CreateDebate


Debate Info

5
7
Learning is threatened Learning is enhanced
Debate Score:12
Arguments:6
Total Votes:13
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Learning is threatened (2)
 
 Learning is enhanced (4)

Debate Creator

addltd(5133) pic



Is the implementation of Common Core education standards a threat to learning?

Implementation of Common Core Education Standards is seen as a threat tho learning by many.  Here is a recent article describing the conflict.

 

Clash over Common Core: Opposition grows as national education standards approach

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/09/06/clash-over-common-core-opposition-grows-as-national-education-standards/?test=latestnews#ixzz2eE6i7JBp

 

Do you feel learning will be threatened or enhanced?

 

 

 

Learning is threatened

Side Score: 5
VS.

Learning is enhanced

Side Score: 7
3 points

I've gone private school my whole life, because I am gifted and was not challenged at public school. These standards really scare me, as clearly not all students learn the same way.

I merely skimmed the article so I only got the gist of it, but it seems to characterize the main problem with public education.

Side: Learning is threatened
Conro(767) Disputed
1 point

Mhm, please, tell me how your private school education necessitates that you are "gifted" and that you are more intelligent than all those imbeciles at public schools. Please continue to tell me, then, that this private school education gives you the capability to understand and criticize public education, which you clearly are so experienced with.

Obviously, not all students learn the same way. You think the standardized curricula (and standardized tests that grew out of that) afforded students more paths of learning? Common Core education provides merely a framework in which states will be given more leeway to approach specific curricula, as well as giving teachers the opportunities to modify their teaching to enable student growth. For a great example of how tests will be modified to encourage actual learning (creative, applied problem solving, rather than rote memorization of processes). For some great analyses of the math section of the Common Core, please see the link below. Or, for an example of how a Common Core question might be would be different from the current sort of standardized test question, see http://map.mathshell.org/materials/download.php?fileid=822. The standards from before would have asked for maybe, how many gray squares are in pattern three. It definitely would not have asked for a predictive model of the tiles.

The sorts of questions that will be implemented by Common Core standards (at least by the states adopting Smarter Balance assessment systems) will be much more in line with expecting students to actually struggle through problems, to face failure, and to give them a more reasonable expectation of how learning is done. Learning isn't a formula; it's a mindset.

Supporting Evidence: Mathematics Assessment Project (map.mathshell.org)
Side: Learning is enhanced
1 point

One day people will realise what I realised at the age of 9. Education is bullshit and studying isn't learning.

Learning is when you do something you've never done before. That's how you learn. Just reading and memorizing for an exam is stupid, two months after the exam you remember nothing you studied for it.

Side: Learning is threatened
Nebeling(1118) Disputed
4 points

Not so fast... You learned to read and to do basic calculation in school. It's true that there's lot of thing that you didn't end up needing, but it would be wrong to say that everything you learned was useless. You have learned a great deal of important things in school.

However, I agree with you to a point. I learned a lot of stuff to pass an exam, only to forget it afterwards. But I only forgot it because I didn't need to know it,and because I didn't put an effort into truly understanding the material. What I forgot was a product of my academic choices and what personally interests me. That is, it has to do with who I am. We once had to learn about different types of sedimentary rock, and I don't exactly know if that impacted my life. I am sure, though, that different people feel differently about it.

Before university you need to deal with all kinds of topics that don't interest you a whole lot. This is a mixture of the fact that educational systems want people to have a decent grasp of common knowledge, and the fact that most people don't know what they want to do with their lives. You have to learn a lot of bullshit because there's a chance it wouldn't have been bullshit for you.

Side: Learning is enhanced
1 point

I agree with you Nebeling.

Very well said, by the way.

The exams, subjects and hoopla in elementary schools through high school are simply for helping the student understand common subjects, common sense, and the world around them in a general way.

Universities and colleges, and some high schools even, give the student various ranges of subjects and a variety in teaching methods from the professors. Not to mentioned more freedom and what not.

And so, I know that I've learned quite a bit throughout elementary school through high school.

Here's what I've learned on a simple scale throughout the years in public schools:

Mathematics like geometry and functions have stuck with me.

Knowledge of the earth and sciences; it's plants, mother nature, rocks, weather, whatever.

Understanding of the english language and the arts; drawing, sculpture, jewelry, wood-craft, sports, [ECT].

Basic fundamental logic and philosophies.

These are to name a few. However, I do admit that many other things that I care not to mention have not stuck with me because I feel perhaps the knowledge is not as useful to me as it can be for others, and so why bother in selectively and purposefully try to continue to comprehend something that will not benefit my life.

But that's just me...

Side: Learning is enhanced
1 point

Has anyone here read any of the Common Core standards? Through my University, I've taken several courses regarding education, been placed in classrooms (before and after implementation started), and talked to a wide variety of educators.

Everyone has almost unanimously been optimistic about what the new standards will mean in terms of education.

Previous standards were WAY more focused on testing and evaluation. The new standards--while yes, they have exams--is focused quite a bit more on assessment. Equating the two is quite a mistake: evaluation is "Did this student get a C or above on this arbitrary exam?" Assessment, on the other hand, is more "How is this student approaching this topic, and how, as an educator can I do better to provoke and enhance his or her interest in this subject?" There is quite a bit more leeway for educators to make the time for exploration rather than memorization and teaching for the test. All the criticisms on the other side mention the emphasis on rote memorization and the lack of practical experimentation and implementation, which is exactly the changes that will hopefully and probably be gained when the standards are implemented fully.

Jumping the gun, before the standards are even fully in effect, let alone for the several years afterwards that it will take before results can be measured, is effectively saying the education system is good as it is. Accepting the education system as is is not only dangerous but irresponsible; these kids need to be prepared to learn and innovate at a much higher rate and scale than ever before, and implementing standards like Common Core will greatly help.

We are currently in the midst of a revolution in the education system in the US. So many points (technology, teaching methods, federal/state standards) are converging that it will be exciting to see what comes out.

Side: Learning is enhanced