Our City Online

Messageboard - Everyday Chit Chat

NOTE: You are viewing an archived version of the Columbus Underground forums/messageboard. As of 05/22/16 they have been closed to new comments and replies, but will remain accessible for archived searches and reference. For more information CLICK HERE

Common Core in Ohio

Home Forums General Columbus Discussion Everyday Chit Chat Common Core in Ohio

Viewing 10 posts - 16 through 25 (of 25 total)
  • Author
  • #1036037

    I’d say the endpoint was even MORE fabulous for non-fiction fans.

    I went to the Central Ohio Curriculum Alignment meetings last year and the year before. If memory serves me correctly, by 12th grade, 80-90% of CC curriculum reading material in language arts is . . . (you see this coming) non-fiction.




    Why the obsession with non-fiction? If you want to make the material even less interesting to high school students, why not insist they read it in latin?


    I think that’s one of the arguments that teachers who disdain CC actually make. Seems totally plausible to me.

    (I prefer non-fiction, from a personal reading-choice perspective.)



    I preferred fiction, but I understand the thinking behind those who say that more nonfiction in the curriculum makes sense from the perspective of what most people who don’t go on to be English majors will likely encounter more often in everyday life. Learning how to spot BS in the newspaper is more useful for most than the more abstract and contemplative lessons that one can often draw more fully from fiction.

    I’d still be skeptical of making 80%+ of the curriculum nonfiction, but we tended towards the opposite extreme in my HS English classes.

    The CC math standards are the ones where most of the ire has been concentrated, though. The language arts sections are fuzzier and involve more judgment; the critiques of the math standards are more straightforward. Similarly, on social studies, the CC standards are actually somewhat light on content, so they actually have built-in flexibility for the local control that most CC critics generally want in the first place. To the extent that local boards still lack control, that’s still often traceable to the same source it was previously: state boards of education, often strongly influenced by textbook publishers (or, sometimes, religious groups) establishing content requirements and enforcing them with statewide standardized proficiency tests.


    El Diablo Einstein






    Changes made to the language that might have allowed ID/creationism into the science classroom.


    Scioto Tower

    I must be dumb…but even in your revised example, how can someone eat 23/20ths of a pizza? That is still more than 100%…is it not?

    The math stuff sounds more akin to applied math, which isn’t at all a bad thing, provided you can write the problem sets well.

    Problem #1 is a failure at multiple levels.

    a. The first failure is the singular description.<br>
    b. The second failure is the fact that since it’s physically impossible to eat more pizza than was ordered, the ratios don’t make any sense, since combined, they add up to more than 100% of the pizza, unless the ratios apply to a single pizza pie, which again, is a textual failure.

    Problem #2 is simply way too advanced for fourth grade, unless they dropped algebra and higher mathematics to that grade level.

    Despite all this though, the real world problem is that vast majorities of people have no idea how to apply mathematics they learned in school to actually solve real problems they’re faced with every day. I understand where CC is trying to chip away at that, and if you write the correct problem sets, you should be able to. Obviously the idiots they’ve got writing the problems can’t.

    Problem #1 should have been written as follows:

    1) We ordered some pizza pies for lunch. John ate 23/20 worth of a pie. Mary had 3/4 worth of a pie. Greg had 82/100 worth of a pie. How much of the total pizza pies combined, was eaten?



    Common Core Repeal Effort Criticized for ‘Creationism’ Language
    September 9, 2014
    by Andy Chow – Ohio Public Radio Statehouse News Bureau

    The National Center for Science Education says a bill in the House would clear the way for Ohio schools to teach creationism in the classroom. The legislation seeks to repeal the education standards known as the Common Core — which is currently being used around the state.

    READ MORE: http://wosu.org/2012/news/2014/09/09/common-core-repeal-effort-criticized-for-creationism-language/


    Wonder if they knew that the committee had already removed the horrifyingly stupid, porky language from the bill?


    I’d hate to think that bill opponents would deliberately ignore that and misinform people. But, given the state of politics, it wouldn’t shock me.

    (even though the language is gone, I’m pretty sure that it’s already killed the bill. too late.)

Viewing 10 posts - 16 through 25 (of 25 total)

The forum ‘Everyday Chit Chat’ is closed to new topics and replies.


This year’s Urban Living Tour event has been postponed due to COVID-19, but will be returning later this summer!

CLICK HERE to sign up to be notified when tickets go on sale!