TED Conversations

edward long

Association of Old Crows


This conversation is closed.

C.C.S.S.-- Yea or Nay?

Common Core State Standards is a big-time effort currently under way to make necessary changes in America's public schools to better prepare graduates for employment.
On this specific issue we the people are either ignorant, apathetic, for it, or against it. Those last two groups can help the first two by expressing their reasons for their positions. Let it rip TEDsters!


Closing Statement from edward long

The vote is: Yeas 0, Nays 11. The Nays have it. It is seen by the respondents to be just another expression of opinion about WHAT needs to be done without a plan for HOW to get it done. It is seen as a power grab by the Feds which leaves the states with little or no say in how schools are run. It is seen as an effort to promote certain career paths while inhibiting others. It is seen as a death warrant for all non-STEM programs. It is thought to be off-target in the definition and utilization of Testing. Tedsters who do not like CCSS spoke up. TEDsters who like it kept quiet. Thanks to all for many experience-based opinions worth sharing.--Edward

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Aug 14 2013: o.k. Edward I'll let it rip......

    A. I have yet to see any educational mandate of any kind that has addressed the core issues our antiquated educational system is suffering from.

    B. I have yet to wittiness any educational mandate, (good, bad or ugly) that has been effectively executed. Yes they are impressive, nicely wrapped by individuals who are talented theorists.

    C. data based information is o.k. but, flawed. if you have had the opportunity of reading this "stuff" then all students are" cut out of the same cookie cutter".

    D. Testing....the on-going quest for the preferable" silver bullet". a school districts testing grades, even when averaged do not speak to the true ability of a student nor an accurate reflection of a districts teaching staff.

    the drop in student achievement lives in the quite middle population. The reason(s) are another conversation Edward. the fix, Magnet High Schools. the reasons are vast and successes proven over time. please read;

    Yes, it does" take a village to raise a child".
    • thumb
      Aug 15 2013: MEJ,

      A. The goal is not to address educational issues ... it is to socialize education with the Fed as the driver.

      B. The mandates are the vehicle to force your will on others. If they like your money they will endorse your mandates. That is the golden rule ... He who has the gold rules ... that would be the fed.

      C. Data always supports the mandate ... I worked in analysis trust me on this one.

      D. Testing is a necessary evil but should be a tool used to show the road taken in relation to the road proposed. Testing is a tool ... high stakes tests .... ruin careers and students willingness to learn.

      Until we offer a duel curriculum of college prep and manual arts / trades, the madness will continue. Not all student will or should go to college. Tech schools and Community colleges are for the majority of people.

      There are many ways to achieve the goal of better education .... Magnet schools, private, lessons learned overseas, all of these are available ... and have been available. However, the goal of the Secretary of Education is assert his will on you and socialize education with the fed writing text, devising and grading tests, and developing all syllabus without input from states or the citizens. See golden rule in B above.

      The best way I know of ensuring failure is to place the Federal government in charge of anything.

      Sorry to sound like I am preaching to you. This really gets to me.

      As always thanks for listening to me rant. Your one of the good guys.

      I wish you well. Bob.
      • Aug 15 2013: A. "The Fed" isn't driving anything. This has all happened purely at the state level. The core was developed by a conference of the states and is up to individual states to adopt or not. No federal enforcement is involved.
        B. There is no "mandate". There is no force being used upon individual states. Quote the specific laws or regulations that force states to adopt the common core. Cite your sources--the direct regulations or laws, not some second or third-hand account from a lunatic political source.
        C. There is no "mandate" for data to support.
        D. Testing is up to each individual state, so its problems are, again, the states' problems. Whether or not there is a DUAL curriculum (not "duel"--it behooves someone who attempts to critique a curriculum to have at least the most basic competence in language use) is again up to individual states. There is no mandate. Quote the specific federal laws or regulations that mandate the common core. Quote them.
        • thumb
          Aug 16 2013: A: Will Barack Hussein Obama and the Sec. of HE&W allow this hugely influential interstate rugulation to operate free of their oversight? Really? The Feds will continue to control the purse strings but they will ignore this far-reaching program which goes to the very heart of the education system in America? The official line is , "CCSS is NOT under the control of the Federal government."?. Such an arrangement, if true, would be contrary to every interstate effort ever undertaken in US history! Suddenly each state is being told by Washington, "Do whatever you want. We will have nothing to do with it"? I don't think we have the truth here.B and C: We are discussing the pro and the con of CCSS. The issue is not about whether or not there is a Federal mandate. The debate here is about the appropriateness of the program for the nation. It absolutely is a national effort! D: If testing can vary from state to state how is the program able to demonstrate overall standardization? You request quotes from the "specific federal laws or regulations". I thought you said the Feds had nothing to do with CCSS? To what federal laws and regulations are you referring? Thank for your thoughts Bryan. Should I record you as a "Yea" vote?
      • Aug 16 2013: Will your idle speculation prove anything at all? Really? Since I'm a scientist and not a demagogue, I don't live in the world of assuming what I claim to prove. Right now, there is no evidence about what will happen. Likewise, given the actual timeline of solid implementation of the plan, Obama will probably be out of office before it even can be seen whether or not it will just be abandoned like so many other pedagogical fads have been abandoned. That's a little detail that the idiot Chicken Littles like to pretend doesn't exist. The USA is infamous, worldwide, for its pedagogical fad-chasing and has been a fad-chaser for at least a century.

        I was responding to a particular paranoid screed that SPECIFICALLY used the term "mandate". I notice that you did not jump all over that screed over the term "mandate". Instead, you dishonestly quibbled over the term only AFTER someone pointed out there was no "mandate". Since there is no mandate, only a paranoid delusional would make claims based on the existence of a "mandate" that didn't exist. I request quotes from specific federal laws and regulations EXACTLY TO POINT OUT THERE IS NO MANDATE and that whining about a "federal mandate" is nothing better than lunacy. If there is a mandate, QUOTE THE MANDATE or withdraw the flat-out lie that there is a mandate.

        Finally, I am not a "yea" vote. I am a "people with no clue need to stop making ignorant paranoid delusional screeds" vote. I consider the "common core" to be an interesting concept, but I also believe it is founded more in wishful thinking and the need to provide the illusion of "doing something" than actual solid grounding. Likewise, if some state wants to comply with NCLB by merely lowering their own state standards to the point where one can graduate from high school by being able to guess the first letter in ones first name three times out of four, it's that state's prerogative. Bad education imposes its own punishment--standards aren't needed.
        • thumb
          Aug 16 2013: There is a current conversation that addresses how to communicate effectively and suggests that certain insults, name calling, and specific words, should be avoided.

          Addressing Edward in such a manner is uncalled for. I also referred to mandates but have read your reply over and over to cross out the attacks and find your point. Here is what I concluded ... 1. you voted NO .... 2. you do not think there are educational mandates.

          On behalf of the paranoid, delusional, screeds, ignorant, whining, chicken littles, pretenders, etc .. I wish to thank you for your response.
        • thumb
          Aug 18 2013: I do not want to start a conversation titled: "Should people with no clue stop making ignorant paranoid delusional screeds?", please feel free to do so. Since this debate is simply titled "CCSS Yea or Nay?" I will record your response as "not a Yea", or, more commonly known as a "Nay". Thanks for adding your specific opinion about the subject of CCSS to all those we have seen thus far including Mr. Winner's. By the way, good job on not being demagogic.
    • thumb
      Aug 15 2013: Clearly another "Nay" vote Mary Ellen. Thank you for giving 4 thoughtful reasons for your convictions. I see some repeating expressions of shortcomings with CCSS. . . the core issues are overlooked; nothing about how to perform the fixes; faulty data used; testing is the wrong metric. Hmmm.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.