While I agree with a lot of the Common Core, Marion Brady's article about the problems with the Common Core brought quite a few things to light. I don't feel that negatively about the Common Core but I did like some of her perspectives about what it lacks. Brady talks about how we are in a changing world and shouldn't be sticking to a "static strategy in a dynamic world" which reminded me of the discussion in chapter three of Heidi Hayes Jacobs' Curriculum 21. I agree with Hayes and I agree with Brady. We should be asking these questions: "What is essential and timeless? What is not essential or dated? What should be created that is evident and necessary?" (Hayes, pg. 31). Which way does the CCSS lead us?
Honestly, I don't have the answers. I would say as of right now, I'm indifferent. I don't completely agree with the CCSS, but I don't disagree with it either. There are some things with the CCSS that need to be considered, or maybe reconsidered? I think that moving from the MLRs to the CCSS was a step in the right direction but there is still some fine tuning that needs to take place.
I also find myself looking back to the ideas of finding whats essential and timeless. Honestly I don't know if anything is. I think that content is something we have to make essential and timeless up continually looking at it and updating it.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you, Amanda. I don't agree or disagree with the CCSS. They're just there and something that we have to work with. With any new program there are adjustments and fine tuning that needs to happen. I found Brady's claims that the CCSS was supported by and produced by testing agencies. I never really thought those agencies would have a hand in creating standards, and that part was definitely eye-opening. I wonder how much validity there was in that claim.
ReplyDelete