pronunciation of those words spoken to them."
Sitkin explains that with the proper guidance and support from adults, these technological tools can be very effective in the classroom.
As a future educator, I appreciate any resources that can take the stress off of my students when being introduced to new material. Anything that helps them learn and fully understand the subject at hand is always welcomed. When used appropriately, technology can be very effective in the learning environment. I agree with Sitkin that this new era of educational technology (when used appropriately) could not have come at a better time.
REVISED - 8/27/13: A concern that was brought up today in class in my Computer App Education class was that technology can hinder human interaction. A couple of students expressed in their blogs that technology in the classroom would defeat the purpose of a teacher. Instead of a teacher instructing the child on how to read or solve a math problem, the teacher would just be guiding the child on how to operate a tablet to help solve the problem for them. Another concern that was brought up was that with the fact that low income school districts may not be able to afford the technology that the Common Core requires. So the question became: How will children going to these schools be able to pass these benchmarks of the Common Core if they do not have access to the required technology?
MY RESPONSE: I completely agree that technology can obstruct the effective one-on-one time that a student has with a teacher. Children need the classroom setting with live teachers and peers so that they can gain that social skill that being around other people provides. I also agree that teachers need to do the teaching, and technology needs to be the co-teacher (or aide). Technology is a very resourceful tool when it is used properly, but it should not take the place of a teacher. It should be used frugally and appropriately. As far as the Common Core concern, I feel that this is a big concern in all of the states that are transitioning into this new learning system. I do not believe it is fair to the teachers and students of these low income schools who are unable to afford the technology needed to teach these students. I am really not a big fan of Common Core in general, but I will expand more on that later. If the public education system is going to make everybody switch over to CCSS, then they need to make sure that every school is able to have access to the resources needed to follow these standards.
Well, this blog entry has been enough technology for me for one night. Time to go channel my inner child again and find some boxes to get into...... or maybe more homework. Hashtag: College Probz.
"So long. Farewell. To you, my friends. Goodbye. For now. Until we meet again."
Emily
I am back again. This time around, I will be reviewing Fred Sitkin's article, "How Teachers are Integrating Technology into Common Core," from www.edudemic.com.
In today's day and age, children and technology have become rather close. And I do not like it. I get quite aggravated when I am in the store and see an 8 year-old with their face buried in their iPhone. For one, I did not get my first phone until I was a freshman in high school. It was a flip phone. Standard texting and calling. No Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Vine, or any other insanely popular social app that is the sole joy of every smartphone owner's existence these days. Secondly, when I was 8 years old, I was either outside playing H.O.R.S.E with my brother, trying (and failing) to ride my bike, or trying to recreate my own "Out of the Box" experience (it was a show, look it up). So, you get the picture. Today's technology has kind of inhibited children's creativity. Kids would rather spend endless hours on their phones or tablets making odd faces for a couple of "likes" instead of taking advantage of all the world has to offer.
However, there is a bright side to a child's interactions with technology. This may come as a surprise to most kids, but there is such a thing as learning with technology. Whoa. Hold the phone (look that up too). Learning? With technology? Yes. And I am here to tell you, it is a pretty nifty change that is coming to a school near you.
In Fred Sitkin's article, he talks about how technology is becoming rather popular in the classroom these days. All across the United States, teachers are transitioning into a new system called the Common Core State Standards. In a nutshell, Common Core is a bunch of standards that students are expected to have successfully learned in order to advance to the next grade level. Sitkin believes the transition to CCSS and the "wave of educational technology" could not have come at a better time. He discusses how the Core is involving more technology in a child's learning environment. More schools are bringing iPads into the classrooms because it can help teachers recognize where a student may be struggling. How? You may be wondering.
Sitkin explains:
"With [apps such as] iBooks, student can interact with text by writing notes and sharing those notes with their peers and teachers. They can define unfamiliar words as they read them or even have the pronunciation of those words spoken to them."
Sitkin explains that with the proper guidance and support from adults, these technological tools can be very effective in the classroom.
As a future educator, I appreciate any resources that can take the stress off of my students when being introduced to new material. Anything that helps them learn and fully understand the subject at hand is always welcomed. When used appropriately, technology can be very effective in the learning environment. I agree with Sitkin that this new era of educational technology (when used appropriately) could not have come at a better time.
REVISED - 8/27/13: A concern that was brought up today in class in my Computer App Education class was that technology can hinder human interaction. A couple of students expressed in their blogs that technology in the classroom would defeat the purpose of a teacher. Instead of a teacher instructing the child on how to read or solve a math problem, the teacher would just be guiding the child on how to operate a tablet to help solve the problem for them. Another concern that was brought up was that with the fact that low income school districts may not be able to afford the technology that the Common Core requires. So the question became: How will children going to these schools be able to pass these benchmarks of the Common Core if they do not have access to the required technology?
MY RESPONSE: I completely agree that technology can obstruct the effective one-on-one time that a student has with a teacher. Children need the classroom setting with live teachers and peers so that they can gain that social skill that being around other people provides. I also agree that teachers need to do the teaching, and technology needs to be the co-teacher (or aide). Technology is a very resourceful tool when it is used properly, but it should not take the place of a teacher. It should be used frugally and appropriately. As far as the Common Core concern, I feel that this is a big concern in all of the states that are transitioning into this new learning system. I do not believe it is fair to the teachers and students of these low income schools who are unable to afford the technology needed to teach these students. I am really not a big fan of Common Core in general, but I will expand more on that later. If the public education system is going to make everybody switch over to CCSS, then they need to make sure that every school is able to have access to the resources needed to follow these standards.
Well, this blog entry has been enough technology for me for one night. Time to go channel my inner child again and find some boxes to get into...... or maybe more homework. Hashtag: College Probz.
"So long. Farewell. To you, my friends. Goodbye. For now. Until we meet again."
Thursday, August 22, 2013
Introduction - 1
Hellooo You All!
As you may have already learned by my video, my name is Emily. I am currently a junior at The University of Southern Mississippi in Hattiesburg, Mississippi.I am studying to be an elementary school teacher as well as trying to pursue a minor in theater. I did not travel too far from home to study my major as I am from Pearl, Mississippi.
Elementary Education was not my first choice coming into college as a freshman. I was originally a theater major, but several paths later, and here I am studying to be a school teacher. I have always had a desire to teach. Anything, really. I am great with kids, as I have two nieces (ages 1 and 2) who I love very much. Most of you may think a teacher's number one job is to educate their students in the area of reading, writing, math, science, literature, etc. Yes, all of that is very important. However, I believe a teacher's number one job should be to help their students grow and become successful human beings.
When I say "successful" I do not necessarily mean a CEO of a huge corporation or New York Times best-selling author. While these are definitely huge accomplishments, they are not the "be-all, end-all" of success.
My definition of success means positively impacting the world around you. Whether a student becomes a janitor, a doctor, a mechanic, a waitress, etc., they have the ability to make an everlasting impact in someone's life. Children need to know that no matter where life takes them, they have the ability to be successful just by having the right attitude and spirit. Teachers are the encouragers for these children. The role models. The examples. And sometimes the only positive authority figure in a child's life.
So, yes. My students will learn the alphabet, a couple of math problems, and read some fascinating books. But most importantly... they will be loved; that is where success starts.
Until next time,
Emily
Elementary Education was not my first choice coming into college as a freshman. I was originally a theater major, but several paths later, and here I am studying to be a school teacher. I have always had a desire to teach. Anything, really. I am great with kids, as I have two nieces (ages 1 and 2) who I love very much. Most of you may think a teacher's number one job is to educate their students in the area of reading, writing, math, science, literature, etc. Yes, all of that is very important. However, I believe a teacher's number one job should be to help their students grow and become successful human beings.
When I say "successful" I do not necessarily mean a CEO of a huge corporation or New York Times best-selling author. While these are definitely huge accomplishments, they are not the "be-all, end-all" of success.
My definition of success means positively impacting the world around you. Whether a student becomes a janitor, a doctor, a mechanic, a waitress, etc., they have the ability to make an everlasting impact in someone's life. Children need to know that no matter where life takes them, they have the ability to be successful just by having the right attitude and spirit. Teachers are the encouragers for these children. The role models. The examples. And sometimes the only positive authority figure in a child's life.
So, yes. My students will learn the alphabet, a couple of math problems, and read some fascinating books. But most importantly... they will be loved; that is where success starts.
Until next time,
Emily
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)