Common Core

[Some Stupid Japanese Name]

I think book reports are getting a bad rap here. Yes, they are but summaries. But the critical thinking comes into play when you hand a kid a 100 page book and ask him to dilute the important parts down into four or five paragraphs. They have to think about what gets filtered out and how to do so without changing the gist of the story.
They're also good primers for getting kids used to how a paper should be laid out and sentence flow.
Should they be used beyond the sixth grade? Of course not, that's when you get into the deeper stuff.
A kid writing down that they liked when Paul Bunyan dragged his ax across the ground to make the Grand Canyon isn't indicative of critical thinking.

[A Robot Bit Me]

None of the eight reasons listed in your second link pertain to any standard, either. It has a nested link here:

"It’s a bad idea. Ignore the fact that specific Common Core State Standards will open up enough cans of worms to keep subject-matter specialists arguing among themselves forever."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...JB9W_blog.html

The link is a blog of a teacher complaining about an "exemplar," which is not a lesson, but an example of a lesson that meets common core standards. Again, no objection to any specific standard, just ideological out-freaking.

[Yoshi]

O.K. So that adds a third (and fair) reason people object to it: ideology, false information, and now method of creation. What I don't see in the article (or anywhere) is objection to any specific standard of Common Core. Which are the bad ones that got us into the mess?

A lot of the actual workbooks and the like are just regurgitated stuff written before the standard was in place. Back to where buttplant started, that means the math is going to be just as shitty as it has always been for example. So it standardizes on garbage that didn't work, just like most federal programs.

[A Robot Bit Me]

Uh, but the feds don't standardize the book lists. If an adopting state wants to make their own book list for teachers, they can. Or they don't have to. Talk about Orwellian!

Anything else?

[Yoshi]

And, thus, the standards add nothing but cost. Again, this is just like most other federal programs.

[Diff-chan]

Uh, but the feds don't standardize the book lists. If an adopting state wants to make their own book list for teachers, they can. Or they don't have to. Talk about Orwellian!

Anything else?

Can you add the Bible to the book list?

[A Robot Bit Me]

And, thus, the standards add nothing but cost. Again, this is just like most other federal programs.

So you had a problem with standardized book lists. Then I said those do not exist. And now you're faulting it for lack of standardized book lists?

So...ideology then?

[Yoshi]

If you want to call not wanting to pay for something that doesn't do anything (at best) "ideology," sure. I'd choose "common sense" personally.

[A Robot Bit Me]

I mean, you decided you hated it before you even knew what it was. I'd call "knee-jerk rejection of any instance of federal expansion as something inherently bad" ideology, yeah. If that's your only reason, that's cool. Just curious to see if you took issue with any of the actual contents. So far, nothing you've posted, links included, has.

I'm not sure I'm a great fan of the idea either, but

the standards themselves are about as reasonable and balanced as one could hope.

[Some Stupid Japanese Name]

I think I can now identify with what Maynard was feeling as he watched Zed pump the shit out of Marsellus.