COMMON CORE

[Nobunaga]

How can someone assault a police officer when that person is not a police officer? And more importantly, why is someone being punished so harshly for questioning what his children are being taught? What is the government refusing to tell us?

The security guard is an off-duty cop.

This is on You-Tube - a million people have seen it. Mr. Small needs to get a lawyer and nail these people to the wall. Who knows, Small might have drilled that cop after the video finishes, but a man being hauled out of a public forum for openly expressing his concerns, and desiring others to know about them - with physical force... He would certainly have a lot of sympathy.

[Phatscotty]

Robert Small (in the video) of Towson, Maryland was charged with second-degree assault of a police officer and faces a $2,500 fine and up to 10 years in prison. He was also charged with disturbing a school operation, which carries an additional $2,500 and up to six months in jail.

This a concerned parent, who pays his taxes to pay for his kids' education - going to prison.

Common Core is so good for America, that if you ask questions, you get charged with a crime and go to jail, unless someone has a video camera.

NAZIS!

[Night Strike]

It looks like all charges have been dropped against that guy.

[Phatscotty]

It looks like all charges have been dropped against that guy.

Very likely only because it was caught on camera and went viral and made news.

[BigBallinStalin]

Bias in the media?

[Phatscotty]

btw, can someone please timestamp the "assault" on the "police officer"? I must have missed it

http://mychal-massie.com/premium/common ... handbooks/
Common Core Part Of Mao and Lenin Handbooks

It’s a well-known observation that whenever businessmen come together sooner or later their conversation turns to how to best separate consumers from their money (which is why businesses in reality exist). And in a froward way, similar can be said about what happens when Marxist ideologues gather in the shadows. They discuss how to strip We the People of Constitutional rights based on their Marxist theorems. And that is exactly what has happened with the advent of the Common Core education curriculum.

The argument for the “absolute need” of Common Core standards is they are the only way to prepare students for careers and college. Supposedly without Common Core standards our children will neither be college-ready nor career-ready. And while the battle to resist Common Core was being fought by those of us who understood the sinister evil of what will be a forced program of education, “. . .the Obama administration had $4.35 billion of Race to the Top federal funds, and [said] states had to adopt ‘college-and-career ready standards’ if they wanted to be eligible to compete for those funds.” (The Biggest Fallacy of the Common Core Standards; Diane Ravitch; 8/24/13)

As Ravitch pointed out, major corporations published full-page advertisements in the New York Times and paid for television commercials warning that unless Common Core standards were immediately adopted our economy would be seriously threatened. The Council on Foreign Relations, chaired by none other than Joel Klein and Condoleezza Rice, warned that our national security was at risk unless Common Core was adopted without delay. (And people were browbeating me because I said Rice was as much of a conservative as my right shoe, but I digress.)

Let me make this easy for you. Common Core standards is an across-the-board, pre-K to the end of your child’s education, system of teaching whereby every student is mandated to be taught the exact same thing and for all intents and purposes taught the exact same thing during the same period of time. In brief, it is a standard of education that creates automatons.

But let me back up to ask what should be obvious. If, as the so-called experts are postulating, the future of America will collapse without Common Core, then someone needs to tell me how we survived to become the greatest country in history with a free market capitalist system envied the world over without it? The simple truth is that Common Core is right out of Mao’s “Redbook” — his manifesto for communism. Common Core could very well be the final death-knell for the minds of our children. Textbooks, ad nauseum, will be uniform. And while in the past, states such as Texas were able to dictate what textbooks would be used in their schools, that ability will be removed. Parents and school administrators will have no say in what the children in their schools are taught.

Most parents are unaware of the distortions, misinformation, and omissions in the textbooks being written by liberals today. As a matter of fact, most parents not only have no clue, but they have never even given thought to the accuracy of the books their children are being taught from.

Imagine your children attending classrooms like those under Mao Tse-tung the evil dictator of Communist China. That’s where Common Core is taking our children. It gives unprecedented control of the minds of our children from their earliest years. It also allows government to segregate our children based on their dictates into groups that they control. And, just as sinister, it allows government to ultimately control what is taught in private Christian schools and in home schooling. And it has long been understood that the public school system wanted to do away with home schooling. Common Core also allows government to dictate which children are admitted to what schools and what career paths are available to which children.

I know, I know. You’re saying c’mon Mychal you’re exaggerating and just trying to scare us. To which I would ask, did children learn more before Carter created the Department of Education, or after it? I would ask, what have the billions of tax dollars that have gone into public schools done to raise the level of accomplishment by students? I would remind you that, since the early 1980s, we have been told that all it takes is more money, and our children will be academic standouts. When, in reality, billions of dollars after billion of dollars have netted the same results — diminished student performance.

How did Americans achieve the advances in medicine, technology, and science without Common Core if we are now being told we cannot survive educationally and economically — and that our national security is threatened — unless it is implemented?

Common Core is a ruse to further entrench communism in America. Obama’s government has built on what Carter, Clinton, and Bush started. While people are running about distracted by things that will bear no fruit, the two greatest threats are on the doorstep of full implementation, i.e., Obamacare and Common Core.

[warmonger1981]

I heard that in the meeting questions were to be submitted in writing if you wanted an answer. Is this common practice at these meeting?

[Lootifer]

@ PS from page one of this thread: (empahasis added).

But its a practice that owes its origins to typical business practices. From a management perspective its easier to [implement] things like kpis, business intelligence and all those other crap, er I mean wonderful, things they teach you in an MBA course

[Phatscotty]

I heard that in the meeting questions were to be submitted in writing if you wanted an answer. Is this common practice at these meeting?

Common practice when you want to dodge all the tough questions and only answer the easy ones. The written questions were also edited.

[Phatscotty]

@ PS from page one of this thread: (empahasis added).

But its a practice that owes its origins to typical business practices. From a management perspective its easier to [implement] things like kpis, business intelligence and all those other crap, er I mean wonderful, things they teach you in an MBA course

darfaq? Not sure what you are saying. Maybe like, I should like Common Core because it supposedly runs the way businesses run, and I like business, so we should copy paste it into every school in America?

[Nobunaga]

Joyful news today on the homework front.

My boys' teacher passed out several sheets of "normal" mathematics problems for the kids to do for homework. By "normal" of course I mean addition and subtraction problems. It looks like she printed them from some on-line teachers' resource or similar. Not common core compliant, but good math all the same. My opinion of this woman has improved.

[isaiah40]

A couple more links on Common Core:

Educators Expose Dangers of Common Core National Education
Major Common Core Shake-Up: Florida Leaves PARCC by Executive Order
5 Part video series on Common Core

[Lootifer]

@ PS from page one of this thread: (empahasis added).

But its a practice that owes its origins to typical business practices. From a management perspective its easier to [implement] things like kpis, business intelligence and all those other crap, er I mean wonderful, things they teach you in an MBA course

darfaq? Not sure what you are saying. Maybe like, I should like Common Core because it supposedly runs the way businesses run, and I like business, so we should copy paste it into every school in America?

I dont know what the US intends to acheive via its education standardisation, nor what their motives are. But I was just trying to poke fun at your common core = marxist/mao/communist idealogy thing 'cause its retarded.

Once again I have to repeat: the problems you guys are seeing has nothing to do with standardisation in education; but in fact the way in which it is being used. That is, common core is not the problem; the content of common core is. Its quite an important distinction as debate on standardisation in education and debate on the content of curriculum are very very different debates.

Sure its rather semantical, but for me: im rather sick of the liberal indoctrination thing, but would be quite interested in a debate on the pro's and con's of standardisation in education.

[oVo]

common core is not the problem;
the content of common core is

I agree totally, but in my opinion education should be broader
and always include things that can improve any student's
ability to enjoy life. Not merely participate in the work force,
have a family and pay taxes.

It would also help if education actually became a political priority
where a teacher's wages, benefits and work environment
were competitive with the corporate world.

[Nobunaga]

common core is not the problem;
the content of common core is

I agree totally, but in my opinion education should be broader
and always include things that can improve any student's
ability to enjoy life. Not merely participate in the work force,
have a family and pay taxes.

It would also help if education actually became a political priority
where a teacher's wages, benefits and work environment
were competitive with the corporate world.

That's funny.

[Lootifer]

Funny because of the first paragraph or the second?

[Nobunaga]

This has me worried.

[Lootifer]

Ok again you are picking apart the syllabus not standardisation, but thats ok (i.e. I give up).

To play the devils advocate (and I only read her speech, didnt listen to it as I dont have sound at work), this seems to be making a mountain out of a molehill, or a persepctive thing.

As far as I can remember the single MOST IMPORTANT thing about maths, and subsequently getting good marks, was showing how you got to your answer. This isnt something new, this is just a slightly different interpretation of the content of math tests and exams since the dawn of time: "What is ..... ..... .....? (please show your working)".

[Nobunaga]

Ok again you are picking apart the syllabus not standardisation, but thats ok (i.e. I give up).

To play the devils advocate (and I only read her speech, didnt listen to it as I dont have sound at work), this seems to be making a mountain out of a molehill, or a persepctive thing.

As far as I can remember the single MOST IMPORTANT thing about maths, and subsequently getting good marks, was showing how you got to your answer. This isnt something new, this is just a slightly different interpretation of the content of math tests and exams since the dawn of time: "What is ..... ..... .....? (please show your working)".

I just helped my son with his math homework.

They no longer teach this style:

567
x 4
-----
2268

Now it looks like this:

567
x 4
------
2000
240
+ 28
---------
2268


It's called Partial Products, and that's fine, because it works, though it confuses my son quite a bit. The standard algorithm is not even going to be taught, at least not this year. He'll also have to endure the Lattice Method.... Bizarre that these alternative methods are being taught, but not the standard algorithm.

I'm questioning/attacking the syllabus, because it's seeming more and more flawed. A flawed syllabus has been standardized in 45 states.

Honestly, anybody in the thread reading this - You think it proper to teach this:



as opposed to this?

83
x27
----------
2241


Really?

[PLAYER57832]

As much as I like to argue politics, I was hoping for explanations. I got some (thanks, guys), and I'm finding more and more on line.

My son watched a film at school today called, Epic. A note from the teacher said watching this film met several common core requirements... What the hell does that mean?

LOL

My son's (private, Roman Catholic) school just gave a presentation on it. I had to miss most of it, but what I have heard is just that it sets some specific standards and guidelines for various academic fronts.

Many public schools have no choice, but private schools do. My son's school chose it (paraphrasing the principal here) because they thought it would offer teachers better guidelines on teaching.

From the outset, it sounds like it might be good, but I am VERY nervous about the implementation and details.

[PLAYER57832]

Ok again you are picking apart the syllabus not standardisation, but thats ok (i.e. I give up).

To play the devils advocate (and I only read her speech, didnt listen to it as I dont have sound at work), this seems to be making a mountain out of a molehill, or a persepctive thing.

As far as I can remember the single MOST IMPORTANT thing about maths, and subsequently getting good marks, was showing how you got to your answer. This isnt something new, this is just a slightly different interpretation of the content of math tests and exams since the dawn of time: "What is ..... ..... .....? (please show your working)".

I just helped my son with his math homework.

They no longer teach this style:

567
x 4
-----
2268

Now it looks like this:

567
x 4
------
2000
240
+ 28
---------
2268

Um... this is what I learned... and my mom and Dad learned (in different countries, too)

It's called Partial Products, and that's fine, because it works, though it confuses my son quite a bit. The standard algorithm is not even going to be taught, at least not this year. He'll also have to endure the Lattice Method.... Bizarre that these alternative methods are being taught, but not the standard algorithm.

What
standard algorythm????

I'm questioning/attacking the syllabus, because it's seeming more and more flawed. A flawed syllabus has been standardized in 45 states.

Honestly, anybody in the thread reading this - You think it proper to teach this:



as opposed to this?

83
x27
----------
2241


Really?

I don't know about that picture, but I did work with a guy who's wife was in on the "new math" craze when she had been in school. He said he could not follow how she multiplied, etc.. but it worked for her. She had a very high paying job, whereas he was "just" a scientist (a world-renown scientist with multiple journal publications).

I like the way I learned, but I am open to new things if they are effective. I would have to see the argument for why the picture is supposed to be better.

[PLAYER57832]

common core is not the problem;
the content of common core is

I agree totally, but in my opinion education should be broader
and always include things that can improve any student's
ability to enjoy life. Not merely participate in the work force,
have a family and pay taxes.

It would also help if education actually became a political priority
where a teacher's wages, benefits and work environment
were competitive with the corporate world.

That's funny.

Why?

[Lootifer]

Ok again you are picking apart the syllabus not standardisation, but thats ok (i.e. I give up).

To play the devils advocate (and I only read her speech, didnt listen to it as I dont have sound at work), this seems to be making a mountain out of a molehill, or a persepctive thing.

As far as I can remember the single MOST IMPORTANT thing about maths, and subsequently getting good marks, was showing how you got to your answer. This isnt something new, this is just a slightly different interpretation of the content of math tests and exams since the dawn of time: "What is ..... ..... .....? (please show your working)".

I just helped my son with his math homework.

They no longer teach this style:

567
x 4
-----
2268

Now it looks like this:

567
x 4
------
2000
240
+ 28
---------
2268

How did you calculate the bolded? Becuase the only real option other than partial products is by rote/memory. Which is actually not ideal when learning math, you want the students to understand the logic/process involved, not just recalling from memory that 6 time 7 is 42 (which is undoubtedly useful, but will only get you so far). Rote learning math is like using equations to model Shakespear. Square peg circle hole.

[PLAYER57832]

@ PS from page one of this thread: (empahasis added).

But its a practice that owes its origins to typical business practices. From a management perspective its easier to [implement] things like kpis, business intelligence and all those other crap, er I mean wonderful, things they teach you in an MBA course

darfaq? Not sure what you are saying. Maybe like, I should like Common Core because it supposedly runs the way businesses run, and I like business, so we should copy paste it into every school in America?

I dont know what the US intends to acheive via its education standardisation, nor what their motives are. But I was just trying to poke fun at your common core = marxist/mao/communist idealogy thing 'cause its retarded.

Once again I have to repeat: the problems you guys are seeing has nothing to do with standardisation in education; but in fact the way in which it is being used. That is, common core is not the problem; the content of common core is. Its quite an important distinction as debate on standardisation in education and debate on the content of curriculum are very very different debates.

Sure its rather semantical, but for me: im rather sick of the liberal indoctrination thing, but would be quite interested in a debate on the pro's and con's of standardisation in education.

Actually, I would say they are the same argument... and that is part of the problem. That is, if you are going to make every child learn the same things, then a LOT of people will demand the "practical" or "biggest bang" approach. Skip anything that doesn't go directly to the desired end result, which is to have kids making money, preferably lots.

The problem is that a lot of these "superficial bits", when it comes to how kids learn, wind up not being so superficial and "extra" as the linear thinkers might imply. The classic example is music. Learning music actually helps kids to learn math, rather than taking away from it. Letting kids play and explore, similarly, is very critical to helping them to learn physics and other sciences.

In fact, if you start getting into creative genius -- that is, inventors and scientists making great advances, it turns out that the most important thing we are missing isn't that we fail to give information, its that we are no longer teaching kids to question and teaching them that failure is a big and important part of learning. I heard a TED talk on this recently, though I cannot do it true justice.

That is the real problem with "niche learning" or "specialized learning" -- that is, we tend to draw too many lines where they don't belong. A focus on math might lead to people able to work on long calculations, but to know physics, and particularly to stretch the boundaries of, say space exploration or reaching the bottom of the sea, takes being able to not just understand a lot of math, it also takes having the ability to connect things that might seem unrelated. Everyone needs a basic core of knowledge in order to have those abilities.

Yet, at the same time, we may be reaching the point where no single individual can learn everything needed to advance beyond, much. We are long past the days of one "Renaissance man", perhaps into the point where so much information is out there and so widely disbursed that we need groups to somehow synthesize it, in the way creative individuals used to do.

[Lootifer]

Your main argument player is pretty much what I was meaning by the standardisation debate. I was referring to debate around the syllabus as in "they are teaching all this stuff that we think is terrible" thing, such as PS's liberal indoctrination idea.

But you are correct. That is pretty much one of the major downfalls or cons of standardisation in education.