Common Core in Ohio
August 21, 2014 5:01 pm at 5:01 pm #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.
YESSSSSsssssssss.August 21, 2014 10:32 pm at 10:32 pm #1036072
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?August 22, 2014 7:19 am at 7:19 am #1036085
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.)August 22, 2014 10:46 am at 10:46 am #1036115
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.September 3, 2014 4:32 pm at 4:32 pm #1038547
El Diablo EinsteinParticipantSeptember 4, 2014 11:51 am at 11:51 am #1038698September 4, 2014 11:57 am at 11:57 am #1038702
Changes made to the language that might have allowed ID/creationism into the science classroom.September 5, 2014 2:37 pm at 2:37 pm #1038963
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?September 11, 2014 11:05 am at 11:05 am #1040696
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/September 11, 2014 12:06 pm at 12:06 pm #1040701
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.)
The forum ‘Everyday Chit Chat’ is closed to new topics and replies.