What Students Do (And Don't Do) in Khan Academy • Hacker News Board

Re: What Students Do (And Don't Do) in Khan Academy

#51

Post by kennytilton » Tue, Dec 16, 2014, 9:38 AM UTC

yummyfajitas wrote: post #42

VLM wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't speak for OP, although I basically agree with you and OP simultaneously. However, look at it as an optimization problem. CC testing standards and format may be ideal testing tools for 49 minutes 5th period after lunch 5 days a week in a 40 person classroom, performed in perfect lock step by all 40 students, only failure mode is repeating the entire class or developing a hatred of the topic, aka standard publi…

So from what little I've seen, KA is reasonably well aligned with common core already. Most decent curriculums do. Also, I think you are misunderstanding what CC is. CC is just a list of topics students should know - there is no "CC testing standards and format". If KA doesn't align with CC, it's because there is some particular topic that KA forgot about. E.g. maybe common core requires students to "Solve problems i…

"there is no "CC testing standards and format"."

I see two. One is called PARC, one is called Smarter Balanced. And they want to use them to close schools and fire teachers, so look for everyone to teach to whatever sample tests they can get their hands on.

Re: What Students Do (And Don't Do) in Khan Academy

#52

Post by jblad » Tue, Dec 16, 2014, 4:15 PM UTC

kennytilton wrote: post #51

yummyfajitas wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So from what little I've seen, KA is reasonably well aligned with common core already. Most decent curriculums do. Also, I think you are misunderstanding what CC is. CC is just a list of topics students should know - there is no "CC testing standards and format". If KA doesn't align with CC, it's because there is some particular topic that KA forgot about. E.g. maybe common core requires students to "Solve problems i…

"there is no "CC testing standards and format"." I see two. One is called PARC, one is called Smarter Balanced. And they want to use them to close schools and fire teachers, so look for everyone to teach to whatever sample tests they can get their hands on.

PARC and SBAC are indeed tests intended to measure students against the Common Core State Standards. They are not from, or a part of, the CCSSI. People definitely do want to misuse these tests to punish schools and teachers, but none of this invalidates the Common Core. And while people will teach to the sample tests, that's on people who want to use these to destroy schools, not on the Common Core itself.

Re: What Students Do (And Don't Do) in Khan Academy

#53

Post by jblad » Tue, Dec 16, 2014, 4:39 PM UTC

kennytilton wrote: post #50

jblad wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm wondering what your pedagogical objections are to the CCSS math standards. From my reading of the CCSS and supporting documents, it sure seems like the designers were research-informed. What did they get wrong, and what would you do differently? It really isn't a rehashing of New Math. They think very carefully about the pedagogical starting point, in fact. Please don't assume that people who think the CCSS are o…

(a) my analogy with the New Math was not meant to equate the two, only their conceptual cart before procedural horse qualities (which would also be my pedagogical concern); (b) don't get me wrong: I agree with the "deeper understanding" goal of CCSS, and it was how I taught. The concerns I expressed were with the whole program's implementation, (un)testing, and effectiveness with less than exceptional students -- mor…

When you are talking about the "program's implementation," are you talking about how the CCSS were developed? The authors were informed by the best existing state standards, teacher feedback, and public input, and they aimed for the standards to be research and evidence-based more than any other standards document I've read. Every change of standards must face the charge of "untested", though I think the authors of the Common Core mitigate this by basing their work on research and work that is tested.

I am unfamiliar with any large-scale failures of the CCSS with struggling students, but I have seen struggler excel with an approach that emphasizes understanding. Of course, anecdotes are not data, and I'm open to hearing how the Common Core fails our weakest students. I don't think it is perfect, but I do think it is better than any of the alternatives I've taught with.

If we're being honest, in many places in the US, the emphasis on misusing standardized test scores to shut down schools and fire teachers was well under way long before the CCSS. And to be clear, I don't think this makes any sense. But I don't think it's reasonable to pin this on the Common Core, it's just that it provides an enemy that people from around the country can hate on.

Re: What Students Do (And Don't Do) in Khan Academy

#54

Post by kennytilton » Fri, Dec 19, 2014, 11:28 PM UTC

jblad wrote: post #52

kennytilton wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"there is no "CC testing standards and format"." I see two. One is called PARC, one is called Smarter Balanced. And they want to use them to close schools and fire teachers, so look for everyone to teach to whatever sample tests they can get their hands on.

PARC and SBAC are indeed tests intended to measure students against the Common Core State Standards. They are not from, or a part of, the CCSSI. People definitely do want to misuse these tests to punish schools and teachers, but none of this invalidates the Common Core. And while people will teach to the sample tests, that's on people who want to use these to destroy schools, not on the Common Core itself.

Ah, but if you check out the Common Core page they go on and on about student performance being comparable between states, which is why the two standardized tests in effect are inseparable from CCSS. btw, I know what you meant by the rhetorical "people...do not want", but the problem is precisely that "accountability" is the other dog whistle never far from any CCSS discussion.

I am afraid your healthy view of CCSS is not widely shared, and the discussion would be much better if CC was offered purely as PD. Teachers love anything that works.

Re: What Students Do (And Don't Do) in Khan Academy

#55

Post by kennytilton » Fri, Dec 19, 2014, 11:36 PM UTC

jblad wrote: post #53

kennytilton wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(a) my analogy with the New Math was not meant to equate the two, only their conceptual cart before procedural horse qualities (which would also be my pedagogical concern); (b) don't get me wrong: I agree with the "deeper understanding" goal of CCSS, and it was how I taught. The concerns I expressed were with the whole program's implementation, (un)testing, and effectiveness with less than exceptional students -- mor…

When you are talking about the "program's implementation," are you talking about how the CCSS were developed? The authors were informed by the best existing state standards, teacher feedback, and public input, and they aimed for the standards to be research and evidence-based more than any other standards document I've read. Every change of standards must face the charge of "untested", though I think the authors of t…

By "implementation" I mean everything that followed the authoring of CC. (But I do have a big problem with the few authors and absence of meaningful feedback from educators.) The thing is untested, mandated, used as a threat, and more untested. I also think the absence of feedback from real teachers was an act of arrogance and ignorance: teachers are actually pretty good at what they do, and the best teachers could have totally schooled the CC authors. They never really asked. CC reminds me of what Yeltsin said about Communism: "It was a beautiful dream."