To be a good reader you need an understanding of literature, art, music, history, and the sciences — that is, you need a liberal arts education.
How decisions teachers make about instruction shape the implementation of the Common Core
Some fret that states that make the U.S. citizenship test a graduation requirement may be tacitly encouraging schools to abandon semester-long classes in civics. I’m skeptical.
I share critics concerns that early childhood learning is leading schools to take all the joy out of kindergarten, but I see no reason to blame Common Core for that.
John O’Connor takes a close look at some of the debates that are taking place over how math is taught in states that are implementing the Common Core standards and at the long history of debates over math instruction.
A subset of white, affluent, well-educated parents have long favored progressive education. Alternative schools are a good option for them.
We can have kindergarten that is both play-based and language-rich. It’s what the best kindergarten teachers have always done.
Arizona became the first state to make passing the U.S. Citizenship Test a high school graduation requirement.
While running the nation’s largest school system, Carmen Farina has made a growing list of decisions based not on empirical evidence, but on the chancellor’s personal preference.
Standards for any subject are most effective when used not to drive lesson planning on any given day, but rather the selection of a clear, teacher-friendly, coherently developed curriculum.
An interview with Paul Tough, author of How Children Succeed
Common Core has the potential to shift and drastically improve math instruction in American schools,
Complaints about close reading bother me less than its potential overuse, or the creeping notion that close reading is what all reading instruction should look like under Common Core. That would be bad for the standards, and even worse for reading achievement in the U.S.
In his column, Jay Mathews highlights a blog entry by Mike Petrilli about the weak, content-free curriculum being taught to his first grader in the Montgomery County, Md. public schools.
Opponents of the Common Core question the idea of improving literacy by introducing higher levels of textual complexity into the instructional mix.
The MCPS curriculum is weak when it comes to content in science and extremely weak in history.
The trickle downward of university curricular mischief into our schools and other institutions continues unabated, and it’s not a problem that the College Board alone can solve.
On Politico’s list of fifty “thinkers, doers and dreamers who really matter,” sharing the number eight spot are E.D. Hirsch and David Coleman, the principal author of the Common Core State Standards in English Language Arts.
Any pedagogy, curriculum, approach, or technology has to be within the skills of ordinary teachers to implement well and effectively. If it takes a superstar teacher it’s a nonstarter.
Elizabeth Green’s story for Sunday’s New York Times Magazine, “Why Do Americans Stink at Math?” is a must-read. But for all the time Green spends documenting the ways Americans stink at math, she never mentions that we’ve gotten much better.
An alternative school in Boston offers flexibility in pacing, help when students need it, and the chance to continuously reengage on material even if you didn’t master it the first time around–in all, the flexibility, support, and hope that human beings, and particularly teenagers, crave.
A look at key curricular decisions that will be encountered as CCSS makes its way through the school system and the potential political controversies that this process may provoke.
We know for a fact that “balanced literacy” has had little effect on closing stubborn achievement gaps. So why is New York City Schools Chancellor Carmen Farina bringing it back?
Common Core supporters should be showcasing lessons that represent a sharp break with the skills-driven, all-texts-are-created-equal approach that has come to dominate too many classrooms.
Balanced literacy is neither “balanced” nor “literacy,” at least not in the sense that poor kids taught to read via this approach will end up literate.