Common Core State Standards - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Common Core State Standards PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 3d0d4d-YmZmM



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Common Core State Standards

Description:

Are They Right For The State ... left in the market The interests of testing advocates and testing companies like Pearson are often the same High-paid lobbyists ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:56
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 42
Provided by: okhouseGo
Learn more at: http://www.okhouse.gov
Category:
Tags: common | core | standards | state

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Common Core State Standards


1
Common Core State Standards
  • Are They Right For The State of Oklahoma?

2
Oklahoma Origins of Common Core State Standards
(CCSS)
  • Oklahoma SB 2033, passed in 2010, contained a
    number of public education reform measures to
    support Oklahomas application for the second
    round of federal Race to the Top (RTT) funding.

3
  • SB 2033 Section 15B states,
  • By August 1, 2010, the State Board of Education
    shall adopt revisions to the subject matter
    curriculum adopted by the State Board for English
    Language Arts and Mathematics as is necessary to
    align the curriculum with the K-12 Common Core
    State Standards developed by the Common Core
    State Standards Initiative, an effort coordinated
    by the National Governors Association Center for
    Best Practices and the Council of Chief State
    School Officers. The revised curriculum shall
    reflect the K-12 Common Core State Standards
  • in their entirety
  • and may include additional standards as long as
    the amount of additional standards is not more
    than fifteen percent (15) of the K-12 Common
    Core State Standards.

4
  • Like all state legislatures that adopted CCSS
    early on in the process, Oklahoma passed the bill
    adopting them before they had been made available
    for full review

5
National Origins of Common Core State Standards
  • Mark Tucker, President of the National Center for
    Education and the Economy (NCEE) wrote his friend
    Hillary Clinton a letter in 1990
  • urging the Clintons to pass sweeping education
    reform including National Standards and National
    Testing using the slogan high standards
  • Dear Hillary letter became 1994s
    School-to-Work Opportunities Act, Goals 2000 Act
    and Improving Americas Schools Act of 1994
    (Clintons ESEA reauthorization)

6
  • 1996 - Achieve, Inc. was formed by the nations
    governors and corporate leaders and NCEE at the
    96 Education Summit in Palisades, NY
  • Main goal of Achieve was to benchmark education
    standards and assessments in order to make the
    1994 reforms lasting.

7
  • 2008 - Achieve, Inc., The National Governors
    Association (NGO) and the Council of Chief State
    School Officers (CCSSSO) produced Benchmarking
    for Success Ensuring Students Receive a
    World-Class Education
  • Called for Washington to implement tiered
    incentives to push states to adopt common core
    standards
  • 2009 Sec. of Education Arne Duncan creates RTT
    backed by American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
    (stimulus) funds for four categories that
    include
  • Adopting Common Core State Standards (CCSS)
  • No public hearings Congressional or otherwise -
    were ever held on RTT or any of the separate
    initiatives.

8
Conflicts of Interest and Monopolies
  • Achieve, Inc., NGO and the CCSSO produced
    Benchmarking for Success Ensuring Students
    Receive a World-Class Education
  • Achieve, is serving as the project management
    partner for PARCC, a consortium of 25 states that
    was awarded a Race to the Top assessment
    competition grant.
  • Achieve creates Americas Choice through Marc
    Tuckers NCEE to
  • serve every aspect of that required by RTT.

9
  • Pearson purchases Americas Choice
  • Pearson provides Complete and cohesive support
    to implement the new Common Core State Standards
    which includes English and math curricula,
    consultation services, professional development,
    and tests, as well as being the largest textbook
    supplier in the world.
  • The Bill Gates Foundation has played a PROMINENT
    role in Achieve, Americas Choice, The Common
    Core State Standards Initiative and PARCC.
  • PARCC is committed to developing a
    computer-based assessment system aligned to the
    math and English CCSS

10
What Will the Common Core State Standards
Initiative Cost Oklahoma?
  • Missouri, Washington, California and Oklahoma
    signed on to CCSS without winning an RTT grant
  • The unfunded cost to Californians is projected to
    exceed 1.6 Billion dollars
  • 70 million allocated for textbooks
  • 800 million for new curriculum
  • 765 million for teacher training
  • 20 million for principal training
  • Other assorted costs

11
  • Washington States Superintendent has asked their
    legislature for 2,156,000 dollars to implement
    the CCSS in Washington
  • Texas will not sign on to CCSS partly because the
    costs to implement are estimated to be as high as
    3 billion dollars
  • Oklahoma would be responsible for the same type
    CCSS outlays as California
  • Of interest the state of Ohio, who won an RTT
    grant, has a number of districts returning RTT
    money saying they can't afford to spend more than
    they'd get from the grant.

12
Are the Common Core State Standards Effective?
  • Andrew Porter, dean of the University of
    Pennsylvania Graduate School of Education a
    previous and early supporter of CCSS, states,
  • Our research shows that the common-core
    standards do not represent a meaningful
    improvement over existing state standards.
  • He also goes on to say, The common core is not a
    new gold standardits firmly in the middle of
    the pack of current curricula.

13
  • Zeev Wurman and Sandra Stotsky (both early CCSS
    contributors and reviewers) determined, in their
    paper, Common Cores Standards Still Dont Make
    the Grade,
  • Common Cores college readiness standards do
    not point to a level of intellectual achievement
    that signifies readiness for authentic
    college-level work. At best, they point to no
    more than readiness for a high school diploma.

14
  • John Jensen, licensed clinical psychologist and
    education consultant says
  • They are a labored way to solve a simple problem
  • Proficiency is what educators want for students
  • Practice of basics makes proficiency - NOT adding
    more to learn
  • The point is not to cover everything, but
    progressively to expand and deepen ones internal
    field of knowledge.
  • Get one idea at a time clear and correct,
    practice it till its mastered, and connect it to
    its field.

15
  • Reaching the Goal by the Educational Policy
    Improvement Center (whose clients include Achieve
    and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation)
    suggests strong support for the validity of
    common core standards, but had great concern
    about the areas they do not cover.
  • CCSS not a complete recipe for college
    preparation
  • Defining a set of standards as college and
    career ready that overlook ... dimensions beyond
    content knowledge will result in assuming that
    students who have achieved a particular score on
    the common assessments of the standards are
    fully ready for college and career studies when,
    in fact, they may possess only a subset of the
    knowledge and skills, strategies and techniques
    necessary to be fully ready for postsecondary
    success,
  • Dr. David Conley, CEO, EPIC

16
  • Closing the Door on Innovation, a manifesto
    signed by a wide collection of interested parties
    including the Heritage Foundation, Friedman
    Foundation, CATO Institute, Goldwater Institute,
    and ROPEs Board of Directors
  • Contains five reasons states should not adopt
    CCSS, including
  • lack of consistent evidence indicating that a
    national curriculum leads to high academic
    achievement.
  • The effects of curricula on student achievement
    are larger, more certain and less expensive than
    popular reforms such as common standards
    Brookings Institute

17
CCS English Standards
  • Standards too narrow in scope, drafted as
    individual, testable actions rather than as
    authentic performances in college classrooms or
    workplaces.
  • Document claims to be evidence-based, but we note
    that none of the evidence has been drawn from
    peer-reviewed research journals or similar
    sources, but mainly consists of surveys done by
    testing companies (ie Pearson).
  • National Council of Teachers of English

18
  • NO research base supporting the 10
    College-and-Career-Readiness Standards for
    reading on K-12 grade-level standards
  • NO international benchmarking as advertised (CCSS
    website now says, Informed by international
    benchmarks)
  • Few content-rich Literature and reading standards
    in grades 6-12
  • Pedagogically useless Vocabulary standards in
    grades 6-12
  • Sandra Stotsky, Ph.D. in reading research and
    reading education, former CCSS draft committee
    member

19
  • The new Common Core standards will require
    students to read considerably less fiction.
  • Julia Steiny, former member of the Providence
    School Board, education consultant
  • Cursive writing is not among the standards.
  • Research proves that handwriting teaches letter
    formation, a fundamental base of literacy
    advances neurological development with perceptual
    and motor skills practice supports reading and
    language acquisition and augments writing
    fluency.
  • Zaner-Bloser English book and ancillary supplier

20
CCS Math Standards
  • US standards the least informative of those from
    South Korea, Singapore, Hong Kong, Japan and
    Taiwan
  • A study in bureaucratic ambiguity.
  • Jonathan Goodman, Professor of Mathematics,
    Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences, NYU
  • The Core mathematics standards are written to
    reflect very low expectations
  • An extremely unusual approach to geometry from
    grade 7 on, the most likely outcome of which will
    be the complete suppression of the key topics in
    Euclidean geometry including proofs and deductive
    reasoning.
  • James Milgram, Professor emeritus, Stanford
    University member of the Common Core Validation
    committee

21
  • This omission of significant portions of
    essential Algebra II and Geometry content renders
    the Common Core Standards inadequate for
    students who will enter undergraduate programs in
    STEM or even non-STEM disciplines in much of the
    country.
  • States should not adopt the "College-Readiness"
    Standards unless they adequately identify the
    content required for success inmathematics
    courses in their state universities.  The current
    Common Core Standards draft falls significantly
    short of this requirement for many states.
  • United States Coalition for World Class Math

22
  • Place emphasis on Standards for Mathematical
    Practice which supports a constructivist
    (progressive) approach.
  • This approach is typical of reform (fuzzy) math
    programs to which many parents across the country
    object.
  • Wheres The Math?
  • Students learn perseverance by struggling
    throughand ultimately succeeding onvery
    difficult problems. And you just simply cannot do
    that unless you have mastered the content you
    need to succeed. Empty problem solving skills
    simply cannot make up for missing content.
  • Kathleen Porter-Magee, Fordham Institute
  • Relevant isnt supposed to be a synonym for
    dumbed-down, it just always seems to work out
    that way. And my hunch is that students might
    struggle less with algebra, geometry and calculus
    if they showed up in high school with a strong
    foundation in basic math skills.
  • Robert Pondiscio, Core Knowledge Institute

23
  • A bitter disappointment.
  • In terms of their limited vision of math
    education, the pedestrian framework chosen to
    organize the standards
  • Incoherent nature of the standards for
    mathematical practice in particular
  • They unwittingly reinforce the very errors in
    math curriculum, instruction, and assessment that
    produced the current crisis.
  • Grant Wiggins, president, Authentic Education
  • Common Core Math writers/reviewers have been
    unwilling to defend the standards,
  • Over the past three months, we've now asked six
    individuals involved in the Common Core math
    standards to pen a piece making the case for
    their rigor and quality, and each has declined in
    turn.
  • Rick Hess, editor, EdWeek.

24
CCS Science Standards
  • This framework does not expect our students to
    be able to do any science, or to be able to solve
    any science problem.
  • This framework simply teaches our students
    science appreciation, rather than science. It
    expects our students to become good consumers of
    science and technology, rather than prepare them
    to be the discoverers of science and creators of
    technology.
  • Zeev Wurman, Chief Software Architect of
    MonolithIC 3D Inc., former senior policy adviser
    at the U.S. Department of Education

25
  • Theres a section of the proposed standards
    called modeling.
  • The only discernible standard I could find
    was The student will be able to use graphs, for
    example, graphs of Co2 emissions and global
    temperatures over time. The joke was What do we
    call this class? Do we call it Global Warming
    Math?
  • Robert Scott, Texas Commissioner of Education
  • Computer science largely excluded.
  • Computing in the Core Advocacy Group (members
    include Google, Microsoft and the National
    Council of Teachers of Mathematics)

26
Testing (Assessments)
  • According to Education Week Experts See Hurdles
    Ahead for Common Core Tests
  • High expectations for tests may outpace ability
    of states to pay for and administer them
  • Tight timelines wont allow for well-done
    piloting of the assessments
  • National assessments were originally intended to
    save states money, but federal grants contain no
    money for administration
  • Many brick and mortar schools do not have the
    technology necessary to administer the tests

27
  • The current focus on testing has tended to make
    test results the goal of the system rather than a
    measure.
  • Violates Goodhart's Law when measure becomes the
    goal, it ceases to be an effective measure.
  • One-third of a billion dollars has now gone into
    mere development (not roll-out, printing,
    training or scoring) of Common Core assessments
    alone, which will in turn render useless the
    billions already spent, state to state, to
    develop, print, administer and score standardized
    tests tied to state standards and curricula.
  • Oklahomas last contract with Pearson cost the
    state 16.7 million dollars

28
  • Testing was to shine a spotlight on
    low-performing schools, and choice would create
    opportunities for poor kids to leave for better
    schools. All of this seemed to make sense, but
    there was little empirical evidence, just promise
    and hope.
  • Diane Ravitch, former Asst. Secretary of
    Education for George. H.W. Bush.
  • Oklahoma has had significant problems with
    testing companies (5 have been used in the last
    decade)
  • This is a national problem described by one think
    tank (FairTest) as a perverted game of musical
    chairs where companies move from state to state
    as they are hired and then fired for poor
    performance.
  • Student test results formulate AYP (sometimes
    incorrectly!) and now will be used to evaluate
    teachers and principals?

29
  • Conflict of interest
  • Pearson has the worst testing track record of any
    test company in the nation, but due to corporate
    mergers, is one of just a handful of testing
    companies left in the market

30
  • The interests of testing advocates and testing
    companies like Pearson are often the same
  • High-paid lobbyists compete for testing contracts
    in Texas where bills that would have reduced the
    states reliance on tests didnt pass
  • This kind of influence can make it hard for
    legislators to assess testing efficacy
  • Can create testing programs that perpetuate
    themselves
  • Can create industries that perpetuate
    marketable tests as companies feel the need to
    create products that might sell

31
What Are Other Organizations Saying About CCSS?
  • Association of American Educators Poll
  • 69 of surveyed membership believes that the
    federal government should NOT mandate curriculum
    standards
  • 64 supported the states making the final
    determination about the standards.
  • Teachers in the field recognize that students, in
    addition to being held to a high academic
    standard, ought to be given the opportunity to
    learn from state-based curriculums designed with
    the goals of their state in mind.

32
Phi Delta Kappa/Gallup Poll 2010
  • 65 of respondents believed the federal
    government should NOT set the standards for what
    students should know

44 of respondents believed the most important
national program was improving the quality of our
teachers 24 said, developing demanding
education standards
33
Phi Delta Kappa/Gallup Poll 2011
  • 74 of respondents thought teachers should NOT be
    required to follow a prescribed curriculum so all
    students could learn the same content

34
ROPE, 2011
81 of respondents believed Oklahoma public
schools that take federal money are made to
follow federal regulations
  • 95 of respondents believed that when local
    Oklahoma schools are made to follow federal
    regulations educational opportunities for
    Oklahoma students decline

35
How Do Federal Mandates and Programs Effect States
  • A 1994 Government Accountability Office (GAO)
    report on education finance found
  • Fed funding for state education amounts to only
    7
  • But provides 41 of state paperwork burden
  • 13,400 workers needed just to oversee compliance
    with all the red tape.
  • 2006 GAO reported
  • red tape increased annual paperwork burden by
    6.7 million hours - at a cost of 141 million
  • Since 1950s, teachers as a percentage of school
    staff declined from 70 to about 51.
  • administrative support staff increased from 23.8
    percent to 30 percent.
  • Estimated 65-70 cents of every education dollar
    leaving Washington makes it into the classroom

36
  • American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy
    Research, Federal Compliance Works against
    Education Policy Goals
  • The current federal education compliance
    structure is a significant barrier to fulfilling
    federal policy goals
  • Fiscal and administrative requirements often lead
    to expensive and time-consuming compliance
    processes that are not related to improving
    student achievement or school success.

37
  • Mercatus Center, George Mason University, Do
    Governmental Grants Create Tax Ratchets in State
    and Local Taxes?
  • Increase in federal grants to state and local
    governments as a result of ARRA will cause state
    and local taxes to increase.
  • Estimate 80 billion in future state and local
    tax and own source revenue increases.

38
Are There Other Mechanisms by Which To Nationally
Benchmark Oklahoma Students?
  • Karl Springer, Superintendent of Oklahoma City
    Public Schools says, ACT is attractive due to
    the use of EXPLORE (8th Grade) and PLAN (10th
    Grade) benchmarking assessments that the state
    pays for students to take across the state. EPAS
    allows for districts to benchmark student
    progress toward meeting college readiness
    standards.
  • Kentucky compared NAEP and ACTs EXPLORE in 8th
    grade reading and mathematics and used as a
    benchmark for assessing college and career
    readiness.
  • Through these comparisons, Kentucky was also able
    to determine that Kentuckys own Core Content
    Test scores in the area of reading and math were
    seriously inflated.

39
Conclusion
  • Often cited as the model country for school
    improvement, Finland does exactly the opposite of
    the NCLB and RTT/Common Core based reform of the
    US (drills basics, no national/state tests until
    high school graduation).
  • Centralized education policy hasnt worked
    because it doesnt address the fundamental
    problem in public education proficiency
  • Home school students have higher ACT scores,
    GPAs and graduation rates when compared with
    public school students model more like Finland.
  • National standards present the risk of states
    accepting a one size fits all, lowest common
    denominator education standard (Fordham - Do High
    Flyers Maintain Their Altitude?)

40
  • National standards cede more control to
    Washington and weaken the decision-making power
    of parents and teachers those closest to
    students
  • CCSS are national in scope, but have been neither
    debated nor adopted by Congress
  • National Council of Teachers of English believe
    CCSS publishers criteria to be a signal of
    usurpation of teacher judgment in ways that are
    alarming
  • Now that the CCSS have been in public purview for
    some time and more is being learned about them,
    five different states are considering various
    stages of their repeal - Minnesota, South
    Carolina, New Hampshire, Utah and Massachusetts

41
  • Oklahoma should too.
About PowerShow.com