Originally Posted November 11th, 2013
It has been over a month since the Tennessee Senate Education Committee held a hearing to dig deeper into Common Core State Standards (CCSS). Proponents and opponents waited somewhat patiently while appointees read the math and literacy standards on the first day. The second day began and ended with seven testimonies for each side. Eight hours of testimony without a break for lunch begot a plethora of information though not all of it was clear or useful. One point is clear though. Even the Education Committee had misconceptions of the new standards.
During the reading of the standards and throughout the testimonies, committee members asked a multitude of questions for clarity about the language, purpose, and implementation of the standards. However, the focal question really needed to be “Are they working?” Tennessee has already begun its full implementation of the standards despite unanswered questions, and students will soon tackle the 2014-2015 PARCC assessment. By this time, we should be hearing teacher feedback on the classroom success and struggle of CCSS thus far. However, I was the only active teacher testifying that day- the only person in the room to have actually taught the standards to our students.
Instead of asking whether or not they were working, the questions revolved around the federal takeover of education, the collection of personal student data, and the technology needed for assessments. Tennessee Education Commissioner Kevin Huffman began the day of testimony by answering a barrage of questions about language in the standards, subject content, curriculum changes, cost, accountability, quality, and so many other fundamental tidbits. Multiple testimonies from outsiders and Tennessee’s own continued through the day. But again- what is actually working? And where are we headed next?
Here is one thing that is working; Tennessee is working hard to prepare its educators to implement these rigorous standards. The state wide summer trainings led by over 700 Core Coaches welcomed over 20,000 teachers and reformatted versions of those trainings continue to take place throughout districts. These trainings offered teachers first hand practice at creating unit outlines, fostering student-led discussions, and deepening mathematical thought and computation. As a recipient and leader of the trainings, I know they are effective. I, as well as many other teachers, marched back into the classroom in August prepared to take our classes to another level. But we are not there yet. There are more teachers who need training and every teacher needs the opportunity to collaborate with their grade and content level. The boost of CCSS training for the past two years is definitely a factor in Tennessee being the fastest improving state this year, but we cannot pull back. We have to disperse the trainings to every school building across Tennessee.
What else is working? The standards themselves. We have known all along that our students are struggling readers and thinkers. Instructional practice has slowly shifted to a student-centered, student-led classroom, but the previous standards (and corresponding assessments) have not held students accountable enough. There has been disconnect between quality instruction, the standards, and the learner. But I have seen firsthand how the new shifts in instruction through the increased cognitive demand can create discomfort that leads to greater discovery in students. Children crave a challenge. and what teachers need to be prepared to be is a guide to direct them through the challenge. However, the students are the ones to navigate the challenges, the higher-level skills.
We have a long way to go but Tennessee has already proven that we are determined to do what it takes to raise our students’ achievement. As a teacher, I am honored to be a part of this redirection of education under the common core, and as always to be a citizen of the great state of Tennessee!
By Casie Jones
Follow Bluff City Education on Twitter @bluffcityed and look for the hashtag #iteachiam and #TNedu to find more of our stories. Please also like our page on facebook.
They are not effective for the lower grades. In fact, they are developmentally inappropriate for grades K-2. It’s possible that if you haven’t studied Early Childhood Education you would not know this. In that case, I would hope you would turn to the experts to determine whether they are effective in those grades.
I am confident those experts will tell you that they are not.
I read something last night about how they are changing the way that kindergarten students are assessed in Tennessee but I don’t know much about it. Possibly moving to a more portfolio based system. have you heard anything about this and do you know anything about it?
Also, have you talked to anyone in the county that teachers Pre-K about what they do? it sounds like they have been implementing common core for the past few years and after some initial struggles have seen students really flourish under the standards (this is from a direct conversation I had with a pre-k teacher in Germantown)
They are making assessment of kindergarten worse, not better (it’s never been assessed by the state before, at least, not to the best of my knowledge).
Also, I do know Pre-K teachers who have told me they are destroying Pre-K (and children’s educations) by placing inappropriate academic demands on children too young for them.
And here is another useful article I stumbled upon (it was posted in the national opt out Facebook page):
http://m.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2014/03/23/kindergarten-teacher-my-job-is-now-about-tests-and-data-not-children-i-quit/?tid=pm_local_pop
The engine that drives the adoption of these new standards is high stakes testing. The tests are taken by the students weekly and cost the school system a fee for each student taking the test. The tests are computer based and are designed to test what the children do not know rather than what they know. As a result, many top students are scoring in the 70’s and 80’s and average and struggling students score lower so they have to be remediated and retested. This remedial software and testing costs the school system another fee per pupil retested.
The testing, textbook, computer and computer software companies are making out like bandits. Why do you think Bill Gates has put so much money into these new standards. Follow the money. Many people in Nashville and Washington DC that are pushing this system (which by the way, has never been field tested) onto our children are highly invested in these testing and textbook companies. The main one being Pearson.
The school computer labs, which were intended to introduce the students to the computer as a tool for them to use to write, create, gather data, have been taken over by mind numbing animated assigned instruction and testing programs that the children HATE!
When you test a child beyond their developmental abilities it is frustrating and demoralizing to the child. Many parents, whose children are in schools in states such as Ohio, California, and North Carolina that have used these programs, are seeing children as young as second, third, or fourth grade having physical and emotional problems that are showing up, refusing to go to school, crying, stomach problems, and thinking they are “stupid.”
How did we get caught up in these common standards in the first place. Follow the money, again. The Department of Education offered the governors of the states federal Race to the Top grants in return for agreeing to implement the common standards in their states. This was done before the standards had even been written! As unbelievable as it sounds, most governors accepted the grant money thereby locking their state into adopting the common standards after they were written.
The teachers that are more seasoned are horrified at the changes but are instructed not to speak out against them. That is the reason you are not hearing more feedback. The teachers are intimidated and fear for their jobs if they speak out.
Interesting thoughts, thanks for the contribution. What’s your basis for the position that the tests teach what students do not know rather than what they do? I would love to see some examples.