I said I had a lot to say about that and that I’d share more later.
It, like most standardized things, has plenty of failings. And, I am the first to agree that the formal assessments currently used leave a lot to be desired.
parents and colleagues is two-fold: First, it’s a spiraling staircase. If everyone (teacher and
student) does their job in each grade level, the concepts recap, reinforce and build. I don’t care if you call it Common Core, Spiraling Standards or Sparkling Smarts (I made that up – you’re welcome). Maintaining this “common” structure is essential to cohesive learning. It makes absolute sense. It also is VERY dependent upon the prior year’s teacher doing their job. We all know how difficult it can be when a colleague just refuses, declines, and or neglects to do what’s expected.
not take most were all able to tell me there was “nothing there to tell the a to say its name” after taking a second look. So, I knew those kiddos were close to mastery. They had the reasoning… just a few more opportunities to apply this concept and it will be imbedded in their schema. For the others, more instruction on the WHY was needed. Just telling them “Take has a silent e at the end.” would never have been enough to truly cement the knowledge of when to apply the silent e phonic rule. So digging deep into the phonic rule and the *job* of silent e was a big part of guided reading for these kiddos. I don’t think you will find anyone who argues this type of teaching. No one is making nasty graphics calling phonetic rules the “NEW READING”. Well… I guess I am… but that’s not that point. 😉 What the Debbie Downers and Negative Nancys are missing is that the “new math” isn’t NEW – it’s an enforcement of deeper understanding that has been side stepped in many classrooms. It also isn’t what students are expected to do on a daily, living my life, paying my taxes, and balancing my