Today I met with some local school administrators who invited me to visit with them and helped me answer some of the questions that have arisen as a result of my recent research. They are just as concerned as I am!
In my meeting, I discovered that in the past, the first year that changes to the TEKS were implemented, the standardized test only covered the TEKS that were common to both the newly revised and previous TEKS. This year because the changes in Math TEKS in grades 3-8 were so drastic, there is not sufficient common standards to build a math test on; therefore, our children will be tested solely on the newly revised TEKS.
So my question this evening is why the huge and sudden revisions to the math TEKS?
The SBOE says that the TEKS were written based on College and Career Readiness Standards (CCRS). Those standards have been in effect since 2008. The previous TEKS were revised in 2009 to meet CCRS guidelines. Nothing has changed in the CCRS guidelines so why the drastic changes in the TEKS?
Is the answer found in the Common Core State Standards?
Renaissance Learning produces educational products nationwide. They created charts that bridge the TEKS to Common Core State Standards so that educators in Texas can utilize their products. The chart shows the staggering relationship between the 2012 revised Math TEKS and the Common Core State Standards. Take the 3rd Grade chart for example. Of the 192 math TEK subparts, Renaissance Learning found 172 have direct correlation to Common Core State Standards. doc.renlearn.com/KMNet/R0055319DCB05FD8.xls
Robert Kaplinsky of Glenrock Consulting also noticed the correlation between math TEKS and Common Core. He works primarily as a specialist helping teachers implement the Common Core State Standards. After being invited to present in Texas, he set out to create an "objective comparison between the two sets of standards." In this article http://robertkaplinsky.com/comparing-the-texas-essential-knowledge-and-skills-to-the-common-core-state-standards/ , Mr. Kaplinsky reports his findings. He says, "I was surprised to see such a strong correlation between the two sets of standards. The CCSS and TEKS have much in common as to how students should demonstrate their mathematical understanding. "
Whether you are a supporter of Common Core or not, these findings are problematic based on House Bill 462, which explicitly "prohibits the State Board of Education (SBOE) from adopting Common Core State Standards." (Read HB 462 at http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/83R/billtext/pdf/HB00462F.pdf#navpanes=0 )
So is a rose by any other name still a rose?
And did the SBOE make this drastic change to the TEKS because they were trying to align them more closely to Common Core State Standards? And if that was the case, then why?
These are questions I am hoping to find answers to. Maybe it will lead me to an answer to my main question. One that I have asked before…
Did anyone consider what the gap in these new TEKS would do to children like mine who are being tested in the classroom and on the STAAR test using standards that the SBOE is fully aware they haven't prepared them for?
1 comment:
Wow! I'm a 3rd grade teacher in Wimberley, TX, and we JUST found these same connections with our TEKS and the Common Core Skills. I compared several of our skills to the common core skills and found they were VERBATIM!
I can tell you that even though the Renaissance Learning chart says it's comparing it with the new skills, those TEKS listed for 3rd grade are the old ones. With the new ones, - you would see WAY more correlation!!
Many of our new 3rd grade Teks sound like they were cut and pasted from Common Core skills! Here's an example: "CCSS.Math.Practice.MP4 Mathematically proficient students can apply the mathematics they know to solve problems arising in everyday life, society, and the workplace." Our Texas Teks say "Teks 3.1A Process standard 3.1a Apply mathematics to problems arising in everyday life, society, and the workplace;" Really?? That is Common Core- verbatim.
Another- "CSS.Math.Content.3.NBT.A.2 Fluently add and subtract within 1000 using strategies and algorithms based on place value, properties of operations, and/or the relationship between addition and subtraction." Our math TEK says "Teks 3.4A solve with fluency one-step and two-step problems involving addition and subtraction within 1,000 using strategies based on place value, properties of operations, and the relationship between addition and subtraction;"
There are a ton just like that. The first - most important issue is that these skills are insanity for our kids. I couldn't agree with your Blog more! There's no way they are developmentally appropriate, and we are setting our students up to fail!
We have met with our Represenative, Jason Isaac and have been contacting other Senators/ Representatives with what we have found.
I am SO happy to know there are others out there who have seen this too and find these skills to be as harmful to our kids as we do!
Jamie Thibodeaux
3rd Grade
Wimberley, TX
Post a Comment