PLEASE send COMMENTS to the STATE BOARD of ED.
SATURDAY at midnight is the DEADLINE! Here are some more sample comments on the ELA for folks who don't usually analyze standards:
In ELA, Common Core splits teaching time between informational and literary texts to about 50%-50% in K-8 and 70%-30% in 9-12. This is a pedagogical/curricular directive that has no peer reviewed study to back up this shift in focus.
Common Core inappropriately expects second graders to know how to use adverbs and adjectives in ELACC2L5. This should be delayed to at least the third grade.
Common Core standards do not promote the study of American literature except in a couple of standards in 11th and 12th grades. This should be corrected, and Georgia writers included as appropriate.
Common Core ELA standards clearly ask for reading to understand and use information through the grades. However, they do not clearly distinguish modes of organization (e.g., chronology) from structural (or textual) elements of an expository text (e.g., introduction, conclusion), do not progressively develop informational reading skills from grade to grade, and omit such important concepts as topic sentences for paragraph development.
For example, children should be able to identify and write topic sentences by third grade. Yet ELACC3R18 does not mention topic sentences (which it should) and ELACC3W2 also does not require students to write
a topic sentence (which it should).
The Thomas B. Fordham Institute, a Common Core proponent, was quite clear when it stated that Georgia's previous ELA standards were better than Common Core standards. Fordham stated, "The Georgia K-12 ELA standards are better organized and easier to read than the Common Core. Essential content is grouped more logically, so that standards addressing inextricably linked characteristics, such as themes in literary texts, can be found together rather than spread across strands.
The high school standards include a course devoted to "reading and American Literature," which provides a greater number of more detailed and rigorous expectations that address the importance of reading American literature. Georgia also more clearly specifies genre-specific writing expectations, and better prioritizes writing genres at each grade level." Therefore, my overall comment on the ELA standards is why doesn't Georgia go back to its superior ELA standards rather than expecting less of students? Why don't we increase expectations on what students should read in American literature rather than going to an unproven formula for integrating informational texts into ELA?
There is no peer-reviewed scientific information that shows students will learn to read better or be more motivated to read or learn more if they are exposed to informational texts. However, there is evidence that an English curriculum with a heavy emphasis on literature does prepare students for college.
According to Dr. Sandra Stotsky, in grades K-3, the various objectives related to phonics and word analysis skills do not include the need for students to apply these skills both in context and independent of context to ensure mastery of decoding skills.
This does occur in grades 4 and 5 so that students are expected to read accurately unfamiliar words “in context and out of context,” but elementary teachers also need this same guidance.
Dr. Sandra Stotsky pointed out the following problems with Common Core in its vocabulary standards. Although they "highlight specific figures of speech and rhetorical devices, they do not teach use of glossaries for discipline-specific terms, or words that must be taught (e.g., foreign words used in written English that do not appear in an English language dictionary). Common Core leans heavily and incorrectly in many cases on use of context to determine the meaning of unknown words.
For example, it is difficult for students to interpret correctly a literary, biblical, or mythological allusion in context, as in ELACC7L5, 'Interpret figures of speech (e.g., literary, biblical, and mythological allusions) in context,” if they have no knowledge of the texts that have served as the basis for these allusions and if the reading standards do not point to some of these significant texts, authors, or events."
By comparison, she pointed out that Georgia's previous vocabulary
standards were "part of the reading/literature strand and through grade 8
spelled out dictionary skills (e.g.,'ELA6R2.d. Uses reference skills to determine pronunciations, meanings, alternate word choices, and parts of speech of words.').
They identified the groupings students should be taught (e.g., 'ELA7R2.c. Identifies and explains idioms and analogies in prose and poetry,' 'ELAWLRL5.c. Identifies and understands foreign terms that appear in works originally written in a language other than English.').
And they pointed to the sources of word meaning in grade 10 ('ELAWLRL5.b. Uses knowledge of world mythologies to understand the meanings of new words,' and 'ELA10RL5.b. Uses knowledge of mythology, the Bible, and other works often alluded to in literature to understand the meanings of new words.).'" According to Dr. Sandra Stotsky, when examining the writing requirements, "the sub-strand on 'argument' confuses argument with expression of opinion in the elementary grades and with persuasive writing throughout. There is no scholarship to support the three 'types' of writing proposed by Common Core and thus this strand badly misinforms English and reading teachers throughout the grades. There is also nothing on the use of established or peer-generated criteria for evaluating writing or written presentations."
