If you are an IT professional, you know that bad standards brings in bad results.
No different here, the standards are vague and very subjective. The resulting curriculum based on vague and subjective standards are thus vague and subjective.
When you come down to it, if you constantly teaching and demonstrating your values to your kids at home, the school has little influence.
Another case in point: My son understands that I say yes as much as possible, or let him make his own decisions, but no means no. (mom is a little easier to negotiate with)
When asked a question on a test (also marked wrong) what he would do if his dad said no like the one in the story, his response was "Nothing. I would do something else"
Asked the teacher why this was marked wrong, and she said that he was expected to come up with a way to convince him. When I explained my policy, she admitted she never considered that I only said no when I really really meant "no".
Look at the standards below. If you don't "Build on others' ideas" (Standard 1) or " draw conclusions in light of information and knowledge gained from the discussions." or"Engage eff ectively in a range of collaborative discussions (one-on-one, in groups, and teacher- led) with diverse partners" You are not right, even if your conclusion is supported by the text, and theirs are not. And the teacher is the sole arbitrator if the standards are met or not, because the standards are all subjective.
Standards in question, from http://www.corestandards.org/w... Engage effectively in a range of collaborative discussions (one-on-one, in groups, and teacher- led) with diverse partners on grade 5 topics and texts,building on others’ ideas and expressing their own clearly. a. Come to discussions prepared, having read or studied required material; explicitly draw on that preparation and other information known about the topic to explore ideas under discussion. b.Follow agreed-upon rules for discussions and carry out assigned roles. c.Pose and respond to specific questions by making comments that contribute to the discussion and elaborate on the remarks of others. d.Review the key ideas expressed and draw conclusions in light of information and knowledge gained from the discussions. 2.Determine the main ideas and supporting details of a text read aloud or information presented in diverse media and formats, including visually, quantitatively, and orally. 2.Paraphrase portions of a text read aloud or information presented in diverse media and formats, including visually, quantitatively, and orally. 2.Summarize a written text read aloud or information presented in diverse media and formats, including visually, quantitatively, and orally. 3. Ask and answer questions about information from a speaker, offering appropriate elaboration and detail. 3. Identify the reasons and evidence a speaker provides to support particular points. 3. Summarize the points a speaker makes and explain how each claim is supported by reasons and evidence
Common core is a disaster. The homework is riddled with errors (found 3 on one page) and the instruction methodology is terrible.
Case in point: My son brought home an assignment where he was graded poorly, and one of the short answers was marked wrong. I know the material they were reading, the book Wrinkle in Time.
When I asked the teacher about it, this is what I was told: His "team" (they are in 6 kid groups) decided the antagonists name "IT" should be pronounced "I.T.".
Under common core standards, the group can decide what the "right" answer is, as an interpretation of the fact, not the fact itself. I can give a little under a "tomato" vrs "tah-mato", but...
I asked her if the group decided "IT" was a giant mouse instead of a giant brain, would that make the person saying it was a giant brain wrong.
She replied under the grading rules, it would.
Fuck me dead, we are raising an army of Project Managers!
No wonder public support for Common Core is about 35%
You are off base, it is spelled out in the Posse Comitatus law:
The Act, as modified in 1981, refers to the Armed Forces of the United States. It does not apply to the National Guard under state authority from acting in a law enforcement capacity within its home state or in an adjacent state if invited by that state's governor. The United States Coast Guard, which operates under the Department of Homeland Security, is also not covered by the Posse Comitatus Act, primarily because the Coast Guard has both a maritime law enforcement mission and a federal regulatory agency mission.
No, it is just the funny way the Supreme Court works.
They ruled 9-0
But there was a 8-1 split on the reason why. "Actually, it wasn’t much of a case: 8-1, with Alito concurring in part and concurring in the judgment overall. "
Again, it talking about changes around the end of the 90 and the 00's, this shows a smoothing of the 20s to 40s spike in temperatures, erasing the heat wave of the 30s, and making the temperature record look like it slopes up in the 20th century, rather than spiking in the 30s, dipping in the 70s, and then climbing back up in the 90s and 00s.
You will also note that the EPA did not get the message about Global warming.
Obviously you would not look at the actual article and graphs presented, or you would know the smoothing is done on pre-1970s data, not 2000-2007 data.
Slashdot Mirror
5w-30?
Dino or synth?
No, 8 is jealous of 9.
Why?
7 8 9.
My definition of happy is having a problem to solve, as apposed to a constant grinding workload.
So handing me tasks that make other people groan makes my day.
Beatings will continue until you are happy and productive.
CC is not going to change how schools pick books, just some of the criteria.
The process will still be garbage.
The copy from the oddly formatted pdf, see the link, did not copy well.
Did not bother cleaning it up.
If you are an IT professional, you know that bad standards brings in bad results.
No different here, the standards are vague and very subjective. The resulting curriculum based on vague and subjective standards are thus vague and subjective.
When you come down to it, if you constantly teaching and demonstrating your values to your kids at home, the school has little influence.
Another case in point:
My son understands that I say yes as much as possible, or let him make his own decisions, but no means no. (mom is a little easier to negotiate with)
When asked a question on a test (also marked wrong) what he would do if his dad said no like the one in the story, his response was "Nothing. I would do something else"
Asked the teacher why this was marked wrong, and she said that he was expected to come up with a way to convince him.
When I explained my policy, she admitted she never considered that I only said no when I really really meant "no".
Here let me show you how this works:
Look at the standards below. If you don't "Build on others' ideas" (Standard 1) or " draw
conclusions in light of information and knowledge gained from the discussions." or"Engage eff
ectively in a range of collaborative discussions (one-on-one, in groups, and teacher-
led) with diverse partners"
You are not right, even if your conclusion is supported by the text, and theirs are not.
And the teacher is the sole arbitrator if the standards are met or not, because the standards are all subjective.
Standards in question, from http://www.corestandards.org/w... .Follow agreed-upon rules for discussions and
Engage effectively in a range of collaborative
discussions (one-on-one, in groups, and teacher-
led) with diverse partners on
grade 5 topics and
texts,building on others’ ideas and expressing
their own clearly.
a. Come to discussions prepared, having read
or studied required material; explicitly draw
on that preparation and other information
known about the topic to explore ideas under
discussion.
b
carry out assigned roles.
c.Pose and respond to specific questions by
making comments that contribute to the
discussion and elaborate on the remarks of
others.
d.Review the key ideas expressed and draw
conclusions in light of information and
knowledge gained from the discussions.
2.Determine the main ideas and supporting details
of a text read aloud or information presented in
diverse media and formats, including visually,
quantitatively, and orally.
2.Paraphrase portions of a text read aloud or
information presented in diverse media and
formats, including visually, quantitatively, and
orally.
2.Summarize a written text read aloud or
information presented in diverse media and
formats, including visually, quantitatively, and
orally.
3.
Ask and answer questions about information from
a speaker, offering appropriate elaboration and
detail.
3.
Identify the reasons and evidence a speaker
provides to support particular points.
3.
Summarize the points a speaker makes and
explain how each claim is supported by reasons
and evidence
I have a soon to be 6th grader.
Common core is a disaster. The homework is riddled with errors (found 3 on one page) and the instruction methodology is terrible.
Case in point: My son brought home an assignment where he was graded poorly, and one of the short answers was marked wrong. I know the material they were reading, the book Wrinkle in Time.
When I asked the teacher about it, this is what I was told:
His "team" (they are in 6 kid groups) decided the antagonists name "IT" should be pronounced "I.T.".
Under common core standards, the group can decide what the "right" answer is, as an interpretation of the fact, not the fact itself.
I can give a little under a "tomato" vrs "tah-mato", but...
I asked her if the group decided "IT" was a giant mouse instead of a giant brain, would that make the person saying it was a giant brain wrong.
She replied under the grading rules, it would.
Fuck me dead, we are raising an army of Project Managers!
No wonder public support for Common Core is about 35%
(I guess that means they have to wear life vests when performing SWAT actions)
You are off base, it is spelled out in the Posse Comitatus law:
The Act, as modified in 1981, refers to the Armed Forces of the United States. It does not apply to the National Guard under state authority from acting in a law enforcement capacity within its home state or in an adjacent state if invited by that state's governor. The United States Coast Guard, which operates under the Department of Homeland Security, is also not covered by the Posse Comitatus Act, primarily because the Coast Guard has both a maritime law enforcement mission and a federal regulatory agency mission.
No, it is just the funny way the Supreme Court works.
They ruled 9-0
But there was a 8-1 split on the reason why.
"Actually, it wasn’t much of a case: 8-1, with Alito concurring in part and concurring in the judgment overall. "
In other words, he "testified" on the matter, and thus could not claim 5th midstream.
We should have never given them guns... made them stick with a whistle and nightstick.
They are paid from our taxes, so how could their actions be considered copyrighted?
Eventually, citizens will record everything, and what you are suggesting is going to pass.
If the government can record anywhere, we the people should be recording anywhere.
I was thinking Ginsberg was the pod person.
Who will watch the watchers?
However, in this case, the Supreme Court was 8-1, and the opinion amounted to "WTF is wrong with you? Of course you need a warrant, asshat!"
Again, it talking about changes around the end of the 90 and the 00's, this shows a smoothing of the 20s to 40s spike in temperatures, erasing the heat wave of the 30s, and making the temperature record look like it slopes up in the 20th century, rather than spiking in the 30s, dipping in the 70s, and then climbing back up in the 90s and 00s.
You will also note that the EPA did not get the message about Global warming.
http://stevengoddard.wordpress...
No I don't remember, even my great grandfather was but a gleam in my great great grandfather's eye.
Beans. Lots of beans.
Methane is more powerful than CO2
Obviously you would not look at the actual article and graphs presented, or you would know the smoothing is done on pre-1970s data, not 2000-2007 data.
Goddard's site shows the current NOAA chart, and the previously published NOAA chart.
The "smoothing" to fit the AGW story is pretty evident, and he is using THEIR data, so there is no "denying", just your projection.