Yesterday I was walking down the street, minding my own business, when I noticed two women who apparently were surprised to see each other. Their eyes opened wide and they each made, in perfect unison, high-pitched noises that sounded like “squeeeeee!”
I’m assuming that they then hugged each other — which seems to be the standard practice under those circumstances — but I couldn’t tell for sure because my glasses cracked. I also don’t know whether they made any additional noises thereafter, because every dog within a 10-block radius started barking simultaneously and my ears began bleeding.
Seriously, what’s with this form of female-to-female greeting that unfortunately seems to be growing increasingly commonplace, regardless of the age of the people in question? What is it about the prospect of seeing a friend that causes vocal tones to be raised at least one full octave? I don’t want to quash anybody’s happy greeting, but can we at least lower the decibel level on the squeeeee! factor to some kind of point that is reasonably tolerable to human beings?
The stated goal of Common Core is to develop critical thinking and better ready students for college and careers and — as its name indicates — establish a common set of standards between states. Supporters say the Common Core approach to learning about math and reading are better, and in any event it would be foolish to retreat from the standards after the participating states have spent years developing and implementing them. Common Core opponents object to “federalization” of education and raise questions about costs.
Richard and Russell are long past learning math and reading, so I don’t have a dog in this fight. I’m not automatically opposed to trying new approaches or promoting standards that ensure that kids learn the basics; I remember taking “The Iowa Test of Basic Skills” when I was in grade school in the ’60s. At the same time, I’m often skeptical at claims that new approaches are better, particularly when it comes to subjects that have been taught for centuries.
With respect to Common Core, I’m more interested in the human element in these changes — which, I think, often get overlooked when huge national forces and politics enter the process. I became aware of that human element when I had lunch several weeks ago with two colleagues who have youngsters in grade school. Neither is a Republican or a reflexive opponent of “federalizing” standards, but both had serious concerns about Common Core. One related a story in which she sat down with her daughter to look at her math homework, which involved addition and subtraction problems. When the mother started to use the familiar right to left process, “carrying” numbers from column to column, the daughter said: “Mom, we don’t do it that way!” The Mom was embarrassed, and wondered why we are making this kind of change. NPR recently carried a report that raised that same issue of disconnect between parents and their kids that Common Core presents.
I think parental involvement helps to encourage kids to work hard in school, and homework assistance can also be one way of strengthening the parent-child bond. Those of us who learned the “carry” method have somehow managed to balance checkbooks, perform the basic math skills needed to function in modern society, and contribute to the economy. Why change the basic approach to addition and subtraction in a way that shuts parents out of the homework process even in the very early grades, and suggests to young children that their parents are old-fashioned and out of it? Isn’t it at least possible that there is an ultimate social cost in such a change that outweighs whatever incremental learning benefit the new approach is supposed to realize?