"Summertime and the Livin' is Easy" ~ Porgy & Bess
It's summertime and our guard is down. What better time for something to be slipped by us! Is that what is happening regarding the issue of network neutrality? The issue, in a nutshell, is whether the Net remains democratic in the sense that there is equal access and equal opportunity to write to it.
Race to the Top grants require CCSS, and there are rumors that the feds might tie Title 1 money to it as well. What is said to be voluntary, in the real world of tight fiscal times, is clearly not. Most states have now come on board along with making major changes in law and policy. And with some greasing of pockets, organizations such as NEA, NFT, ASCD and the PTA have come on board as well.
This was very much a top-down creation with very little real input at the grassroots level or even by national curriculum organizations such as NCTE or NCTM.
Most readers of this blog should know my view on this development by now. I'm very concerned for at least three reasons.
First, I believe President Dwight Eisenhower's observation has great merit.
"A distinguishing characteristic of our nation — and a great strength — is the development of our institutions within the concept of individual worth and dignity. Our schools are among the guardians of that principle. Consequently . . . and deliberately their control and support throughout our history have been — and are — a state and local responsibility. . . . Thus was established a fundamental element of the American public school system — local direction by boards of education responsible immediately to the parents of children. Diffusion of authority among tens of thousands of school districts is a safeguard against centralized control and abuse of the educational system that must be maintained. We believe that to take away the responsibility of communities and states in educating our children is to undermine not only a basic element of our freedoms but a basic right of our citizens. "
I simply don't believe schools controlled by large corporations is in the best interest of democracy. And don't make any mistake about it, this control is reaching a new level of magnitude.
Second, I worry about the type of pedagogy that will be encouraged with the soon-to-be-developed assessments. I've seen the glitzy content management systems being hawked in the vendor areas of state and national conferences. Already, powerful interests are aligning their products with the CCSS. Do we really want learning to be a teacher-in-a-box? It seems to me that there is a great danger that the connections that develop when students are engaged in real life problems in project-based learning will take a big hit if so much importance is given to standardization.
Third, I would argue that standardization is not really the issue. The issue is poverty and income disparity in the United States.
Okay, that's where I stand . . . . but being resigned to the reality, I've created a new wiki (currently under construction) called Learning in America at http://learninginamerica.us in order to index open educational resources to the new standards. If we must have national standardization, then we should at least not become enslaved to large oligopolistic educational publishing outfits. Let's open up the possibilities of local decision making in the methods and resources we use.
Proposed Rule Change for Adoption of Common Core Standards
INFORMATIONAL LETTER: 10 POLICY CODE: ILB
To: Superintendents of Schools
From: Angela Faherty Ph.D, Acting Commissioner
Date: August 2, 2010
RE: Proposed Rule Change for Adoption of Common Core Standards
The Department of Education is proposing an amendment to Chapter 131: The Maine Federal, State and Local Accountability Standards, a Major Substantive Rule of the Department of Education to include the Common Core State Standards in English language arts and mathematics for kindergarten to grade 12, with implementation to begin in 2012-13.
The proposed change is being made pursuant to PL 2009, Chapter 647, which revised state statute to permit Maine’s standards to include a core of standards in English language arts and mathematics for kindergarten to grade 12 established in common with other states and authorized the Commissioner of Education to adopt them, pending final approval by the Legislature.
Maine has a long history as a leader in rigorous standards and assessments and the adoption of the Common Core standards for English language arts and mathematics is the next logical step. The Maine Learning Results standards were first adopted in 1997 and later revised and re-adopted in 2007, each with significant statewide educator involvement and input. A similar process was used in the development of the Common Core standards. Maine educators and Maine Department of Education staff participated significantly in the development and review of the Common Core Standards.We have made clear that Maine would not adopt any standards that are less rigorous than the ones already in place. As a Department we are confident that the Common Core Standards will reflect what students need for success in post-secondary education and careers.
The proposed rule was filed today, August 2, 2010. The Secretary of State will post the rulemaking notice on August 11, 2010. The Department will hold a public hearing on August 30, 2010 in room 500 of the Cross State Office Building from 10 a.m. to 12 noon. The public comment period will begin on August 11 and end on September 10, 2010.
“An important question to ask of any proposed educational innovation is simply this: Is it intended to make the factory run more efficiently, or is it designed, as it should be, to get rid of the factory model altogether and replace it with individualized, customized education?” ~Alvin Toffler
Often, we use words like depression, bi-polar, panicattack, generalizedanxietydisorder, and more to describe normal reactions kids have to life circumstances. This can be dangerous and gives kids the wrong message about life and our ordinary human experience in response to adversity.
For example, a teenager breaks up with her girl friend and is feeling down and dejected. Saying she is “depressed” would be common. Today, it can mean something else—Depression with a capital “D.” In a situation like this, I’ve found it better to stay away from “terminology” and use ordinary words to describe what the kid is going through, rather then telling them they may “have” depression and implying (or actually telling) that they should be thoroughly evaluated.
The girl in our above example was dumped by her friend. She’s upset, hurt, sad, angry, and feeling really down. She probably should be feeling all of that, as well as being confused and feeling poorly about herself. She is going through the normal progression of experience in a typical human circumstance. She needs love, support, hugs, understanding, encouragement, and time.
I’m not pooh-poohing depression or minimizing the potentially devastating impact of clinical depression. But I am trying to bring balance and common sense to our observations of kids going through a hard time and subsequently our communication with them.
My first mentor, Ralph, was a child psychiatrist. He passed on a piece of wisdom over thirty years ago that I carry with me today. Paraphrasing: if you describe in detail the behavior and emotions of any teenager, they will qualify for a mental health diagnosis—and some pretty heavy duty diagnoses at that! Teenagers have mood swings, black and white thinking, irrationality . . . etc. I don’t mean this disparagingly. During adolescence there are enormous body/mind changes which are very unsteadying. Any of us adults in a difficult situation will exhibit many of these behaviors, as well. Drawing diagnostic conclusions, though, can be dangerous—especially with kids
Also, we’ve gotten more detailed and sophisticated in our terminology about human behavior but often at the exclusion of common sense. For example, I’ve found myself using old-fashioned terms like “nervous exhaustion” or “nervous breakdown,” when they seem more accurate and helpful. Other choices like “psychotic break” or “bi-polar disorder” just don’t fit and aren’t helpful, and we can all identify with being in a “slump” or “down in the dumps.”
Connecting with others in distress by being patient and emotionally supportive is the first order of business. Expressing kindness and understanding are always helpful, even if it doesn’t have an immediate, discernable impact. Knowing someone cares makes a big difference. It’s simple but true. And communicating using simple, descriptive language is always the best medicine.
"The most useful thing Congress and state departments of education can do is abandon authoritarian, centralizing initiatives and legislation that dictate what’s taught. By propping up an obsolete, dysfunctional curriculum, they’re making a very bad situation much worse. ~ Marion Brady, Truthout, June 25, 2010
"The 'standards and accountability' education reform effort began in the 1980s at the urging of leaders of business and industry. The reform message preached by Democrats, Republicans, and the mainstream media is simple. 1. America's schools are, at best, mediocre. 2. Teachers deserve most of the blame. 3. As a corrective, rigorous subject-matter standards and tests are essential. 4. Bringing market forces to bear will pressure teachers to meet the standards or choose some other line of work.
Competition - student against student, teacher against teacher, school against school, state against state, nation against nation - will yield the improvement necessary for the United States to finish in first place internationally." ~ Marion Brady, Truthout.
Take a break from the pressures of summer chores and recreation for a professional recharge in Castine at the 2010 MLTI Summer Institute July 28th through the 30th at Maine Maritime Academy. The popular professional development event is expanding, adding a fourth half-day session this year and featuring an eight hour Pre-Institute, Learn about Google Tools, with Maine's own Google Certified Teachers (sponsored by ACTEM).
Sessions emphasize hands-on, imaginative professional development opportunities in all content areas. Educators in all grade levels including adult education are welcome with focus on grades 7 through 12.
This year the presentations will encourage activities and resources to help answer to the question: “How can we model and promote ethical, responsible, and productive behavior among all members of our digital society?” The goal - connect to one or more elements of digital citizenship: etiquette, ethics, safety, savvy, presence, and productivity.
Ned is a very active seven year old boy—tireless and constantly in motion. His continuous imaginative play is captivating, both to himself and to anyone watching him. Within a minute of seeing a stick and a piece of crumpled up paper, for example, he has combined them with other objects to form a spaceship that he weaves in and out of many worlds.
Often, though, it is difficult to get Ned’s attention because he is so absorbed in play/thought/imagination. If you ask him a question or give him direction, he’ll respond as though he’s heard you but he doesn’t follow through…or so it seems. When his parents try to talk to Ned about listening and following through, he seems distracted and uncomfortable, and the session often accomplishes little except giving all involved a not-so-healthy level of frustration. Mary and Kevin, Ned’s parents, are concerned that his level of absorption will cause big problems for him, especially as he gets older.
Mary especially is tireless in her attempts to engage him and help him focus better. As she explored the communication styles framework, she recognized that Ned has a strong visual-spatial and kinesthetic world. He tends to think in pictures and focuses his attention on creating and experiencing. Therefore, using words to connect with him would likely be ineffective.
One day when Ned and Mary were at the park, they watched as two boys, some distance away, played with a ball. When the ball bounced toward them, Ned picked it up and began bouncing it in a pattern relating to the cracks in the pavement. Mary instructed him to return the ball to the boys. Ned replied, “I am.” His mother retorted, “No, you’re not. Give it back now.” The conversation went back and forth like this, and eventually Ned rolled the ball back to the boys.
Then Mary asked him to go sit in a nearby hammock and picture two scenes: the one that just occurred and another where he simply handed the ball back to the boys. Ned sat dreamily in the hammock for about five minutes and then said, “Oh, I get it. I should have given the ball back right away because they were playing a game with it.” Mary saw this as a breakthrough moment, and it was.
Typically in a follow-up discussion of this sort, Ned would defensively explain that he was giving the ball back because, in fact, he was, but it was in a manner that suited him and was not congruent with anyone else’s reality. This time it was different. As Ned tuned into his imaginative world to reflect, he observed his creative process for returning the ball (which he fully intended to do) and observed the scene from the perspective of the two boys. Once he visualized both pictures, he realized what was most important—the right thing to do in this situation. Tapping into Ned’s natural language in the visual-spatial realm gave him an opportunity to connect to a bigger picture and understand what was important to others.
As Mary and I talked about this, we explored the possibility of helping Ned use an imaginary pause button when she’s trying to get his attention. Because the compelling pictures he constantly visualizes makes it hard for him to focus on input from others, learning to press the pause button might help Ned focus on what Mary is saying. It’s an experiment worth trying. Using the communication styles lens often can help us creatively and specifically solve problems.
"This group of very rich people ignored this body of research that shows that the single most powerful factor in education gaps is poverty and not standardized testing.
Did they forget that theUnited States has the second highest rate of children in poverty of any industrialized country in the world?" ~ Cindy Lutenbacher, ajc . . . READ MORE
Diane Ravitch is a distinguished scholar, a professor at NYU, the author of the recently released The Death and Life of the Great American School System: How Testing and Choice are Undermining Education, and part of a two-member team that writes the blog “Bridging Differences.” I love reading “Bridging Differences”, and my views on education frequently align with those of Ravitch. Lately her focus has been on testing and teacher accountability.
In her June 15, 2010 post, Ravitch chides elected officials and education honchos for creating accountability policies that are so unrealistic they generate teaching to the test, circumscribed curricula, lowered standards, and outright cheating. Yes, I’m thinking as I read, that’s certainly true. She goes on to discuss and disparage how states have improved their students’ results on standardized tests by lowering the tests’ “cut” scores. For example, in New York in 2006, a seventh grader was rated “proficient” if he got 59.6% of the points correct on the annual state mathematics test. By 2009, the cut score for proficiency on the test by a seventh grader was 44%. In other words, “proficient” has been manipulated to such as extent that it has become meaningless. Yep, that’s a problem all right.
Next she cites and praises “some whistle-blowing teachers” who alerted the New York Post that the scoring method for this year’s standardized math test had been changed. Lo and behold students were given partial credit for some answers when they were incorrect and for some questions where no answer was supplied at all. Two of the examples that Ravitch gives the reader are from the fourth grade scoring guide:
“A miscalculation that 28 divided by 14 equals 4 instead of 2 is ‘partially correct’ if the student uses the right method to verify the wrong answer.”
“A child who subtracts 57 cents from three quarters for the right change and comes up with 15 cents instead of 18 cents still gets half credit.”
Ms. Ravitch says she hopes the children taking tests with this type of scoring never become engineers or choose other careers that require mathematical accuracy.
What??
Accustomed as I am to nodding my head when I read Diane Ravitch, I was dumbfounded by her criticism of awarding students partial credit for understanding a math concept. Isn’t that what educators have been working toward for 25 years or more? Aren’t we trying to deemphasize rote learning and replace it with strong problem-solving skills? Of course, accuracy is an important skill, but I want my students to be able to analyze a problem, understand the math concepts that elucidate it, and choose the strategies and steps needed to solve it. If they make a careless computation error or forget how many inches are in a foot, so what? I can accept it and am thrilled to give them partial credit for their answers because they’ve earned it. It’s clear to me that they understand what they’re doing, they're building on previous knowledge, they’re thinking. Isn’t that what we want?
Welcome to this community blog. We invite you to collaborate with us by sharing your thoughts, beliefs, ideas and resources. At the top find a custom search engine, and below a chronological archive of past posts and an alphabetical index. If you would like to be a "writer," being able to compose original posts, simply send a request to JBurkeMaine@gmail.com and an invitation will then be made.
Learning in Maine is a community blog to share ideas about learning and resources that might be helpful to others. Everyone can make comments on posts. If you would like to be a "writer," being able to compose original posts, simply send a request to JBurkeMaine@gmail.com and an invitation will then be made.
If you have questions or notice an issue, you may write to either of the two admins:
