Synthesis Essay : What 's Your Standard For Teaching?

As schools were faced with these daunting expectations to meet standards, state agencies, school boards, and administration all had to re-evaluate current practices, not only in the form of what should be taught, but how it should be taught (Performance Evaluation Advisory Council, n.d.). In more appropriate terms,

Throughout today’s society, media contributes to almost everyone’s daily life. From informative news channels to comical television shows, media proves to be effective in advertisement, releasing messages and informing the audience. Although media proves to be wildly effective in advertising, releasing messages and informing the audience, periodically destructive and misleading messages are provided to the audience and directly influencing women. Cultural critics widely agree that media tends to negatively influence women and all the critics point to research which supports the belief that women are portrayed as subordinate to men, having no

The educational system in the United States was originally developed using concepts from around the world, created using ingenuitive ideas from countries such as China, Japan, and Korea. However, as the United States quickly moved into position as the leading country for state-directed educational standards, America looked less and less to the systems of other nations and more into how we could improve what was locally and currently being applied in education. Consequently, an improved type of education instruction was officially launched in 2010. These new state standards, practically titled Common Core, were declared to focus on developing a child’s skills in reasoning, problem solving, communication, and competition (Conrad, et al. 52). While the standards are professed to be an extremely practical and beneficial method of teaching today, there are issues which have recently surfaced and raised some concerns. The Common Core State Standards are emerging as the subjects of a provocative controversy in society today as they prompt discussion on global economic efficiency, nationwide academic standards, and the ultimate well-being of school-age children.

There are many approaches that can be taken in order to develop a school’s curriculum, or the material that the students will learn. If there were no federal regulation of curriculum, then it would not be possible to compare student achievement across districts or even states. The federal program, Common Core State Standards, assists in equaling education across the nation. The Common Core has reinvented the perception of student learning which, in turn, has caused American education to become a corporate institution. As a result, there has been a threat to states’ rights for education as more rigorous content has been implemented into classrooms by the government, which ultimately changes the role of the teacher.

Education in the United States is in an abysmal state. It continues to spiral downward as students and educators fail to meet standards. The standards are then altered on a patchwork basis throughout the states. The goal is no longer to have a high standard educational system. The goal now is to maintain the status quo, allowing students and educators to strive for the minimum. There is no common approach to achieve success. Incipit Tragoedia, in comes the Common Core, agreed upon by educators, politicians, and

Ohanian begins with the statement that encompasses her outlook on the curriculum and standards teachers are expected to teach which states "Teachers and curriculum being flexible enough to meet the needs of each students, not shoving every kid through some distant committee's phantasmic pipe dream of a necessary curriculum for tomorrow's workforce" (Ohanian, 1999, p.2). In this quote Ohanian says what school should be about and stresses the need for "oddball plans for oddball students". Throughout the book this point is supported with personal recounts and stories of interactions with students and the outcomes. The most key point of this book is that standards are unfair to children who do not learn the traditional way. Curriculums and standards are created by individuals who are not even in a classroom day to day whom Ohanian refers to as "standardistos". Therefore the importance of a nurturing, personal relationship suffers

From the word ‘core’ reveals that the Common Core State Standards has higher chances of success than other educational initiative where other improvement determinations have failed. The standards characterise one of the most promising developments in the struggles made to improve a nation’s transformation. The Common Core State Standards are not intended to replace any other standards that might be considered as weak or strong. Rather, they seek to reinforce all other standards in use by enhancing an integrated model of literacy in stating the details of content required for students in terms of grade (Drake, 2012).

Like an epidemic terrorizing the western hemisphere, the Common Core State Standards program has swept across our nation, and at each stop, threatened a new way of thinking and learning. These standards were created to ensure that more students graduated from high school with the skills to succeed in college, life, and career, no matter where they might live (“About the Standards”). In 2009, this fresh new take on education was launched to each state’s educational leaders in the U. S. The officials of each state decided whether the implementation of the program was beneficial for them, or if the current techniques were the best option.

“Common Core State Standards Initiative” is a result of the “Standards and Accountability Movement” which began in the 1990s in the United States. This particular branch of education reforms was geared towards expectations of learning at each grade level. The Standards and Accountability Movement not only brought attention on what students were expected to learn, but on teachers as well – focusing on how teachers were to implement lessons and able to teach for student achievement which would be measured in

The 1980s brought a new reform movement in education, accompanied by a new emphasis on testing. The effort to improve education at all levels included the use of standardized tests to provide accountability for what students are learning. Minimum competency tests, achievement tests, and screening instruments were used to ensure that students from preschool through college reached the desired educational goals and achieved the minimum standards of education that were established locally or by the state education agency. As we continue in a new century, these concerns have increased.

Remember when you were in 5th grade? Your teacher went over the material in class, you went home and had some sort of homework paper to do, you took a test in class later that week, and you either passed or you didn 't. Do you remember comprehending any of that material? Or did you simply just memorize the material and move on with your life? The Common Core State Standards (CCSS) not only standardizes education, but it makes comprehension and intricate tool of the learning process. When it comes to American public education, the diagnosis has been offered that our schools suffer from a lack of consistent standards from coast to coast about what our kids should leave school knowing. The fix that has been adopted in a number of states in the last few years is a set of standards called the Common Core State Standards (CCSS), which have become the most contentious issue in American education in the last generation with disputes about who drew up the standards, whether they result in kids being over-tested, and even whether standards make sense that they have to be common. Are we fixing the right problem (Donvan, 2015)? Throughout the U.S., more and more states have been enacting the Common Core State Standards. Despite opposition from politicians and educators alike warning of dismal results, these standards appear to persist as a result of mostly positive outcomes.

“Our educational goal [is] the production of caring, competent, loving, lovable people” . The students found in the schools across the United State are the future of America. They are the doctors, teachers, business people, lawyers and many other roles, that will be out in the workforce in the years to come. What they learn in school will impact them immensely; it is the responsibility of a teacher to give students the best education in order to ensure the common good of the future. It is essential for students to not only learn content matter, but also the skills to enable them to participate in a democracy. Due to standardized testing, the emphasis of education has become on score and rankings rather than learning. A standardized test does not look at the whole student, the scores provided are on a very narrow aspect of education. In the classroom, there are countless ways for teachers to assess the student as a whole person not as just a score. Standardized tests scores should not be the sole criteria for determining a student’s academic achievement.

Currently, instructors are pressured by state education department to adjust school curricula to meet the expectations of the standardized test. Educators alter the curriculum to “match the [standardized] test” (“How Standardized”). Therefore, instructors are limited and classroom instruction is focused around test preparation for the annual standardized test. Teachers are forced to abandon their creative lessons and “teach the test,” or concentrating only on the material that will be evaluated (“How Standardized”). This frequently involves taking multiple choice tests that are formatted identically to the standardized test and only memorizing facts, formulas, and items included only on the standardized tests (“How Standardized”). Even though test scores may improve, students are not learning how to think critically and perform better in other subjects that are not on the test (“How Standardized”). Instructional time is limited in the other subject areas such as science, social studies, music, and art. Instructors feel “handicapped” and plead to state officials abandon these standardized tests for the sake of the “quality of the instruction in American schools” (Zimmerman 206). School curricula are being modified only to prepare students for a single test, not for education the students need in the future.

To begin with standardized testing creates several critical problems for students and for the education industry. These tests are created to test over particular things. In the end these types of tests are only limited in the amount of knowledge that can be tested toward students. For example, “Standardized exams offer few opportunities to display the attributes of high-order thinking, such as analysis, synthesis, evaluation, and creativity.” (“Standardized Testing Has Serious Limitations”). Even though these tests are able to attack certain subjects at the core, they still leave out very valuable and critical information that all students should know. In

Schools are and will forever be learning institutions, but learning isn’t limited to purely comprehension and fact memorization that can be found in books. Furthermore, knowledge is an unquantifiable metric and similarly, grades and scores have a multitude of factors that could affect the results. This is not to devalue good academic standing but rather raising a question of “Do we want to develop students holistically or