54min50sec
Question: Garrett Fryer
American Youth Policy Forum
Was there ever a discussion,
when you all were designing it, to implement it on a kindergarten level and
letting it grow with the students as they aged on through each grade, as
oppossed to implementing it with the entire school system nation wide?
Answer: Jason Zimba
This is something that states
have each approached differently. Some
states have done something more like that, some states have done something less
like that. I seem to remember at one
point I saw a MA plan where the grade level wasn’t the key parameter, but they
had a Venn diagram, what we do now the Common Core doesn’t do, what the Common
Core does that we don’t, and then what sort of overlap, where we want to do it
better. In year one, we’re gonna focus on the overlap and do it better. In year
two, we’ll drop things… and then in year three, we’ll add… I got the details of that wrong, but… my only point is that
different states all approached it differently, and we may find out that some
states were much wiser than others in this way.
Singapore has a long
standing, high functioning system in which they not only revise their syllabus
ever so often, but they do it actually on the basis of how kids do, so think
about that, a performance-based loop, a feedback loop. Which is something we
are taking halting steps toward, but can only image. And so roughly every six years or so, they’ll
put out tweaks to the thing. This year I
noticed that they’ve rolled out a new thing in kindergarten.
I wonder... How in the world
can one "image" OR take "halting steps toward" creating a
"high functioning system" based on a "performance-based feedback
loop" when we are STARTING with a top-down DESIGN by the name of Common
Core?
No comments:
Post a Comment