A Scholastic Author
A Disney Author

Common Core: Kan U Speel IT ouut pleeze?

Posted on April 14, 2012 at 4:56 AM by Alan Sitomer

The Common Core ELA standards lay out a pretty clear, if ambitious, picture of what a student ought to be able to do (and know) at a variety of demarcation points along the K-12 educational scale.

 

A question I have is (and I am wondering if anyone else has this question), “What foundational literacy skills are pre-requisite to entering K in order to be well-prepared to meet the demands of Common core?”

 

After all, a host of presuppositions have been made about the skills a student will own before they enter kindergarten but where are they illuminated?

 

Without this guideline, parents are just throwing darts in the dark.

 

We know what CC expects kids to be able to do by the end of K, 1, 2 and so on but what do they need to know before K in order to be able to meet these aims by the end of K?

 

The answer is most certainly not, “Uhm, nothing… just send your kids as is?”

 

Yet, why does CC make inferences about these foundations instead of identifying them clearly for us?

 

  • Too much work to do so?
  • An oversight which no one really considered when they were locked in the think tank?
  • Too little expertise owned by the authors of CC at the primary level?

 

We’re already hearing lots of criticism about how little attention seems to have been paid to the cognitive development of primary learners whereas a whole lotta expertise seems evident in the secondary expectations. To wit, here’s a piece of an argument written by Joanne Yatvin:

 

“…I could not see many elementary school children of any background or ability meeting the standards at the grades designated. In my view, as a former elementary teacher and principal, the standards overestimate the intellectual, physiological, and emotional development of young children, asking them to think analytically as they read or write, extract subtle meanings from a text, and make fine distinctions within and across texts. Such deliberative and intensive behaviors are not supported by the research on child development, nor are they expected anywhere else in children’s lives today.”

 

People are asking where the research is. I am willing to grant the authors of CC the latitude that they actually do have the research in their back pockets – not that I have yet seen it – because, hey, if you don’t, my goodness are you in for a karmic journey across the rack of teacher wrath and public humiliation. I mean it’s not like ALL OF AMERICA is watching. And if it turns out that you showed up to this game without all your ducks in order thinking that you’d just be able to pull the wool over all our eyes, well… I’ll save that for future blog fodder.

 

Me, I am curious about the skills you very much infer as needing to be owned by a kindergartener before you actually enter K.

 

Common Core: Kan U Speel IT ouut pleeze?

  • Christy Rush-Levine

    This post and your previous post bring up such a good point, and so well-put.  In our district, a k-12 unit district, most of our resources are being shifted to address the needs of moving towards common core standards k-3.  We are even spending millions of dollars as a district to implement all day kindergarten to try to somehow get all kids to the same place within that one crucial year.  As if all day kindergarten will do the trick. 

    I wonder if the reason the authors of the CCS did not address pre-k skills is that they just didn’t know where to stop.  They would’ve had to put CCS in place for promoting proper child care to foster healthy future intellectual growth for babies when they are still in the womb. 

  • http://www.alanlawrencesitomer.com/ Alan Sitomer

    Phonetics in the womb… That’s brilliant!! More energy into early childhood education is, to mu way of thinking, a good thing. (Certainly beats trying to go “plug holes” once they are older and weighed down with baggage.) Yet if this deacends into drill-n-kill worksheets, YIKES!

  • Gerard Sukhram

    I feel like the overzealous K teachers are just going to assume that they are starting with a clean slate; “My kids know nothing, and I have to teach them everything.” I don’t know if that’s a good thing or a bad thing, and to be honest, as a pre-service teacher, I don’t know much about the assumptions that K teachers make about their students on the first day. I mean, don’t some overzealous secondary teachers do the same thing? I remember the first day of my 7th grade math class, we took a test on addition and subtraction and half the kids failed it. Honors class in a good school district, too. So does the clean slate rule apply there?

    Here are some problems I foresee: we analyze these ideas and realize that K students should be able to do such and such by K. Then companies open up these drill-and-kill centers to build those skills and by the time those students reach kindergarten, they have already had a negative experience with learning. I’ve worked at one of these centers, and this is exactly what I see. Employees of these companies rarely have knowledge of childhood cognitive development, and sometimes they are just too hard on kids.

  • http://www.alanlawrencesitomer.com/ Alan Sitomer

    Great, thoughtful reply. Wild card factor in all this is merit pay and teacher evaluations tied to student performance. All those kids who get a “blank slate” shot at school are not gonna see that kind of tolerance from teachers who “inherit” kids that are not up to snuff.
    Cause how can you meet the demands of a fast paced, challenging curriculum if your students aren’t prepared to do such a thing.
    Lots of friction coming in the near future on all this stuff. But thanks for the comment.
    All my best,

    Alan

    Alan Lawrence Sitomer
    California Teacher of the Year, 2007
    & author of two new YA comedies
    Disney Book Group’s
    NERD GIRLS
    & Penguin Putnam’s
    THE DOWNSIDE OF BEING UP
    Learn more at http://www.AlanSitomer.com

Powered by WordPress   |   Log in   |   Entries (RSS)   |   Comments (RSS)