Anyone doing CScope? I believe it is a Texas based curriculum. Our district has bought into this year and the attitudes of the teachers have changed significantly. We used to be like family. Now, almost everyone is short with one another and towards the students. We are spending way too much time after school and on weekends preparing lessons. Many of us use our conference time just to prepare for the next lessons. Any advice Cscope users?
If you can keep away from c-scope, do it! It is a bunch of lesson plans submitted by different teachers that do not flow well from one lesson to the next. The lessons are confusing to the students, and the pace is horrible. You either spend too long on one thing or not enough time on another. I am a 3rd grade teacher who has been teaching for 8 years, we spent almost the whole first semester on addition and subtraction in math, and yet only a week or so on multiplication. The supplies needed are numerous and costly. I gave up trying to get them for Science and went back to the old curriculum...my principal wasn't happy about that. It takes hours to prepare for each day's lessons, and there are times when none of us understand what the lesson is trying to accomplish. I could go on, and on, and on. I will say that I don't like seeing the kids fail and knowing I can't do anything about it because I am being told to use this "curriculum". This is so bad, that I am willing to leave this district and find one that wants what is really best for the students, and not what they think the Service Center wants.
Run, run, run, as fast as you can! Cscope is an unholy mess. My district forced us to use it for 3 six weeks until we finally revolted. Now it's supplemental. They spent a fortune on this junk, and we've been receiving it from ESC experts just days after it is written. It's full of mistakes and seems to have been written by people who have no concept of how to differentiate curriculum. I teach lots of students who are LEP, and it seems like there has been no regard for them in cscope. It's a one size fits all disaster. If you can avoid it, DO!
Our district is also using C-Scope, and we have since the beginning. We found that the best way to implement it is to start with our focus on the Vertical Alignment Document. The second year we added the Instructional Focus Documents and the key understandings and guided questions. Many of the lessons are long and involved; however, we do not require our teachers to use the lessons since they were included as best practice-model lessons. C-scope has been a great way to insure that all of our teachers are covering the TEKS and preparing our students to become stronger critical thinkers.
So anybody love teaching CScope this year??? We are going to be required to use it next year, but we will be able to use the state adopted version of Envisions. So we will be able to make a TAKS connection and I can read the materials for that text books lesson and not the 20 pages on CScope!
Our service center treats teachers like we are incapable of planning and doing a professional job. Quote..."it takes someone with a master's degree to know what is going one". This blew my mind when I have 18 years of experience and I continually look for various ways to make my classroom more productive. C-Scope is horrible. It doesn't flow, it's NOT teacher friendly (especially if a sub has to teach the class), parents are so lost and needless to say if this is taking place just imagine how our students feel. Parts of it may be good, but overall it is terrible. You can tell that the people planning it are not working in the classroom and esepcially not at the primary level.
The sales pitch to our administrators and school board members sounds awesome, but it is just that a sales pitch. Money is exchanged between the c-scope planners and the schools without any input from the teachers that try to implement a program that is not worth the paper it's written on. My prediciton is that in a couple of years we will see the effects of c-scope and it will not be a pleasant one. It's a joke to say no child left behind when c-scope leaves all involved behind!
Just read in our local paper our district has bought the new CSCOPE curriculum to be installed K-12 for school year 2009. As the father of a 14 year old middle schooler, I am naturally interested in learning more about this curriculum. Obviously, the program has met with mixed success among school districts and teachers. Wonder what's in store for us???
Our school district has purchased the C-Scope curriculum. My daughter is an A honor roll student. She has been coming to me for explanations for 7th grade math. Some of the word problems that I have looked at have the potential for two answers depending on your interpretation. My daughter's teacher is working the problems for each interpretation. You can not have 2 answers for 1 problem. The teacher is seemingly having to work the problems for an answer. The kids are telling her their answers while she is working them on the board the next day after the homework and she gets short with them stating that she doesn't know the answer, she has to work for the answer. The teacher makes the kids take notes for home work and then takes up the notes at the end of the day. The kids have no workbooks for examples. I corresponded with the teacher and superintendent about the lack of workbooks. The super stated that he would get me access to the online C-Scope curriculum. I haven't gained access yet. I beleive Atl ISD is using this as a stand alone curriculum. Is this C-Scope a joke or what?!?!?!?
I am reading with interest about teachers and the C-Scope program. My 15 year old daughter complains that she has learned nothing in her Soph Geometry class. Indeed I found out that she did not even have a text book. I confronted the principal and was given a text book and advised that they were not issuing text books because some students did not return them! Are you kidding me? What is going on in the education system these days? I'll admit that I am a senior citizen but when I graduated in 1965 I had no problem with college level courses. I am not a professional teacher but I have a BA UT Austin, MBA Harvard and JD STCL and have been in a few class rooms and have been taught by world class professors.
My daughter does not have homework and is expected to take notes in class and then understand the materials. She blames this C-Scope curriculum. I cannot find out anything about it. It seems the teachers "clam up" when I mention it.
This is incredible and no wonder our schools are turning out uneducated individuals whose diplomas mean very little.
Any information that you have on this topic would be appreciated.
We were told 3 years ago that our district had purchased this program. We had a total of 3 hours inservice explaining the program and all its benefits. Luckily, my district is not mandating that we all use it. It is STRONGLY suggested, however. I spoke with a teacher at our service center, and she said that principals and superintendents have misunderstood C-Scope completely. Teachers are supposed to use it as a RESOURCE to their teaching. It is not supposed to be considered as the BIBLE. It is to be used as a supplement, nothing more. I would talk to the service center your district belongs to and get some dialogue going. I teach 5th grade, and no one in 3rd, 4th, or 5th grade are using this program.
Cscope was given (forced upon) to us this year; it has been one nightmare after another. Last year my TAKS scores were in the high 90s...this year, I'll be lucky if any of my students pass. The curriculum is disjointed, smacks of socialism (I teach history), and is not connected in any way. I was told by a school board member that if I did not follow it, I would be in trouble with the district. This is about to drive me to another district that is NOT required to use it, so I can teach freely.
Cscope will cause you monster STRESS!!!! I had a walk-through during my science lesson and was left very unsatisfied remarks by my asst. pricipal stating:WHERE ARE ALL THE MATERIALS YOU ARE SUPPOSE TO BE USING? WHY ARE YOU ASKING OTHER QUESTIONS BESIDES THE ONES IN THE CSCOPE LESSON?- We needed some type of salt I have never heard of and other countless materials that would costs me at least over 20 dollars for that days lesson. So I approached her on her comments saying I didn't have the materials, because they were not available in my classroom or school. She said it was my responsibilty to buy them. Oh, and about the questions I said I was asking higher order level thinking questions and she said no stick to the CSCOPE lessons. Yet, when I had my evaluation she said I was not asking higher order level thinking question!!!!! I seriously wish for this CSCOPE to go away!!!
Good luck to anyone who has to use this-believe me it helps no one, our students do not know simple things such as adding or subtracting because we spent a week on it since school began, and have not touched it since. GOOD LUCK!!
Our district started using C-Scope last year and it has caused nothing but confusion and heartache. It beats all I've ever seen!!! We pay for it and C-Scope doesn't even have this years LA curriculum ready since we have new TEKS from the state of Texas (which IS the curriculum in my opinion). This year in LA we are told by our administrators to use the old C-Scope from last year that do not go with the TEKS the state of Texas mandates we teach for TAKS testing this year. In other words, I'm supposed to use the old TEKS and the C-Scope scope and sequence from last year to get my kids ready for a TAKS test this year!!!! HOW INSANE is this! Can't college educated administrators see that this is not going to work.....we are just setting these kids up to fail. I can't bring myself to do this. Also, we learn the lessons from C-Scope are written by college kids who have never taught before!! I've taught for 17 years and our TAKS scores have always been in the 90s....what's wrong with the 98% we have gotten for the past 3 years?
I've been on a vertical planning committee this year, and one of our tasks was to review C-Scope prior to making a recommendation on adopting it or some other canned curriculum. Despite an almost unanimously bad review, both by our committee and polled teachers on every campus in the district, our new superintendant has adopted C-Scope district-wide for all science.
Oh, the joy.
In our district, they have left it up to each individual campus to decide if it is negotiable or "non-negotiable". Our campus admn have decided on the latter. Oh man...we are upset! Math and science are okay with C-Scope. English and Social studies, well, we are not happy. For English, the material is so boring. Students need literature they can relate to...not the outdated material C-Scope suggests. C-Scope does not know my students nor do they take into account the diversity of a classroom. C-Scope is impersonal and in ELA, this will not work. My scores for ELA have been quite well! C-Scope as the bible is a huge mistake at a unbearable cost.
In our district, they have left it up to each individual campus to decide if it is negotiable or "non-negotiable". Our campus admn have decided on the latter. Oh man...we are upset! Math and science are okay with C-Scope. English and Social studies, well, we are not happy. For English, the material is so boring. Students need literature they can relate to...not the outdated material C-Scope suggests. C-Scope does not know my students nor do they take into account the diversity of a classroom. C-Scope is impersonal and in ELA, this will not work. My scores for ELA have been quite well! C-Scope as the bible is a huge mistake at an unbearable cost.
I'm student teaching in a district that just bought CSCOPE. We don't HAVE to use it for anything but math and science, and even then, we don't have to use the lessons. I think the best way to use the program will be to use the concepts outlined, and make your own lessons. Let CSCOPE be the skeleton, making sure you're on track, but still add all of the body yourself. That's how I have to do it because I obviously can't turn in premade lessons every week, but it's working out well. I like knowing what concepts I'm going to cover and then still putting together creative lessons. I think as long as you use it as a guide and not a Bible, CSCOPE has some really good things to offer.
Let me clarify a couple things. First of the new ELAR lessons are not written because TEA has not given the TAKS objectives that will be tested with the new ELAR TAKS test. It would be useless for the CSCOPE writers to write these lessons without this information. CSCOPE aligns the TEKS with the TAKS. Also, the CSCOPE lessons are NOT written by college students! The CSCOPE lessons are written by educators that teach using the 5E model in their classroom. Just wanted to clear some misconceptions-
The curriculum DOES not flow from mathematical concept to concept. It is out of order! I have no idea what person decided upon the order but they may need to go back to school! The preparation takes up a lot of time and we are not given the time or the money to get the supplies. But we are told we have to follow it. Something wrong here!! Some of the games and activities are good and I can see using them within the context of a lesson but not make the games and activities all of the lesson. SOOO many kids are confused and lost and not be able to do the critical thinking skills and applying to life situations with this program. We adopted it and the entire department is unhappy. Not good for teacher moral and not good for our kids!
The thought behind it is to replace the textbooks! For heavens sake it is a scripted lesson in a notebook! one book for another! Let's leave room for teacher creativity, and bring back the enthusiasm for creating an environment that students can learn in and be successful.
There is no way on God's green earth that the Scope and Sequence or should I say "Vertical Alignment Documents" were written by English teachers who are currently still in the classroom and who have majored in English in an accredited University. Not to sound pretentous, but I do not have a generalist certificate nor do I have an elementary certification. I am secondary certified and am subject specific which means I majored in English in college.
The order in which they have me and my 'highly qualified' collegues teaching grammar and writing is ludacris. Why would I teach subordinating conjunctions one six weeks but wait until the second six weeks to teach complex sentences? We call that putting the cart before the horse. Subordinating conjunctions are words that are used to introduce adverb clauses in a complex sentence. Subordinating conjunctions should be taught alongside the concept of complex sentences.
Just because one particular district/region deems a curriculum as the end all of curriculums does not make it so. The money shelled out to purchase this curriculum could have been put to much better use in my district. I also know for a fact that as a highly qualified teacher with writing TAKS scores which have been 100% passing and around 50% of those being commended was never asked for an opinion or even given a heads up on this CScope curriculum. As a whole, the writing TAKS scores for our middle school students have never been lower that 97% passing. So, the need for this change was for what reason? Change for the sake of change is NEVER a good thing.
We are using C-Scope. Overall there are many frustrated people. Our math scores were pretty good so I think some people are a little offended at the purchase. I am not a complete downer when it comes to the program, but I have found a few holes. I guess we will see what our results are like at the end of the year.
As far as how to simplify: My team and I sat down and sketched out on a school calendar the Unit #, Lesson # on each day of the 6 weeks. We also allowed days for the Unit tests. We haven't done well getting the spiraling review in, but I don't think that matters too much. If you know what lesson you are on then really all you have to do it make copies and glance over the main points of the next days lessons. It is pretty laid out for you and really you just have to try it a year and make adjustments as needed. I think the math is ok, but I am definitely hearing that ELA and Science are pretty useless. Are you using all 3?
This year has been a complete nightmare. We found out the week before school began that we would be using CSCOPE. Last year, we received very high ratings on our TAKS test and none of us understands why this awful curriculum was forced on us. I hate teaching this year, because I feel lost all the time. I teach 3rd grade and the concepts I am supposed to be teaching to 8 year olds don't even make sense to me sometimes.
I don't even think our administration looked at the curriculum before requiring us to follow this absurd plan. I was told today by my principal that I need to do teacher evaluation grades for CSCOPE...her interpretation of this is when we discuss the lesson, I am supposed to evaluate my students on a rubric, this is fine, but eventually my student will be required to actually perform on a test and when that day comes and they can't do it, I will be blamed. I feel awful because I know that my students don't understand the material and it is my job to help them succeed, CSCOPE is not built for success, it is built for speed. I do not recommend this program and hope that soon the Administrations of the districts using this curriculum will look beyond the sales pitch and see the damage that this program is causing. It is tearing apart districts, confusing teachers, making parents angry, and worst of all hurting our students.
I was at an inservice at a service center about a month ago. The service center lady (cscope cheerleader) said that 5 other states are now looking at Cscope! there was an audible gasp in the room. The workshop wasn't even about Cscope, but she must have mentioned how "great" it was at least 10 times.
I'm teaching 4 preps of social studies 4th-7th and it is very time consuming in getting prepared. I go early, stay late, and work most of the weekend. It shouldn't take that much time. There is not enough background information. There seems to be a lot of gaps in tying the lessons together. Seems so much is left out. Some of it is good, but many of the students and teachers aren't that excited about it.
C-Scope in and of itself is not the problem. If it may be used as a guide or a tool, there wouldn't be a problem. However, once a district pays the money and gets on board, the teachers are FORCED to use it. I know of one district where the teachers were threatened with reprisal if they did not access this program daily. They were, in essence, told that the administration would be watching. Sounds a whole lot like Orwell's Big Brother. This program kills teacher creativity, fails to address in-depth thinking on the part of the teacher and student, and is disconnected at best. Insisting upon its use is just one more way of getting the masses to buy into a socialist system. Please rebel against it.
I am new to this chat room; I have been reading all the messages on cscope. I have taught in a district that started using this curriculum about 3 years ago; also taught at a district that was just getting into it. First I think it is a push to go to electronic curriculum and also it is seen as a way to improve the schools rating. Even if the schools scores (texas standards) are good, the school has to improve in several paramaters, if some are lacking, the administration sees cscope as a way to improve accross the curriculum. Districts are always striving to get ratings up to exemplary, if cscope claims it will do the job, there goes the district.
I have found that the best way to deal with this is to see cscope as one other person said, "not the bible", but a tool. The instructional focus documents, (IFDs) are the best part, especially in providing important vocabulary.
I am speaking for the science content...
It was not a bunch of random lessons or activities submitted by teachers. It was curriculum that was designed following the "backwards by design" model by a selected team of teachers who were selected to do the writing.
Based on the evidence of your comments, I would say the teachers are the ones who are having "issues". Students say it is the best science they have had in years.
The textbooks are so outdated- as are most methods still being used in classrooms. Rows, individual/isolated work, cookbook labs etc.
Have you submitted your feedback to the CSCOPE writers? There is a feedback button on your CSCOPE page. You should have been taught how to use it. As a user of CSCOPE at the first grade level, there are no lessons that would have cost $20, and in addition- is the salt being referred to the "kosher salt"? Do you know why it was needed? There is a message at the bottom of every materials list that says clearly "you can substitute materials based on availability in your district".
BTW- regular salt (ie iodized) will look cloudy when mixed in water, non-iodized, or kosher salt will not.
In stead of spouting off falsehoods about the curriculum and lessons, why not post where it will do some good? Use the feedback button.
After reading your message I researched what "socialism" is. Could you please explain how offering students a viable curriculum/instructional lessons is = to socialism? Because teachers have to read the lessons a day in advance, and not just "do whatever" when they walk into the classroom- this = socialism?
The more I read about the complaining on this site I realize why teachers are not respected as professionals.
I think the primary science is awesome. Does it take some prep time? Yes. I prepare the activities for K-5 teachers, and it takes time to read all the lessons and gather the materials. But, it is making a difference for the students. So, I am willing to go the extra mile because I teach so students learn.
Sounds like this site has a bunch of complaining teachers. I wonder how many have really assessed if it is the scope, sequence, the alignment, the lessons, or their lack of motiviation they are angry about.
There is a feedback button the the CSCOPE lesson page- if you are that unhappy- USE IT!
I used CSCOPE in the past and don't have the privledge of using it this year. I miss it dearly. At first it is hard to get used to, but once you let it do it's job it works great. My students loved the activities once I changed my attitude that it could work. As far as planning, it is all layed out for you. I spent much less time planning when I had CSCOPE than I do now that I don't have access to it. I envy you!
I was at your inservice this summer!! You're the head writer for the C-Scope science units. I don't think you need to try to sell C-Scope on this thread. It's a lose situation, kinda like the situation that teachers are in due to your program. I think there is something fishy about this whole situation. How do administrators get so easily manipulated into buying this program?
Have to say that when I read your post, I thought maybe I had been here and posted it myself. ! I couldn't agree more with what you say. C-scope is bologne that educators are falling for just for the sake of change! Administrators everywhere will ruin their schools if they adopt this mess! Students will suffer, teachers will leave and scores will fall. Then how smart will educators look!
C-Scope is a bunch of crap. Students are not cognitively ready to answer most of the math questions, and in other classes, it is totally impossible for the teachers to grade the amount of work that is done daily. These idiot administrators have bought into a very expensive curriculum and now they have to stand behind it. They think the kids are getting smarter because they are making higher grades on TAKS, but the truth is that the TAKS gets a little easier each year, and the kids would do better anyway.
This is the worst curriculum I have ever taught. Our children will suffer in their grades for this mistake. You will not find any teacher that had a good experience with CScope. God bless our teachers and students for having to endure this educational injustice. I know Texas can do better than this.
Change is hard. Even change for the better is difficult. We never get the answer to our "why"s that make us feel comfortable.
However, every district, administrator, teacher and parent wants each and every student to be successful. Research says that a guaranteed and viable curriculum is the key. One of the true benefits of CSCOPE is that in our very mobile society, that if and really when this curriculum is state-wide, students who relocate will no longer be the students we dread to see enroll in January, March, April! They will come right in and recognize the vocabulary, etc. from the lessons they had in their previous district.
CSCOPE pushes teachers to make students think. That is the hardest part for everybody, teachers, students, and parents. But in a few years (yes, some schools can testify to this), we will have students who are thinkers not just regurgitators.
I was wondering if you are still a self-contained classroom? We started using CSCOPE this year with Science only, but next year they have asked us to incoorporate all subjects. That is fine if you are the math teacher in high school, but not so easy if you teach all subjects. Some grade levels around here are panicking and wanting to departmentalize, even in Kindergarten! I am trying to make the best out of this situation and find a way to make this work for the good of my students. Do you have any positive suggestions on anything that has worked for you in organizing all of this information?
I admit it looks like CSCOPE does not deliver. However, I don't think that something that obviously doesn't work should be shoved down to schools who have poor academic performance. These schools are the ones that need a successful program more than anyone, otherwise we end up with uneducated children. We are here to help them not keep them down. PT38 I hope you are not a teacher because if you are this was an ignorant thing to say.
I think you are either a very young teacher or are on the payroll of cscope. Your vehemence is amazing in your defense of the aforementioned program. We have just bought it (woe unto us) and have found so many errors in the ELA curriculum it's laughable. One does wonder who wrote the lesson plans because some are just flat out wrong! And thanks for the tip on where else to write about problems. Why you think this is not the place to voice concerns puzzles me, though. I reached this site by typing in 'CSCOPE problems'. Obviously this is a fairly apropos place for discussion.
We are starting CSCOPE this next school year. I am so nervous and today i spent all day in our reading adoption prep course. Will we even be able to use our new reading adoption with CSCOPE? I love the reading adoption but i do not see how it fits with CSCOPE. I am really nervous about this curriculum and if it is actually going to help us or hurt us. I know we as teachers are not divided about how we feel about CSCOPE. We are all extremely nervous and stressed out above and beyond. Do we even have the materials to complete the lessons??????? A very concerned and scared teacher.
I have 5 preps and nobody to help me assemble all of the materials. Nor do I have the $$ to purchase all of the materials required for cscope. What is a teacher supposed to do when he/she has NO help with copying, laminating, researching materials for social studies and science, collecting books and reading material for ELA, making manipulatives for math, creating assessments to match the content of cscope so there are daily grades that can be taken, AND be expected to continue on with other school responsibilities like RTI, PLTs, and dozens of committee meetings? Oh yes, I have to actually TEACH the students too. It's a good thing I'm not a stress eater or I'd weigh a ton...but I will most likely become an alcoholic thanks to the stress that is being forced upon teachers. Oh wait, I won't have time to drink because I'll be too busy with all of the above mentioned jobs.
I'm going to the C scope convention next week. Our district will HAVE to use it for 10-11 year. I teach 2nd grade GT and am told all of my special units can maybe be done if I have a few miinutes here or there, basically my 25 years of experience should be thrown out for this new and improved curriculum. I've seen some good stuff in math but not too impressed with others. I don't know how my kids will get what they need by doing the same as everyone else, the same with the needier children. ONE SIZE does not IT ALL. I hope to learn more and feel better after the convention. Has anyone gone to one?
I just finished 2 years in a self-contained 5th grade classroom using CSCOPE for math and science. The second year, I was able to see the value in some of the lessons, but the preparation load is simply unrealistic, as is any grading. My district put a lot of money into providing supplies; I can't imagine trying to use CSCOPE without that support. Even just the printing/copying load is tremendous.
Three-fourths of the science lessons are worthwhile, if you can do them. In self-contained, I could not spend 30 minutes every single day just setting up for science. It's also weak on TAKS preparation. It's a nice concept that well-educated students will ace the test, and some will, but many still need a lot of exposure to the format in which they are tested to succeed.
I'll never understand why this district chose CSCOPE over the Envision math materials. In math, there is far too little practice for most kids. Even my gifted kids often struggled with what concept they were supposed to take away from some of the "explore" lessons. The equivalent fractions lesson with 2-color counters made them want to cry. I question whether the conceptual understanding that is pushed in math is developmentally appropriate for most elementary kids.
Other gripes include the large number of grammatical/spelling/factual errors. Proofread, people! The lack of graphic design is a total turnoff, to me and to the students. The pace is unrelenting, and each day's lesson rarely took us less than an hour, so there was little time for spiral review or supplemental practice. As mentioned above, there is little or no support for differentiation. (And face it -- some people are just going to be concrete thinkers who will do fine with an algorithm without knowing WHY. Shouldn't they get to learn their best way?)
The goal of a consistent curriculum for a mobile population could be achieved without such a micromanagerial program. The 5E model is worthwhile, but leave time for mastery. Mastery motivates. Yes, we need to do the best possible job educating our students, but there is something wrong with a curriculum that's supported by those who got out of the classroom after only a few years and so consistently opposed by the people who have to use it every day.
I, too, am attending the C-Scope Convention this week. I find it rather funny that I am attending this convention as I am probably the MOST against using a "canned curriculum". I have well over 20 years experience with most of those being dedicated to a TAKS grade. I am hoping that by attending that I will better understand the need for every teacher in Texas to adhere to such a strict teaching method. I'm kind of worried that I will be "brainwashed" and turned into a "Stepford Teacher". Just plug in my curriculum and let me begin the lesson. (said in a robotic voice!!) I basically feel that it is an insult to the many teachers out there (including myself) who year after year have excellent TAKS scores which help not only their campus, but also their district have the Recognized or Exemplary rating. Yes, I realize there are poorly trained teachers out there, but that's where the administrators should put their feet doan and get rid of those that cannot perform well. Don't punish the good apples, because there are a few bad ones!
It seems the direction of education changes every 5 years or so (TEAMS,TAAS, EOC, TAKS, "new TAKS", and now we are back to EOC or STAR). CSCOPE is the newest thing. I've been teaching for 18 years and have used CSCOPE for the past 3 years. Whether I like it or not seems to be irrelevant because it is here and the district wants us to use it. I look at it as another hurdle. If you have been teaching for while, you have overcome many of them. Not only has the curriculum changed, but so have the students. Change is never easy. I do follow the Vertical Alignment from CSCOPE and I am lucky enough to work for an administrator that will allow me to change it just a bit if I justify it. If you have concerns, talk to your administrator about small changes. Of course they aren't going to let you ditch CSCOPE because the district has spent the $, but maybe you can change small things to help. It is very overwhelming if you have more than a couple of preps, especially when it comes to making copies. Therefore, I try to integrate my own materials and some textbook practice. I feel this benefits the students as well. The results have been successful on the TAKS test although I hate saying that because I don't like marking the success of my students by TAKS. My standards are higher. If your district is making you follow every single lesson, I think they missed the message from CSCOPE. You will never be able to complete the curriculum if you use absolutely everything. During my CSCOPE training I was told the lessons were meant as a collection of resources to pick from, therefore if I have something better for a lesson I can use it. I may be one of the lucky ones to be able to do this, but my administration listens to my concerns because I have proven myself as a teacher and because I am not resistant to change.
It seems to me that the majority of you are angry with CSCOPE when you should be angry with your district. The decisions on to what extent you will be required to use CSCOPE is a district decision. The only document that is non-negotiable is the Vertical Alignment Document. If your district requires you to use the exemplary lessons, then that is a district issue.
I personally like CSCOPE, especially the Vertical Alignment Document and Instructional Focus Document. It keeps me on track and ensures that I am teaching my students what they need to know. Granted I am not required to use the exemplary lessons, but there are some lesson I do choose to use. I can see the fustration if your district requires you to use the exemplary to the T. But as I said before that is a discussion you need to have with your administration. Also, I receive support from my administrators. I know alot of teachers in other districts who do not receive adequate training and are fustrated. It is all about the implementation.
CSCOPE does require us, teachers, to do more work. But if helps students then isn't it worth it. I don't know about you but I want my students to be successful. It is not about me and the way I want to teacher. It is about the students learning.
So, is the issue with CSCOPE or your district? Can you see anything positive in CSCOPE or do you choose to only see the negative?
I am a sixth grade math teacher in texas, I have been teaching for 19 years but only began to teach math last year and I used cscope for the first time last year. I really loved it, now granted I had to study the material the night before, but our taks scores in math were raised 20%. I do not teach just cscope, I use it as a base to keep me on track and then I do centers to back up the lessons. My students love the hands on and it really is easy to teach once you understand how it is set up. I am looking forward to using it in Math this year. I will say however in our school we only use the Math and Science curriculum. We also get all of our copies made for us and all we have to do is be prepared to teach it.
You are right - Cscope is both time consuming and handout dependant. Our School was at 96% testing with Saxon Math and fell to 88% when we switched to Cscope. a peer math teacher and I gave it an honest try. for a whole semester we did exactly what the Cscope LP directed. The hours I put in were insane, the paper I copied was massive and the "rabbit holes" I ran into were frequent. The first benchmark (9 wk) grades were horrible. Mind you, I was voted teacher of the year, so I assumed it wasn't me. To fix things, I restarted and got through the year. I then went before our school board with all the other math teachers and pleaded our case against Cscope. We are back to a regular math book (Holt) and this year managed a rating of Exemplary for the school.
My suggestion to you is that you use Cscope as a resource - not as the curriculum. The Year at a glance is a good planning device and the verticle alignment is a good tool to keep you focused on what the students need to be learning. Remember that there is little spiraling in Cscope and you need to revisit previously taught subjects on a regular basis. But, unless you are a new teacher or need to be told what to say and when to say it; use Cscope as a resouce and make sure you know exactly what part of Cscope is required by your district.
I am one of the complaining teachers you spoke of. Guess what, I have really assessed the cscope curriculum and tried to use it (FOR HIGH SCHOOL SCIENCE). It is no good. And trust me it is NOT a lack of motivation. I am angry that I am being told to use a curriculum that is not teaching the content in a way the STUDENTS learn it AND retain it. Many of the lessons are ones you can find online and do yourself. As far as teh feedback button, do you really think they are going to listen. They won't do a thing about it. Like this year (2010-2011) the science TEKS have changed and CSCOPE has not updated the "exemplar" lessons. So the districts buying the curriculum this year are not getting a full curriculum. The teachers have to analyze if the lesson is still good and how to change it to make it work for the new TEK.
We that don't like CSCOPE want to vent our frustrations and maybe get another point of view. Our administrators don't listen and the service center people don't listen either. You undo changing anybody's attitude about CSCOPE by making comments like the one below
"Sounds like this site has a bunch of complaining teachers. I wonder how many have really assessed if it is the scope, sequence, the alignment, the lessons, or their lack of motiviation they are angry about. "