Just how bad are the new Common Core tests? Two New York educators offer a frightening in-depth look

Glenn has spoken for some time about how the fight against Common Core is a cause that can unite the left and the right, and it seems as though that logic is beginning to prove true.

A recent Washington Post article entitled "A disturbing look at Common Core tests in New York" makes a case study out of New York state where parents and teachers who were over promised are now finding themselves underwhelmed by the impact of the Common Core standards. Earlier this year, NY Governor Andrew Cuomo (D) amended the state's teacher and principal evaluations to protect educators from their students' low scores on Common Core-based exams.

The Post highlights work by Carol Burris and John Murphy. Murphy is a former English teacher and assistant principal at South Side High School in New York. Burris is principal of the school and has been highlighting the "flawed implementation" of the Common Core standards.

Right off the bat, Burris and Murphy make their position on the issue clear:

Congratulations to the New York State Education Department. Officials there have solved the college remediation problem. Their Common Core graduation tests are so “rigorous” and have a new passing score (for students graduating in 2022) set so high that only about 1 in 4 students will graduate high school. And the elite 25 percent who make it won’t be going to community college, so the colleges with highest remediation rates can close.

The article proceeds to take a look at two of New York state's Regents exams "in order to better understand the continuing march of New York’s reformist lemmings right over the cliff of reason."

Ouch.

Burris and Murphy first take a look at the June 2014 Common Core Algebra Regents, which was administered primarily to eighth and ninth grade students. The authors highlight question 12 as evidence of how the Common Core standards have maimed the wording of exams:

In the past, the question would have been phrased: “Given the roots -6 and 5, which of the following would be the correct equation?” Students are then given four choices.

Here is the Common Core phrasing: “Keith determines the zeros of the function f(x) to be -6 and 5. What could be Keith’s function?”

This is but one example of a question that was made unnecessarily complicated and wordy in order to give the illusion of a ‘real world’ problem that requires deep thinking.

You can see the entire Common Core Algebra Regents HERE.

Because of the way the test is scored (a topic Murphy and Burris explain thoroughly in the article), a large number of students will fail. As a result those students will then "take the Common Core Algebra course and the test over and over again, rather than move on to Geometry and Advanced Algebra, which would better prepare them for college." The authors refer to this phenomenon as "a glass ceiling" created by "overly complicated problems in the name of the Common Core."

The article also takes a look at the June 2014 Common Core English Regents, which Murphy and Burris describe as "even worse" than the math exam. The test has been changed to more similarly model the Advanced Placement Language exam and requires students to read and write more in less time than previous versions of the exams. As the article explains:

[T]he reading requirement on the new exam has almost tripled; the January 2014 ELA Regents exam contained readings that totaled 2,200 words, compared to the Common Core’s 6,200. What’s more, the readings themselves are more difficult in terms of vocabulary, main idea or theme, and syntax–so students have less time to spend on each question, and significantly less time to spend on the writing.

Furthermore, the authors do not believe the exam provides an better indication of college preparedness than the former format did:

We were promised that the test would be an indication of who was and was not college and career ready; the test has no validity in this regard. In fact, we are hearing reports of students taking both the Common Core and the traditional English Regents this month, passing the Common Core Regents and failing the traditional exam. When guessing gets you to pass, a test measures close to nothing.

Check out the June 2014 Common Core English Regents HERE.

Ultimately, Burris and Murphy are not chastising the idea of more rigorous standards. In fact, they seem to support the concept. They do, however, take issue with the various claims that were made while Common Core was being forced through in many states:

Can New York’s students meet more challenging standards? Of course they can. But you must have reasonable standards, take the time to build capacity, and then create assessments that allow students to show what they know, not make tests so difficult few can demonstrate their learning. New York is the canary in the Common Core mine. New York parents, as well as parents in other states, should take the time to look at these tests and decide for themselves if they are reasonable assessments on which to base all students’ diplomas. Is the Common Core and its tests the path to college readiness? We think not.

Read the entire Washington Post report HERE.

COVID is back! Or that is what we’re being told anyway...

A recent spike in COVID cases has triggered the left's alarm bells, and the following institutions have begun to reinstate COVID-era mandates. You might want to avoid them if you enjoy breathing freely...

Do YOU think institutions should bring back COVID-era mandates if cases increase? Let us know your thoughts HERE.

Morris Brown College

Both of Upstate Medical's hospitals in Syracuse, New York

Corey Henry / Senior Staff Photographer | The Daily Orange

Auburn Community Hospital, New York

Kevin Rivoli / The Citizen | Auburn Pub

Lionsgate Studio

AaronP/Bauer-Griffin / Contributor | GETTY IMAGES

United Health Services in New York

Kaiser Permanente in California

Justin Sullivan / Staff | GETTY IMAGES

There was a time when both the Left and the Right agreed that parents have the final say in raising their children... Not anymore.

In the People's Republic of California, the STATE, not parents, will determine whether children should undergo transgender treatments. The California state legislature just passed a law that will require judges in child custody cases to consider whether parents support a child’s gender transition. According to the law, the state now thinks total affirmation is an integral part of a child’s “health, safety, and welfare.”

We are inching closer to a dystopia where the state, not the parents, have ultimate rights over their children, a history that people from former Soviet nations would feign repeating.

Glenn dove into the law AND MORE in this episode titled, "Parental Advisory: The EXPLICIT plot to control YOUR kids." To get all the research that went into this episode AND information on how YOU can fight back, enter your email address below:

If you didn't catch Wednesday night's Glenn TV special, be sure to check it out HERE!

The Biden admin has let in MORE illegal aliens than the populations of THESE 15 states

GUILLERMO ARIAS / Contributor | Getty Images

There are currently an estimated 16.8 MILLION illegal aliens residing in the United States as of June 2023, according to the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR). This number is already 1.3 million higher than FAIR's January 2022 estimate of 15.5 million and a 2.3 million increase from its end-of-2020 estimate. Even Democrats like New York City's Mayor Adams Mayor Adams are waking up to what Conservatives have been warning for years: we are in a border CRISIS.

However, this isn't the same border crisis that Republicans were warning about back in 2010. In the first two years of the Biden administration alone, the illegal alien population increased by 16 PERCENT nationwide, imposing a whopping net cost of $150.6 BILLION PER YEAR on American taxpayers. That is nearly DOUBLE the total amount that the Biden administration has sent to Ukraine.

This isn't the same border crisis that Republicans were warning about back in 2010.

These large numbers often make it difficult to conceptualize the sheer impact of illegal immigration on the United States. To put it in perspective, we have listed ALL 15 states and the District of Colombia that have smaller populations than the 2.3 MILLION illegal immigrants, who have entered the U.S. under the Biden administration. That is more than the entire populations of Wyoming, Vermont, and South Dakota COMBINED—and the American taxpayers have to pay the price.

Here are all 16 states/districts that have FEWER people than the illegal immigrants who have entered the U.S. under the Biden administration.

1. New Mexico

Population: 2,110,011

2. Idaho

Population: 1,973,752

3. Nebraska

Population: 1,972,292

4. West Virginia

Population: 1,764,786

5. Hawaii

Population: 1,433,238

6. New Hampshire

Population: 1,402,957

7. Maine

Population: 1,393,442

8. Montana

Population: 1,139,507

9. Rhode Island

Population: 1,090,483

10. Delaware

Population: 1,031,985

11. South Dakota

Population: 923,484

12. North Dakota

Population: 780,588

13. Alaska

Population: 732,984

14. Washington DC

Population: 674,815

15. Vermont

Population: 647,156

16. Wyoming

Population: 583,279

POLL: Should the Government control the future of AI?

The Washington Post / Contributor | Getty Images

Earlier this week, tech titans, lawmakers, and union leaders met on Capitol Hill to discuss the future of AI regulation. The three-hour meeting boasted an impressive roster of tech leaders including, Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, Bill Gates, Google CEO Sundar Pichai, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, and others, along with more than 60 US Senators.

Tech Titans and Senators gathered in the Kennedy Caucus Room.The Washington Post / Contributor | Getty Images

The meeting was closed to the public, so what was exactly discussed is unknown. However, what we do know is that a majority of the CEOs support AI regulation, the most vocal of which is Elon Musk. During the meeting, Musk called AI "a double-edged sword" and strongly pushed for regulation in the interest of public safety.

A majority of the CEOs support AI regulation.

Many other related issues were discussed, including the disruption AI has caused to the job market. As Glenn has discussed on his program, the potential for AI to alter or destroy jobs is very real, and many have already felt the effects. From taxi drivers to Hollywood actors and writers, AI's presence can be felt everywhere and lawmakers are unsure how to respond.

The potential for AI to alter or destroy jobs is very real.

Ultimately, the meeting's conclusion was less than decisive, with several Senators making comments to the tune of "we need more time before we act." The White House is expected to release an executive order regarding AI regulation by the end of the year. But now it's YOUR turn to tell us what YOU think needs to be done!

Should A.I. be regulated?

Can the government be trusted with the power to regulate A.I.? 

Can Silicon Valley be trusted to regulate AI? 

Should AI development be slowed for safety, despite its potential advantages?

If a job can be done cheaper and better by AI, should it be taken away from a human?

Do you feel that your job is threatened by AI?