There's a lot of outrage now these days about education, and a lot of it seems to stem from a hatred of Common Core. From Jon Oliver to Kasich's decision to outlaw PARCC after just one year, there is a lot of unrest when it comes to this topic. People aren't happy, and I admit that they do have something to be unhappy about. However, I'd say the blame is misplaced. A lot of people think all of the problems in education stem from Common Core: the federal standards that many states have adopted. If you believe this, please, go read the standards yourself. From what I've gathered, Common Core has had a very positive impact on education, and teachers (most anyway) have welcomed it with open arms. I myself have accepted the standards. Then again, they're really the only standards I've had within my short career, but they're good.
"But, Jake," you might say. "What about that video that shows how dumb Common Core math is?" Well, of course it's going to look silly to us; we learned math using rote learning. For those of us not savvy with teacher talk, rote learning is equivalent to memorization which is considered the lowest form of learning nowadays. We learned early on that 8+5=13 because we used blocks (real learning), then learned by writing over and over again what x+5= (rote learning), then took timed tests that tested our ability to recall that information (recollection of rote learning). We've sort of evolved from that in education. Now we're looking at getting deeper with learning. Watch the video again. Did you see some deeper learning that was taking place? Notice how those second graders are not only learning different strategies for adding, but they're learning ALGEBRAIC CONCEPTS?! WHAT?! Yup, it's kind of cool once you break it down. Now there are some concerns with this: are second graders ready for this kind of thinking? Can they really understand what it is they're doing? Yeah, they actually are. Granted, it takes a while, but with a good teacher they can make it. Considering my father was taught algebra in elementary school, I think they're up for the challenge. The question is: do we have teachers who are up for the challenge?
It's the same way with English teachers. I think now more than ever the language arts field is calling for teachers who - dare I say it? - write along with their students. I myself write poetry at least once a week in order to keep my writing skills sharp (I'll share that on another post). Whenever I have students write journals, I write a journal entry along with them - it's great for getting discussions going. With the English Standards, writing has more of a presence in the class which is phenomenal for the teachers who are ready to dig down and teach from their own writer's toolbox.
"So, Jake" you ask, "where should we put the blame?" Just as I'd direct one of my students, take a look back at the sources I linked early on in the article, the ones about Jon Oliver and "King" Kasich. The problem doesn't lie with the standards, but rather in our attempts to interpret what we should be assessing and how to assess it. So, to be clear, the standards are okay: it's the assessments that I have a problem with. I'll have more to talk about on that tomorrow after my first day of examining student data though. We'll see how that goes first.
Here comes the monkey...
ReplyDeleteEverything is automatically better with those four words.
DeleteI remember some of the "hatred" against Common Core, and that video. The video showed a concept for reaching an answer that was indeed different from what I grew up learning. Though it did appear silly, I was curious about the argument for this new approach. Rather than scoff and reject Common Core outright, as many were doing, I went looking for the case arguments that supported it. From what I remember, the case logic for Common Core could be summed up like this: rather than utilizing mere memorization to teach, Common Core's aim was to teach by breaking a problem down utilizing logic and process. At least, that was my take on the idea. I could have it wrong, but I found the concept interesting nonetheless.
ReplyDeleteThat is precisely what it is aiming to do. The goal is to introduce a algebraic concepts early on so that there isn't a transition period around 7th to 9th grade from concrete thinking to abstract thinking. Plus, it's accepted in the field of education that rote learning is just bad learning. We're moving towards a type of education that requires teaching concepts at earlier stages, and building on the understanding of those concepts as the students go up in grades. But yes, you seem to have the gist of it.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
Delete(Deleted my comment above for a slight edit.)
DeleteWell, that makes me feel good. Regarding rote learning, I recall an NPR story on China and why they're so good at math. They had this guy -- a teacher, or professor, I think -- from China criticizing the method by which students are taught. It was literally drilled into their heads. (OK, not "literally", but I get a kick out of deliberately misusing that word.) Anyway, according to this teacher, math was taught by constant repetition. His concern was that students, while they had memorized the formulas and the rules, they didn't understand them. Thus, critical thinking skills, he argued, were not being developed.
And I'm happy to say that the math teacher I work with is someone who recognizes this. She was telling me that we need to get away from the idea that math happens just on paper, but that it occurs everywhere around us. It's wonderful to just hear her talk about her lessons, and to talk about math with her. As a language arts person, I consider it magic that she is able to make math seem so interesting.
ReplyDelete