Critical Litercy in Science

Have you ever saw a subatronic spectacle of matter collapse on itself? This is probably not a question you would normally ask of yourself. Let me ask you this then, have you ever looked down from a somewhere far off the ground such as ledge or on top of a tall building and wondered "How far is it to the bottom"? One way you can find out is by dropping a stone and counting how long it takes. This can simply be done by using this equation: vertical distance is equal to half the gravity multiplied by the square value of time or otherwise known as y= 1/2 x g x t^2. Gravity is measured as 9.8 meters per squared second.

Try and see how far these guys have been fell.

If you have an answer more or less 45158 meters than you are right. In real life this may not be completely accurate, but you were able to come to a value or an answer.

Literacy in science is about doing things. I never completely understood this phrase until recently. Literacy is science is all about asking questions and finding your own answers based on what you know. It is about looking for evidence and testing to find results. Its all about problem solving and translating your knowledge into your reasoning and exploration to discover the truth. 

Thus, brings me to another idea. Is everything we know to be true. Is there such a thing as global warming and are we to blame? This topic has been a political debate for over a decade. While searching for the answer you will find discrepancies from scientific findings, where one party is biased toward one idea. So you have to wonder, how is the findings distorted? Who are they targeting? and for what reasons is there distortion if any?

In the following article you can find that there is a push towards global warming when the data is not there to support it.
How We Know Global Warming is Real

Common Core

Since the adoption of Common Core there has been praise and criticism that followed. The aftermath of the failed No Child Left Behind Act prompted liberal legislators to create state standards that provided equal opportunity to minority, low-end economic, and high economic areas. Once credited by Arne Duncan as the future of education and the biggest academic achievement since Brown vs. Board of Education, such standards have been met with criticism and the repeal in multiple states. However, criticism is now generated from both conservative and liberal politician as Governor Cuomo of New York dubbed Common Core, "flawed" and is planning to restructure how is state adopts standards.

Educational reformer Diane Ravitch who is a proponent of educational legislation and standards discusses her criticism below:

Aside from criticism is the anomaly, Massachusetts. As our New York times article we are discussing tomorrow states, "Yet he staunchly defended the effort, saying Massachusetts went through the same pains two decades ago after it adopted new standards, and now consistently scores as high as the top countries do on international measures." However, this took two decades to achieve, and the standards taught today face many issues such as educators who are unaware of how to teach standards effectively, the acquisition of technology, textbooks, and materials that will prepare each student equally for standardized testing. Critics of Common Core advocate this is simply impossible and students will continue to be considered inadequate, especially in lower-income areas where access to materials and technology is limited.

I feel as though the adoption of standards is necessary in order to close the achievement gap between high-income and low-income areas. It goes without saying that students are given more opportunity in high-income areas, than those in low-income areas. It is simply impossible to meet achievement standards with some of the problems these areas, families, and schools face. Furthermore, educators are not equipped yet to teach in alignment with Common Core, and we are seeing students fearful of mathematics and other disciplines. There is a great issue with Common Core, and states such as Oklahoma have already repealed the standards and implemented their own. I am not sure what the real solution would be, but Federal control of education and the equal distribution of funds is a plan that could provide students equal opportunity. Additionally, it is unfair to lower-income areas to meet standards and receive funding if they are not properly prepared to teach Common Core. Common Core in my opinion has done nothing but perpetuate an already existing problem in education, and the legislation was passed almost in secret without the public fully understanding the implications. 

Common Core

Ever since they were brought to the public's attention in 2010 the common core state standards have faced strong opposition from the right, but the standards are now beginning to lose some of its support from the left. The opponents claim that the new standards will hurt students already at a disadvantage and that the standards for math will actually cause more students to become uninterested in the subject. They also believe that rolling out the new standards is hurting districts performance. The supporters of the common core state standards claim that these new standards will help disadvantaged students by leveling the playing field, and it will help make the United States competitive in global market.The two videos below will help to illustrate these points. 

The Colbert Report
Colbert Report Episode Guide,  More Colbert Report Videos,  Comedy Central Full Episodes

Many administrators, government officials, and parents are beginning to claim that actually implementing the standards are creating problems for districts. Many of the teacher required to teach these new standards have not yet received proper training or materials, and it is causing the test scores within those districts to drop. However, I believe that this is only temporary. The New York Times article from the readings this week states that Massachusetts faced many of these same challenges when it adopted new standards about two decades ago, but it now scores as highly as top performing countries do on international scales.

Those opposed to common core also claim that the standards will put students who are already at a disadvantage in a worse position because of the increased amount and difficulty of the work they are expected to do. However evidence shows that overall standards are beneficial for disadvantaged students. Education analyst John Chubb has stated that, "student achievement has grown much more rapidly in the last decade...than during the 1990s, especially for the lowest achieving and most-disadvantaged students in the nation." and since 2000, "The bottom 10% had gained far more than the national average..."

Lastly, many of the critics of common core say the standards for math will create a generation of students who are uninterested or fearful of math because of the complex word problems and the advanced subject matter. While I agree with the critics about the problems with the standards for math presented in common core, I believe that the standards for literacy are essential for preparing students for college. The skills that are presented in the standards are students should read and analyze rigorous texts, see the link between content and comprehension, and it emphasizes their close reading skills. Which are all skills that I use in my daily life as a college student.