Is the Adversity Score a Tool for Acknowledging Poverty (as a surrogate for race) in College Admissions or a Tool to Enrich the SAT?
About ten years ago I sat in a room with a group of principals and watched/listened to David Coleman’s “Letter from the Birmingham Jail” kickoff of the Common Core.
At the end of the presentation a teacher in the audience commented, “We’re already using these strategies: what’s new?” Coleman snapped back, “If that’s the case why are our kids doing so poorly?”
I knew we were in trouble.
States adopted the Common Core State Standards (CCSS), tests were aligned with the CCSS, instruction was measured by CCSS and we all anticipated achievement to begin to move up the ladder – we’re still waiting: NAEP scores remain flat and in New York State test scores are still mired in the lower half of states
The Organization for Education, Co-Operation and Development (OECD) takes a deep dive into reading instruction across the OECD nations, “Measuring Innovation in Education: 2019,” and reports,
It turns out that over 90 percent of U.S. teachers were already regularly doing these Common Core-endorsed practices back in 2006 … for all the Common Core-induced hoopla—there was little obvious change in U.S. practice, while other nations actually spent 2006-2016 doing more of what the U.S. was already doing back in the Bush years.
Turns out that teacher in the audience was correct.
I’ve always wondered why ED Hirsch’s Core Knowledge has never caught on, a rich curriculum and high level of instruction in a collaborative environment is CONTINUE READING: Is the Adversity Score a Tool for Acknowledging Poverty (as a surrogate for race) in College Admissions or a Tool to Enrich the SAT? | Ed In The Apple
