tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post7096918143089924988..comments2024-03-28T02:21:17.452-07:00Comments on Seattle Schools Community Forum: Federal/State Education NewsMelissa Westbrookhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17179994245880629080noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-16769201074927359342015-05-16T19:11:07.331-07:002015-05-16T19:11:07.331-07:00Jan:
"Having read some stuff on how inapprop...Jan:<br /> "Having read some stuff on how inappropriate the elementary standards are at each grade level, I would LOVE to know what the process was -- who was asked, what were the questions, who objected to certain standards for certain ages,..."<br /><br />Here's an article that may explain some of this. Particularly, read on from "I need you to understand two numbers"<br />https://lft1760.wordpress.com/2015/04/10/how-the-common-core-and-high-stakes-testing-are-sabotaging-students/<br /><br />--CameoAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-20022887173969641282015-05-15T12:28:05.442-07:002015-05-15T12:28:05.442-07:00swk: First, although I may be wrong in understand...swk: First, although I may be wrong in understanding what Charlie meant, I read his comment as being more about accountability than a defense of the CC standards. He is correct in pointing out that regardless of who wrote the standards (and whether they are currently miscasting their authority), we are stuck with them in Seattle not because of the NGA, but because of our legislature.<br /><br />But I have two problems. First, both you and Charlie seem cavalier about the "duress" issue. In contract law, undue duress gets you OUT of a contract! I am not suggesting that these laws are invalid, but my recollection of watching this process is that we would NOT have adopted CC had it not been for the various sticks being wielded by the feds in terms of money, RRRT participation, etc. Should we have held out? Yes. So it is our fault -- but it is misleading to say we adopted them in any process that fairly evaluated the standards themselves, or the potential downside of participating in the (backdoor) nationalizing of educational curricula and standards. <br /><br />Second -- regardless of what WEA says in terms of who they represent, or WDDSA, BSSLLs point is still true. The states speak for the states. If these decisions devolved back down to the states, we wouldn't have this controversy at all. Texas would be deciding how to teach biology in Texas, and Alaska would be deciding what the standards/curricula are for Alaska, etc. The "laboratories of innovation" that states can be (I still recall the days when folks looked to Massachusetts because things that IT -- as a state -- were doing seemed to be working better than what other states did) would remain intact, etc. We STILL have the NAEP if we want to "true up" state assessments against a "third party" measure. <br /><br />Finally -- the process and the product that the NGA used are both fairly opaque. Having read some stuff on how inappropriate the elementary standards are at each grade level, I would LOVE to know what the process was -- who was asked, what were the questions, who objected to certain standards for certain ages, how those objections were processed (and overruled or accommodated), etc -- and, of course, I would love the kind of insight that we seem to have on all or most other tests -- in terms of test question validity, how many kids answer various questions correctly, etc.<br /><br />My sense is that the entire process of developing the CCSS and the high stakes tests that measure progress in meeting them has been corrupted by opacity, pressure from outside agendas and special interests that are at odds with parents objectives in educating their kids, and misrepresentations as to the motives of, and validity of the process, at virtually every step of the process. (I am not using corruption in the RICO sense, though others may -- I am using it more in the "garbage in/garbage out" data sense). <br /><br />Jan Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-7134668509922985012015-05-15T10:12:09.966-07:002015-05-15T10:12:09.966-07:00BSLL, in addition to the point that Charlie makes ...BSLL, in addition to the point that Charlie makes in regard to states having the ultimate authority to adopt the standards (even under duress), it is completely inaccurate to claim, as you have, that states had no input into the development of the standards.<br /><br />See http://www.nga.org/files/live/sites/NGA/files/pdf/2010COMMONCOREK12TEAM.PDF.<br /><br />The CCSS development teams were chock full of representatives from the states. It is true that there was very little input from classroom teachers on the development of the standards but state departments of education had significant representation.<br /><br />--- swkAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-33692631907151910572015-05-15T02:02:51.425-07:002015-05-15T02:02:51.425-07:00Regardless of who developed the CCSS, there is the...Regardless of who developed the CCSS, there is the simple fact that they were adopted by state legislatures all across the country. Yes, they were under pressure from the federal government to do it, and probably under a lot of pressure from campaign contributors as well, but, nevertheless, the state legislatures voted to adopt CCSS.Charlie Mashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17173903762962067277noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-7686256575339549832015-05-14T23:54:26.223-07:002015-05-14T23:54:26.223-07:00--SWKy
States represent states. MW was correct JB...--SWKy<br /><br />States represent states. MW was correct JB's statement was misleading as it sounds like States had some input. They did not. Some Governors voted a plurality in support of it. That is it. What consideration was put forth I don't know. But show me one piece of legislation that a Governor can inact unilaterally.<br /><br />Also, if you read it "with a full grain of salt" ie a R who wants above anything to win the white house again... you think that is great that Education is finally going back to the states. We need that. When in fact it is just the opposite. <br /><br />Aside: I actually think Jeb doesn't so much like the idea of running a campaign for Pres as this and Iraq being justifiable regardless of WMD, are both ridiculous. BSLLnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-4734589877083030442015-05-14T11:02:17.312-07:002015-05-14T11:02:17.312-07:00Melissa, I know I've confronted you on your NG...Melissa, I know I've confronted you on your NGA issue in the past and your position that NGA doesn't represent the states. Fine. Let me take another approach by asking a question: Who does represent the states?<br /><br />When I've witnessed testimony in front of the legislature, I've seen and heard WEA claim they represent teachers, WSSDA claim they represent school board members, WASA claim they represent district superintendents and other administrators, and AWSP claim they represent principals. Do they not?<br /><br />If you're the White House and you want the input of states and state departments of education on policy matters, don't you go to NGA and CCSSO to gain that input? These are the chief executives of the states and state departments of education, respectively.<br /><br />As a practical matter, under what other umbrella(s) can states claim representation if not NGA?<br /><br />--- swkAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com