There are a couple of other threads currently on this Texas
teacher chat site, so check them out as well.

IN ADDITION, I saved a word documant with all kinds of comments
from other threads that have sinced dropped off.
Here are dozens of comments about C-SCOPE from this site and
others.

http://www.tylerpaper.com/forum_message/2561t724093g303561i/NEWS01#
 
Bill,
C-Scope is a curriculum plan that many districts in Texas are
using including TISD. The curriculum consists of prefabricated
lesson plans in a software package that are based on what they
call the 5E Model: Engage-Explore-Explain-Elaborate-Evaluate.
The lesson plans are timed and scripted for the teacher. The
software package allows for the teacher to replace C-Scope
lessons with their own lessons, but the process of doing so is
arduous and time consuming. I have tried it, and if you have
any life outside of teaching modifying C-Scope will eliminate it.

Some of the lessons that C-Scope offers are good; however, the
time constraints are rigid. If a teacher sticks to the C-Scope
lesson and plans to stay on the timeline, very little learning
will occur because everyone must press on at the same pace.
When I say press on I mean press on. It doesn't take much to
fall behind. The curriculum was adopted in hopes that every
classroom in the district would be on the same page at the same
time with their inter-district counterparts. If I am teaching
European Colonization than a teacher at a different school at
the same grade level is also teaching European Colonization and
we are both using the same script. Kinda makes PreAP, magnet
schools, honors course and such make little sense. No two
classrooms in one school move at the same pace much less two or
more different campuses of classrooms. C-Scope ignores
differentiated learning.

The primary problem I have found trying to use it is that
C-Scope lessons are all based on the assumption that the
students received C-Scope lessons in the prior grade. When a
district implements the curriculum across the board K-12 it is
on the admittance that many students will not benefit from it
because they do not have the prior knowledge that C-Scope
assumes they do. If a district insist on using C-scope, it
seems to me that it would make more sense to work it in each
year by grade level. Start C-Scope in kindergarten, the next
year K and 1st, the next year K-2nd, the next year K-3rd, and
so on. That way all students have the prior knowledge C-Scope
assumes they do and the lessons make sense. Since the C-Scope
curriculum is sold to districts as a package though, the money
made by the vendor from one bulk payment surpasses the interest
of the program actually working. Administrators also tend to
lean more on quick fixes that way, if the quick fix works they
get credit and if it doesn't they still get credit for trying.

Another problem is the last E in the 5E Model. As a teacher, I
evaluate with one primary question in mind, "Did the students
comprehend the concept?" With C-Scope, if the teacher evaluates
student comprehension and the answer to that question is "No"
the teacher must still press on to the next lesson. Reteaching
is out of the question. This causes a steady loss of student
comprehension in the classroom as the year progresses. For
example:

If I teach a lesson on culture and at the end of that lesson I
Evaluate student comprehension and 1/2 of the class
comprehended the concept, I must move on to stay on the
timeline. The next lesson is on how culture influences
government. I Evaluate and 1/4 of the class comprehends the
concept, I must move on to stay on the timeline. The next
lesson is on how culture and government influence economics. I
Evaluate and the number that grasp the concept continues to
shrink because I never had the oppurtunity to reteach. By
standardized test time oh yes the students heard the lesson.
They worked in groups and they produced a visual; however, they
do not comprehend the concept or know how it relates to them in
the real world.

My personal opinion is that any teacher worth their salt uses
the 5E Model everyday and they use it for a reason. Not to
appease a program requirement but to promote learning. I can
make a case at any time in one of my lessons that I am using
all of the 5Es. I have also noticed that those promoting the
curriculum stick to a list of buzz words and catch phrases that
are prominent in the pitching of C-Scope:

"It's a tool in your tool belt" - "It's not over their heads,
it's rigorous" -"change is always hard" - "It does everything
for you. You don't even have to think."

The last line I find downright insulting, and I think reveals
the motives behind the adoption of C-Scope - a lack of faith in
teachers.

Now I know after saying all this some will ask, "Well what do
you suggest?" My idea is simple:

The state supplies the TEKS (broad concepts). All teachers in
each grade level content area in the district collaborate to
construct a Scope and Sequence that divides the broad concepts
into subcategories along a manageable timeline. Send your
highly qualified and motivated teachers out to teach their
hearts out. Administration supplies the teacher with whatever
tools required to be successful and evaluates classrooms.
Teachers evaluate student comprehension by subcategory to
determine if reteaching through different methods is necessary.
Create a district internet forum for the teachers to share
lessons and activities that have worked for them and those that
haven't, this taps into the most valuable learning tool in
education, trial and error. Require all teachers within the
district that teach in the same content area and at the same
grade level to meet at the beginning of every six weeks grading
period for one day where each teacher is required to present a
lesson on a subcategory that is in the next six weeks units to
their team members, everyone presents a different lesson and
all subcategories are covered. This will ensure that all
teachers have a lesson plan to revert to if necessary. If a
teacher cannot successfully teach after aid and intervention
from administration, their team, and their department then do
not renew their contract.

Teach, reteach, reteach again if necessary and jump on every
student-solicited teachable moment. Lead them to water and make
it so there is no other option but to drink.
Toby Wahl, Tyler

http://texas.teachers.net/chatboard/topic13656/5.26.09.10.18.55.html

Post: C-Scope: my district is looking at it. Pros?Cons?Love?Hate?
Posted by: mrsmsr on 5/26/09
In the past I have noticed threads about C-Scope, but never
really checked out. Now our district is looking at C-Scope. Do
tell, please.

Posted by: yuck on 5/26/09
It's difficult to follow and it is a pain. WASTE of money

Posted by: Don't do it!!!
CScope is for the birds! on 5/26/09 It is a terrible
curriculum. For instance, in the 10th grade ELA curriculum,
teachers are directed when teaching Julius Caesar to read
excerpts of Act II or all of it "if you have time." Well, any
English teacher worth his/her salt knows that Act II is CRUCIAL
reading to understanding the play. I don't know who wrote that
but that's about the way the whole ELA curriculum is. My
colleagues and I give it about one more year at my school (the
2nd overall) and it will be abandoned and our current
curriculum coordinator will be moving on to another district.

Posted by: Don't get me started...oops...you did! on 5/26/09
The cscope writers didn't know the difference between
Fahrenheit and Celcius, nor the differences between statements
and questions, until I EDITED THEIR LESSONS FOR THEM. No joke.
They invite, no, they want you to email them and tell them
about their mistakes so they can fix them. And there are typos
and mistakes aplenty, I can tell you. This is the beauty of
their "collaborative" system. The head cscope chick I've spoken
with actually told me that because cscope is a collaborative,
everyone can have a say and help to improve the lessons. But,
since I'm just a teacher, I don't get paid to edit their crappy
curriculum. I'm just forced to use it, and, because I am a
teacher who wants the absolute best for my kids, I work my tail
off editing, tweaking, and improving this joke of a curriculum.
Oh, get this: Today, in a meeting after school, our curriculum
director told us that the ESL kids' scores were didn't quite
make our goal this year. Well, since we've had to chunk our old
curriculum and go with cscope this year, you can guess why. And
our principal is gonna lay a brick when he sees the list of all
the books we'll have to buy for next year, just so we can teach
this wonderful curriculum, because the books we have just don't
cut the mustard anymore. Hopefully, the administrators or board
members who are considering Cscope in your district will not
believe the "commercials" that are thrown at them. Hopefully,
they'll go through the lessons, talk to real teachers who are
forced to use them, and make an informed decision.

Posted by: centx on 5/26/09
Pro - SOMEONE is making money from it Con - it is crap
Love - the fact that our district is not making us follow it
verbatim the way some districts did Hate - that we are
still using it because we've paid for it and now we have to
"get our money's worth"

Posted by: mrsmsr a couple more questions on 5/26/09
Do you know of other schools in your regions that are
participating in C-Scope? According to our presenter, about
half the school districts in Texas are using C-Scope. Do you
know of districts that bought in but have since stopped using?

Posted by: Beverly on 5/27/09
Beverly, I wish you would let the people on the Message Board
know that CScope is not endorsed by TEA, and TEA would never
consider telling teachers how to teach the TAKS. I do enjoy
reading all the responses. Keep them coming. I've been sharing
them with the principal and my fellow teachers.

Posted by: mrsmsr is confused. Who is Beverly? on 5/27/09

Posted by: Brad on 5/27/09
lol...I was wondering who Beverly was also!

Posted by: mrsmsr on 5/28/09
I googled a bit; there's a C-Scope Beverly in region 8. Is that
perhaps the Beverly you direct your question to? I am in region
5, where it seems C-Scope is just now becoming more widely
discussed. To the person who directed your question to
Beverly...does your district use C-Scope at present?

Posted by: Bad Rap on 5/28/09
C-Scope gets a bad wrap. If you just put yourself in an
administrator's shoes for one minute and look at the big
picture you will see the following: EVERY teacher in the SAME
subject is teaching the same thing. * Parents compare
constantly what one teacher is teaching vs.another. This
eliminates that problem, COMPLETELY.* Some teachers are not
capable of staying on track and C-Scope helps them stay on
track. This eliminates hundreds of students falling behind
because of a teacher's lack of ability to stay on task. The
only con I've seen is that veteran teachers are resisting the
change. In reality the errors that have been noted are not any
more numerous or worse than any errors that are in the printed
textbooks, worksheets, etc. Most of the "errors" that have been
brought to our attention, we have actually found the TEACHER
was in error and did not fully understand the subject matter
they were hired to teacher. They blamed C-Scope. I blame their
education.

Posted by: Veteran Teacher on 5/28/09
I'm a "Veteran Teacher" of MANY years and I go to training today.

Posted by: don't like it on 5/28/09
My students have always loved the unit on dinosaurs. Just
because it is not in TEKS does not mean that students shouldn't
learn it. What is wrong with learning something because it is
fun?I don't like all of the group work. students talk too much
in groups. And we have to go too fast. Isn't it better that
students learn one thing really well then 10 things not so
well? textbooks and worksheets were good enough for me - they
are good enough for my students.

Posted by: mrsmsr on 5/28/09
What about technology? Our district will next year incorporate
lots of tech in our curriculum. How does that fit into C-Scope?
Our presenter suggested that there isn't much tech imbedded. I
like dinosaurs, too. A brief unit would be fun and interesting
as long as you thoroughly cover ALL other TEKS; in addition,
and from my perspective as a secondary ss teacher, reading
non-fiction is GREAT. I presume the dinosaur unit is at
elementary level. I just hope that along with dinosaurs, you
include all the science and social studies TEKS at your grade
level, so that students have lots of background knowledge when
they get to the next level. It's unfortunate when science and
social studies are placed on back burner and neglected in many
cases. It makes it so hard on the teacher and students who have
science TAKS at 5th and 8th as well as social studies TAKS at
8th if TEKS aren't thoroughly covered at each grade level. I
think that is very likely why curriculum like C-Scope has come
about, because too many teachers may not be seeing to it that
their grade level TEKS are completely covered. In all fairness,
we of the science and social studies depts know that many
principals are more concerned at the elementary level with
reading and math, and that teachers are under that gun. But I
am all about keeping things interesting, and I'll bet there are
lots of ways to incorporate dinosaurs, and indeed, all kinds of
other science and social studies non-fiction into curriculum,
while still prepping kiddoes for the next level. Personally,
I'm not a textbook and worksheet kind of gal; the text is for
me a great resource and one that the students NEED to learn to
how to read and successfully use, but it's just one of many
resources.

Posted by: veteran teacher on 5/28/09
I went to the training today. I went with an open mind.
Honestly, it reminds me a lot of Bridges Math, and Whole
Language. We do Saxon Math, and the presenter said it will not
work with Saxon. But, we've bought Cscope now, so I guess we'll
do it.

Posted by: ceecee on 5/28/09
HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I asked my principal about C-Scope and she said WHAT IS THAT? I
told her about it and she did research and said no way will our
district spend money on that. There is no way that half the
districts are using it......My district writes their own
timelines and we follow them and use whatever materials we need
to teach the TEKS.

Posted by: mrsmsr on 5/28/09
We do Saxon math as well, and it works. As a parent of 3
children who had the Saxon program, I was pleased. It just
plain teaches math. Can you tell me how much the program is
costing per student?

Posted by: TAJ on 5/28/09
You know, if cscope were a well-written curriculum, I wouldn't
have a problem with it. But it's not. Sure, it would be great
if every teacher in every grade level in every subject in every
district taught the same thing. The philosophy behind it sounds
good. But the sad reality is that the cscope curriculum has
fallen way short. Until their own standards improve, I will
continue to tell everyone, "Don't buy into cscope!"
Incidentally, the three responses I've heard from cscope
champions is always the same: "veteran teachers don't want to
change," "all curriculums have errors," and "if students don't
learn, it's the teacher's fault." Those really aren't
convincing arguments, Bad Rap.

Posted by: To Bad Rap: on 5/28/09
Veteran teachers are resisting the change, huh? No @#$%*.We
don't want to change to a crappy curriculum. As teachers, we
have to adjust, change, improve, tweak, and squeak things all
the time. We're actually quite good at it. But we do tend to
resist when someone pees on our boots and tells us it's
raining. If cscope were a good curriculum, we'd be behind it.
The fact is, it's not. To say that veteran teachers are the
problem is insulting and won't earn your precious curriculum
any bonus points. Maybe if you guys actually listened to what
we are saying, your curriculum would improve.

Posted by: to bad rap and others on 5/28/09
I am tired of hearing that teachers who don't like c-scope are
veteran teachers who don't like change. It could be that we are
veteran teachers who are tired of jumping on band wagons and
can tell if a program is working or not. I change. I work on my
curriculum every year. I am the tech person for our school and
I present at TCEA. I also attend a week long science camp each
year so that I can learn new and better ways to teach my
students. I know I am constantly learning new things. Our
school has been "using c-scope" for 3 years. Our grade level
never used the math part because it did not follow the order of
teaching math that made sense. Our math scores for the last 5
years have been 96% or higher. For 2 of my years at this grade
level I had all students passing math, and for 2 years I have
had 1 child fail each year. This year we adopted Saxon. Our
admin also said that we must use c-scope. Saxon and c-scope do
not mix. So, our grade level decided to do an experiment. There
are 12 of us. 6 of us used Saxon the other 6 followed c-scope.
I was in the c-scope group. I followed it like I was supposed
to. I had 5 of my 19 students fail. Other c-scope teachers had
anywhere from 3 -5 fail. The successful classes were the ones
who used Saxon and supplemented when they felt necessary. Our
grade level passing rate fell to 86%. We were devastated. I am
so disappointed for my students that failed. I know if I would
have used the old scope and sequence we used to use, or if I
would have used Saxon, I would have only had 1 student fail and
he might have passed.
The other 2 grade levels had been struggling with c-scope and
math. Their math scores were low. This year they closed their
door, dropped c-scope and taught Saxon. Their math scores
jumped. Our new c-scope rules: Follow the scope and sequence
for all subject areas except math. For math use Saxon and
supplement if needed. We do NOT have to use any lessons from
c-scope anymore. But, we have paid for the program and our
school board is sold on it so it is still a ball and chain tied
to our ankles.

Posted by: Another Veteran Teacher on 5/28/09
You say "EVERY teacher in the SAME subject is teaching the same
thing." Rather a frightening thing to think of all Texas
children to be in lock step in the classroom...seems almost
un-American. Almost never will two teachers teach exactly
alike. Absurd to think such. Bad Rap, are you an administrator?
If you have teachers who can't stay on track, if there are
"hundreds" of students falling behind, if the teacher doesn't
understand the material he/she should be teaching, there is a
solution. Districts don't need C-Scope to fix these kinds of
problems. That's what a principal is for. Documentation,
documentation, documentation, recommendation for non-renewal.
Simple. Sure, there's lots of paperwork and conferences, but it
can and should be done. If there are really bad teachers on a
campus, the buck stops at the principal's desk.

Posted by: Truth on 5/28/09
Thank you very much!!!! I couldn't have said it better myself
other than too many teachers are allowing our principals and
administrators to make socialists out of our students. Gifted
students have been the first to go. Our school's AP and GT
program is just about gone. All the admin cares about are TAKS
scores.

Posted by: Bad Rap on 5/30/09
On 5/28/09, To Bad Rap: wrote:
> Veteran teachers are resisting the change, huh? No @#$%*.
> We don't want to change to a crappy curriculum. C-Scope
follows TEKS, are you saying that you do not believe TEKS is a
good curriculum?

Posted by: oh lord on 5/30/09
The TEKS are NOT a curriculum!!!! They are standards to follow.
ANYTHING can follow TEKS and still be bad or great!! CSCOPE is
confusing and a pain. MONEY MONEY MONEY has been spent and wasted.

Posted by: Bad Rap on 5/30/09
Quoting from the Wharton Journal Spectator, "Region XIII
C-SCOPE Director of Instruction Jennifer Drum said many of the
districts across the state see increases in Texas Assessment of
Knowledge and Skills scores within the first year of C-SCOPE."
Please read the entire article as it will probably enlighten
many of you:
http://www.journal-spectator.com/news/2009/0325/news/048.html.

Posted by: On your salary? on 5/30/09

Posted by: Oh, dear. on 5/30/09
TEKS are standards ultimately established by the powers that be
in Austin. Curriculum is the way in which these standards are
imparted to the students. Are we clear? C-Scope is a
money-making curriculum scope and sequence that insults
educators. On our campus, we strive to develop curriculum that
teaches the students to a commended level, and this can be done
without paying BIG BUCKS. Most districts already have a
curriculum person for each core subject who is paid to do this.
All the info is easy to find on the TEA site and many others.

Posted by: Is not conclusive on 5/30/09
It is not conclusive, because teachers are being forced to
"say" they are using it and then behind closed doors, they are
actually not using it. Scores go up, praise c-scope. That is
what happened to us last year. We did not use c-scope but said
we did. Scores went up. This year, 6 of us actually used
c-scope. The rest of the people at our school used Saxon and
supplemented as necessary. Their scores went up. The 6 who used
c-scope went down. Coincidence, I think not. From the article
it states: Drum said each district that contracts with C-SCOPE
has the freedom to choose how it implements the curriculum, and
that some districts choose to follow the system exactly while
others vary it to fit their students needs. The system is
designed to help districts create a curriculum in which
repetition and gaps are eliminated, keeping teachers at higher
levels from having to teach fundamentals that should have been
taught at lower levels. I don't have a problem with following
the scope and sequence. It is when you have to do their lessons
that problems arise. Also, I have found several mistakes on the
science test this year.

Posted by: big bucks? Where did you get this info? on 5/30/09
Check with your district. You will find that the district is
actually saving money by using CSCOPE. They no longer need to
hire someone to write curriculum during the summer.

Posted by: ?? I have written scope and sequence for our campus
and on 5/31/09
certainly never got paid big bucks for writing curriculum.
Saving money? But at whose expense?

Posted by: curriculum on 5/31/09
People still get paid for the curriculum.

Posted by: kd/tx on 5/31/09
We still pay people who are at the admin building and are in
charge of curriculum. For the first time ever, they are paying
some people from each grade level to sit down with the TEKS,
the C-scope curriculum, and the needs of our school district
and work to combine lessons to make better use of time. For
example instead of teaching folk heros in ELA as a genre one 6
weeks and then again in SS in another 6 weeks, we are "lifting
and shifting" (c-scope presenters words) to teach them at the
same time. Makes sense to do so, yet the c-scope people didn't
do it. So our district is actually paying more.

Posted by: yup on 5/31/09
EXACTLY!!!!

Posted by: Our curriculum coordinator on 5/31/09
has NEVER written or coordinated a single solitary piece of
curriculum. Oh, and our curriculum coordinator never even
taught a core class. She taught typing.

Posted by: wow on 6/01/09
NOW there is an example of BAD HIRING!!!!

Posted by: Truth on 6/01/09
The fact of the matter is that there has been a lot of bad
hiring and failure to fire inadequate teachers, which is why
they have to search for tools such as C-Scope.

Posted by: Daniel Bynum on 6/01/09
Call me crazy (which I'm sure a lot of people on here will),
but I like C-Scope!

Posted by: Bad move on 6/01/09
Well let me assure you that in the process of trying to strong
arm the bad teachers, you are driving the good ones out the
profession in droves. Bad move, administrators...bad move.

Posted by: Yes, indeed. on 6/01/09
Well and simply put.

Posted by: Think before you type on 6/02/09
A "bad hire" is just as much someone who refuses to be a team
player as it is someone who doesn't know their job. Thus, if
teachers of leaving because of C-Scope, they are either not a
team player or someone who doesn't know their job. And having
them quit instead of firing them is best for everyone.

Posted by: To Daniel Bynum, won't call you crazy, but can you
on 6/02/09
be specific about what you like about C-Scope?

Posted by: Enough of the mumbo jumbo, please!! on 6/02/09
Two things are required of a teacher...being well versed in
content knowledge and an ability to transfer content and skills
to students. As for your response, you need to work on a better
sales job. Teachers see right through the teamwork appeal. We
are all on the same team and our goal is for students to "win",
right? But your idea of teamwork is not the same as most
teachers. And the teamwork metaphor is hackneyed. It's because
teachers do know their job (remember, they are trained experts
in their area) that they get so frustrated with the latest fads
that are used to justify administrators' jobs and the
transparent platitudes with which they try to ply teachers. The
sad and scary fact is that students are the real losers in all
of this. Teachers are spending more time on the latest
educational gimmicks and fads that strike administrators' fancy
than they do teaching. Something has to give and it shouldn't
be the careers of good teachers. Ultimately, what you are going
to have left are robot teachers that don't know a damn thing
about what they are doing.

Posted by: PI on 6/02/09
Talk about a lame argument for the Cscope curriculum. "If you
don't like it, you're a bad teacher." Admit it: you're one of
the writers, aren't you?

Posted by: Not backing down on 6/03/09
Too bad for people like you, I'm not quitting. I care too damn
much about the future of education and the young minds we are
charged with. You are either a CSCOPE employee or a district
curriculum coordinator that's feeling a little edgy about right
now. CSCOPE is a bad move. Everyone knows it.

Posted by: Lin on 6/04/09
My school is also going to CScope next year. All I said to my
principal was: "On the message boards a lot of people say they
don't like it." His response: "They told us at the service
center that the experienced teachers were the ones who don't
want to change." Translation: Old people like you don't want
progress. When I used to teach a unit on Propaganda, we called
that "Poisoning the Well". If you can say something bad about
your opposition before they have a chance to respond, then no
one will listen to them. Interestingly, my daughter (a young
teacher with 5 years experience) who has CScope in her school
does not like CScope either. I am trying to have an open mind.
What I have seen of it is that it appears to be a rehash of the
math lessons at the Dana Center and of a few other things that
I have seen on some of the big school websites. I'm not saying
it is necessarily bad, but I have 6 preps and 8-45 minute
classes. It looks like a lot of reading and preparation. It
also seems to me that we have been through this "discover
method" before. (I teach math, now.) It is a slow way of
learning things--and some kids never "discover". I have new,
excellent Math textbooks that follow the TEKS. They even have a
separate scope and sequence written to finish TAKS objectives
before the test. It comes with workbooks and TAKS workbooks
that are "free" with the adoption. I spent a year finding the
right book for my school. I have videos, powerpoints, and other
great supplements that coordinate with my text. Now, they want
to set those aside and do CScope. What a waste of my time and
the state's money.

Posted by: Sue on 6/04/09
Who gets by with saying things like "many of the districts
across the state see increases in Texas Assessment of Knowledge
and Skills scores within the first year of C-SCOPE." Where is
the documentation? Were they using C-Scope exclusively? C-Scope
appears to be more of the fuzzy math approach. Is this "fuzzy
statistics" where you don't really have to prove anything, you
just make blanket statements that apparently service centers
and administrators (who haven't taught in years) believe
whatever they are told?

Posted by: AGREE!! on 6/05/09

Posted by: Junior on 6/05/09
Yeah, How do they know those "increases" are directly because
of C-scope? Most teachers say they turn in their lesson plans
for C-scope, close their doors, and do what they know DOES
work. If we want to get rid of C-scope, then we need to bite
the bullet, teach
C-scope word-for-word, and let the district ratings drop. But
we are just too dedicated to let that happen to our kiddos.

Posted by: CSCOPE State Conference on 6/07/09
CSCOPE State Conference is being held in San Antonio, this
month. If you would like your concerns to be addressed, please
consider attending. Reportedly, there are 2,000 registered
already for the conference, each of the 4 core content areas
will have break out
sessions, and there will be an opportunity to ask and answer
questions.
Posted by: To CSCOPE State Conference, questions: on 6/08/09
Are you a presenter or C-Scope rep? Are you a classroom teacher
who currently implements?

Posted by: Come out of the closet on 6/08/09
If you really don't like C-Scope and you're not just another
whiny teacher, then prove it...come to the C-Scope State
Conference on 6-7-2009..... CSCOPE State Conference is being
held in San Antonio, this month. If you would like your
concerns to be addressed,
please consider attending. Reportedly, there are 2,000
registered already for the conference, each of the 4 core
content areas will have break out sessions, and there will be
an opportunity to ask and answer questions.

Posted by: You sound rather defensive. Why? on 6/08/09
Are you a teacher?

Posted by: um on 6/08/09
6/7/2009??? That has passed

Posted by: another example on 6/08/09
Telling us about the conference that was YESTERDAY
This is about par for the course with CSCOPE

Posted by: aggie'swife on 6/08/09
Pros --
vertical alignment
assessments aligned to the TEKS
exemplar lessons provided and can be helpful to new teachers
basically follows the 5E model and does provide for hands-on
activities
good skeletal guide

Cons --
exemplar lessons; however, one can choose to do their own lessons
inflexibility -- there is a certain order (by unit) that one is
supposed to
follow no matter the time of the year.

logic of some units -- we had a unit on space and space
vehicles. About 10
weeks. The space vehicle unit was quite lengthy based simply
for the exemplar
lesson. better be ready to increase your copy count.
IMHO -- Not enough time is factored in to doing lab tools, lab
safety, SI
measurement, etc.

The overall setup seems to assume that kids will learn everything
the first time. It doesn't seem to loop back.
-- Seems too watered down. Does not allow for "a teaching
moment" or
flexibility. Kind of like going to a buffet and taking a little
of this and
a little of that instead of digging into one item and seeing
what makes it
work. Probably not a good explanation....so if it doesn't make
sense to
you....ignore. :)
Also perhaps some subjects are perhaps better than others. Our
math teachers do not like it (maybe that is too weak a
description). We are stuck with it so we will put it in
perspective and use what we can...and otherwise we are the
professionals so we as teachers will make the call on how we
use it.

Posted by: Conference is June 23 & 24 on 6/08/09
Go to google. Type in: CSCOPE State Conference. Region 13 is
advertising it.
Posted by: Anyone go to this conference? Anything new to
report? on 6/16/09
TEKS changes might make some huge differences.

Posted by: not yet on 6/16/09

Posted by: jj on 6/22/09
On 6/16/09, not yet wrote:
The conference is not until next week. It is full and they are
not accepting any more registrations.

Posted by: Are you secondary? on 6/22/09
I looked at the conference (June 23-24) info online today.
Perhaps some teachers who attend can give us a report after the
conference is concluded.

Posted by: NO ELA lessons for 2009-2010 on 6/22/09

Posted by: Sooooo on 6/22/09
Are you saying that there are NEW ELA TEKS FOR 09-10, but NO
coordinating C-Scope lessons?

Posted by: aggie'swife on 6/22/09
The science TEKS have been rearranged and changed. Will there
be a new
alignment for c-scope?

Posted by: answer for Soooooo on 6/23/09
On 6/22/09, Sooooo wrote:
That is correct. My understanding is that the IFDs and VADs (the
curriculum) will be updated and teachers will use their own
lessons or
may refer to last year's. New lessons are undergoing the
writing process
but will not be posted until the next year.

Posted by: jj on 6/24/09
We are new to cscope. Do we use last year's ela or will new ela
lessons be
posted soon for k-2? We are just looking for some direction!
Thanks!

Posted by: A warning to all looking for a job on 6/24/09
I was runner up between 7 candidates. Guess what the deciding
factor was?
The other candidate has used C-Scope. Get to know it. It's here
to stay.

Posted by: What esc region are you in? on 6/24/09

Posted by: to Warning on 6/24/09
Are you serious? Here to stay?

Posted by: Sounds like.... on 6/25/09
a nervous curriculum coordinator wrote this. Here's a warning
for the coordinators that bought into this piece of crap
curriculum...you've lost the respect of thousands of
teachers across the state and you'll be lucky if you aren't
looking for another job in a couple of years. It's beyond
frustrating to see curriculum coordinators that didn't even
major or teach in one of the core areas make such a ignorant
decision to use this sorry excuse for a
curriculum as is the case in smaller districts rather than rely
on the true experts...the teachers that have actually majored
or taught in a core academic (at least for secondary ed).
The real loss is for thousands of students across Texas. Sad,
really sad. Watered down crap is what students are learning now.

Posted by: Venting... on 6/26/09
Our curriculum coordinator's comments to the schoool board
regarding cscope implementation (as I read in this week's
newspaper) says "Some teachers are still resisting the change
to cscope." No sheet! But did she bother to explain why we are
resisting?
No, we're being painted as stubborn mules, not professional
educators who know what we're talking about. Her attitude
really hacks me off, and that's why the school board has so
bought into cscope. And not one of our school board members has
even thought to ask themselves or us to find out the problem
for themselves. Thanks for letting me vent.

http://texas.teachers.net/chatboard/topic13789/6.26.09.05.11.58.html

Post: What is C-Scope?
Posted by: DD on 6/26/09
I keep seeing posts about C-Scope, what is it and why is there
such controversy about it?

Posted by: it's an INSULT. on 6/26/09
It's a week by week day by day lesson plan and curriculum for
core subjects that seeks to put all Tx kids on the same lesson
on the same day.I think it was started by curriculum people in
one of the region ESC's, perhaps 13. Throw out YOUR great
lessons, or lessons that YOUR school has developed and use
these instead. It's like kudzu vines...insidiously creeping
across Texas and smothering real educators' efforts. It's been
thrust onto teachers, but see the attached thread to understand
some odf the issues.
http://texas.teachers.net/chatboard/topic13656/5.26.09.10.18.55.html

ccisd
Posted on 6/26/09
I saw on our board minutes that they are buying it. UGGHHHH.

Posted by: Mathman on 6/26/09
If all teachers were qualified and had done their jobs
originally, this monstrosity would never had surfaced. Nobody
to blame but ourselves.

Posted by: don't blame me on 6/26/09
Don't clump me into that group who is to blame. I know my
stuff. If teachers were treated like professionals and paid
accordingly, getting qualified folks into all classrooms
wouldn't be so hard. Students ultimately suffer, regardless.
Was this developed in part to get unqualified coaches and
uncertified up to speed? Was this developed to push higher paid
long term teachers who know their subject into retirement? Was
this developed to make life easier for
curriculum people and principals?

Posted by: djoyce on 6/28/09
Then do something about those teachers who are not doing what
they are supposed to do and leave the rest of us alone! I don't
blame myself for any of this mess. I think this is one of those
follow the money situations and teachers are screwed in the
process.

Posted by: Di on 6/26/09
Interestingly it seems to have been created shortly after we
had thought the service centers (esc) might "disappear" because
of the lacking of funding by the legislature. Perhaps it is job
security for the esc's if it can be adopted in all the schools.
I think it shows the power of the esc, for sure. Notice above
that a teacher found out about the adoption only after it was a
fact--no teacher input in that district. In my district we had
a meeting with a service center rep and were told it would not
be forced on us. HOWEVER, if we did not vote for it we would
need to be willing to work a few weeks this summer (for free)
to create our own vertical alignment. What a choice!

Posted by: Very Unsure on 6/26/09
Our district just purchased C-scope for academic subjects. I
have looked at it, but so far I'm not impressed. This will be
my second year teaching in TX; I taught 17 years in OH. Last
year I taught ELA; this year I will teach both ELA and SS. I
can see using this as a guide, especially for new teachers or
those having challenges, but I believe it will stifle those of
us who have a pretty good handle on what we're doing. I've been
told we can add things to the c-scope curriculum, but I can't
imagine there will be time. I will try to reserve judgment
until I have actually put some of this into practice, but I'm
not too optimistic.

Posted by: DD on 6/26/09
Well, I just found out yesterday that my district purchased it.
Now I'm bummed. Does each district use it differently, i.e do
we HAVE to follow the sample lesson plans, or can they just be
guide to help us sequence our lessons? Any input on this would
be helpful, especially for those who have already been using it.

Posted by: Don't get me started... on 6/26/09
I think it depends district to district. We started out using
it as only a "guide," but the more money our district pumped
into it, the more they required us to use. (I think they feel
the need to justify the amount of money they spend on it.) Just
a note: You'll spend a lot of time reading over the lessons,
correcting the mistakes, making copies, and gathering
(making/buying) the materials. I truly wish I had a more
optimistic view to present to you. Sorry, and good luck!

dumping it
Posted on 6/26/09
On 6/26/09, ccisd wrote:
My school is dumping it - teachers hated it. We weren't
consulted at all about using it - the board somehow decided
that we needed it. We only had it this past year. My school is
small and turnover is nearly non-existent. Most of our teachers
have worked together for many
years and have developed a tried and true "system" - they had
just never taken the time to document it all into a school wide
curriculum plan. So, this summer, we're all documenting all of
our lesson plans and demonstrating how everything fits into our
TEKES, which is basically what C-Scope is about. It's a pain in
the neck, but worth it for them to not be saddled with C-Scope.

Posted by: Implementation varies per district on 6/26/09
Actually, CSCOPE isn't that big of a deal. All it is, is a
vertically aligned curriculum for the 4 core content areas
based on the TEKS. Because it is vertically aligned, teachers
are responsible to teach what is required only at our assigned
grade level and that is not always what we want to teach or
what we have always taught or what we think we should be
teaching. The truth is, most districts have never had a
vertically aligned curriculum (K-12) and so we (teachers) have
always pretty much made the decision about what goes on in our
own classroom. Now that districts are providing a district
curriculum we no longer have the
say in what we teach and when we teach it. HOW we teach, varies
per district. In our region, some districts tell their teachers
that they must use the lessons. Other districts (mine included)
require their teachers to just follow the timeline or scope and
sequence, follow the IFD teach the specificity and teach at the
rigor of the TEKS verb. Because we are not able to do things
the way we always have, we sometimes feel like 1st year
teachers again. Our district joined the first year and some of
our teachers put up a fuss about it. However, we are use to the
timeline now and have our lessons lined up, so it is no big
deal anymore. I worked for a district once before with a
district curriculum so it didn't bother me that much when
my current district adopted CSCOPE. I am not sure how much
writers on this chatboard actually hate it because of what it
is or because of what they think it is. I have seen a lot of
wrong information about it so I am not convinced they really
know what they are talking
about. Too, sometimes people just do not want change because it
means more work. In their defense, I have seen grammatical
errors and even content errors in some of the lessons and so
many argue that it should not have been offered to the
districts until it was perfected. I have also seen those errors
fixed the next time I pulled up the lesson which means to me
that it is a work in progress, something our district told us
from the beginning. So don't let anyone convince you that it is
all good or that it is all bad. It is all about the kids. Wait
and see if it helps them or if it doesn't. Personally, I think
a vertically aligned curriculum will help but it really all
comes down to the quality of the teacher.

Posted by: aggie'swife on 6/26/09
I'll go along with it aligns everything vertically. But why is
there a need to do the units in that precise order in a grade
level? Is this basically a prototype so that all schools in Texas
(thinking maybe eventually the entire US) will be on the exact
concept at approximately the same time? We had real issues with
the order of which the content is taught in some of the grade
levels. For instance, why would you teach about plants in the
middle of December?

THIS IS A GREAT LENGTHY COMMENT WITH DETAILS.
Posted by: Lisa on 6/26/09
I’ve often heard it said that experienced teachers don’t want
to change to the Cscope curriculum. That is such a cop-out. We
are not resistant to change. We change, tweak, and improve
things all the time. If Cscope were a good curriculum, we
experienced teachers would be behind it. But, because we have
actual classroom experience—with other curriculums, as well as
Cscope—we know a poor curriculum when we see it. And Cscope is
a far cry from being the answer to all curriculum woes.

My four main complaints about Cscope are as follows: There are
too many senseless errors. Cscope doesn’t provide enough
materials to teach with. The scope and sequence of this
curriculum doesn’t always make sense. The lessons are not
necessarily up-to-date.

First of all, Cscope has too many errors. For example: ssha

2nd Grade Math, Unit 11, Lesson 2: The head Cscope person for
ESC 6 told me that they had corrected this lesson, because I
emailed the math people and told them exactly what to fix. Keep
in mind that these are the mistakes I found in ONE lesson. (I
didn’t have time to edit everything for them.) Also, please
note the number of mistakes on each page—it’s scary. Please read:
p. 8 (key) and p. 10 (student handout): The word “treat” should
be “treats.” There should be a question mark instead of a
period at the end of the question, “If the zoo keeper gave the
zebras…?” The word “and” needs to be inserted before “if so.”
The run-on sentence needs to be broken up into two sentences
(“trains. How”) or it needs to start with the word “If.”
(GRAMMATICAL ERRORS)
p. 12 (key) and p. 13 (student handout): The word “even” needs
to be replaced with “equal.” The words “10 longs” needs to be
replaced with the word “rods.” (IMPROPER MATH VOCABULARY)
p. 15 (key) and p. 17 (student handout): In the chart, the word
“Footballs” needs to be replaced with the word “Bags.” The word
“circle” needs to be replaced with the word “oval.” (WRONG
WORDS=CONFUSED STUDENTS)
p. 20 and 22 (student handout): The sentence that starts with
“Use the calendar to determine...” is a statement and should
end with a period, not a question mark. (GRAMMATICAL ERROR)
*Here’s the really scary part. Even after I told them what to
fix, they only fixed one thing: They changed “treat” to
“treats” on pages 8 and 10. The rest of the errors are STILL
THERE.

2nd Grade Science, Unit 4, Lesson 3, p. 13: This page has also
been sorta-corrected, because I emailed the science people and
told them exactly what to fix.
Please read:
In the United States, we use the Fahrenheit scale to measure
weather-related temperatures. In these weather-themed units,
Cscope has us teaching the kids using the Celsius scale. This
makes no sense. True, scientists use the Celsius scale, and
it’s important that children know about the different scales,
but this is basic weather we are talking about. When the kids
watch the Weather Channel or weather reports on the news, the
temperature is reported in degrees Fahrenheit... (Sadly, this
argument didn’t hold much water with the Cscope writers. They
wouldn’t change to the Fahrenheit scale for these weather
activities, nor were they
able to give me a good reason why not.)
Page 13 showed thermometers with Celsius temperatures. The
students were supposed to match each thermometer with the
appropriate picture. The thermometers were supposed to match
with these pictures: Here are the problems:

1st Thermometer: 47 °C
a girl bundled up in a coat, hat, and scarf 47 °C is
actually about 117 °F. (People wouldn’t be bundled up for cold
weather.)

2nd Thermometer: 22 °C
snow falling and accumulated on the ground 22 °C is
actually about 70 °F. (Snow in Texas at 70 °F? Really?)

3rd Thermometer: 96 °C
a boy outside in swimming shorts 96 °C is actually
about 205 °F. (We’d be fried.)

4th Thermometer: 79 °C
rain 79 °C is actually about 174 °F. (I seriously
doubt it could rain at that temperature.)

*The Cscope writers changed the thermometers to read 10°C, 0°C,
30°C, and 20°C. Now, the temperatures match the pictures, but
they are still using the Celcius scale.

I’m suspecting that the Cscope writers will defend their
non-editing process.

Let me argue their “points” in advance.
“All curriculums have mistakes and errors.” This is both true
and false. In all my years teaching, I have used materials from
all over the place—textbooks, websites, workbooks, magazines,
books, etc. I have never seen so many blatant mistakes in anything
professionally published as what I have seen in Cscope. I
challenge the Cscope writers to find as many errors in the 2nd
Grade Saxon math handouts or the 2nd Grade Harcourt Reading
handouts, or any teacher publication of their choice.

“You use too many worksheets and handouts.” No, I don’t. But I
do use them, balanced with manipulatives, books, hands-on
activities, real-life applications, technology, games, etc. I use
many things to teach my students. “Since Cscope is a
collaborative, it’s everyone’s job to help improve it.” No, I
don’t get paid to be their editor.

“If you’re a good teacher teaching the content, then the
mistakes don’t matter.” Yes they do If we teachers consistently
put materials in front of our kids that have mistakes on them it
becomes harder to teach them the right way to do something?
Reading and writing conventions arent just isolated in Language
Arts they cross into all the subjects They are in place to
ensure accurate communication not just to give grammar teacher
fits The
children look for the questions in math word problems to help
them decide if they should add subtract multiply or divide Its
hard to do when there isnt’ even a questions written? When the
charts Cscope provides to help the students don’t make any
sense at all, what good are they! If the information provided
is outright wrong, and we try to use it with our students they
will become as confused as the Cscope writers?
(Yes, I did this on purpose to illustrate a point.)

My second complaint about Cscope is that they don’t provide
enough materials to teach with.
Let me take Language Arts, for example. (Note: If we stray too
far away from the so-called “exemplar” lessons, we get called
on it. Sure, there are some places where different books will
suffice, but then the exemplar lessons don’t fit and we have to
create everything from scratch.) So, Cscope requires us to buy
trade books to teach with. But they don’t provide them. In
addition to our district paying big bucks for the Cscope
curriculum, they have to pay out enough money to outfit every
Language Arts class in every grade level with at least one copy
of each book required.

In my grade level, for example, our principal has gotten us 9
copies of each book listed for Cscope because there are 9
teachers. But each class has 15-20 students, who don’t have a
book to read. Cscope’s “Reading” curriculum thus becomes a
“Listening” curriculum. And at this age level, our kids need as
much reading practice as they can get. So we teachers
have to resort to breaking copy-right laws and xeroxing the
books so the kids have something to read. And, while Reading
collection textbooks aren’t always the best, at least they are
state-adopted (paid for) and every child has a multitude of
stories to read.

As for the weeks we spent working on state park brochures,
wouldn’t it be beneficial for the Cscope people to make a deal
with the Texas State Parks people and put together packs of
state park brochures for all the districts who use their
program for 2nd grade? We had to take personal time to go track
down these brochures. And it should be noted that we didn’t let
the students keep those brochures. I doubt my principal will
let me take a school-business day year after year to get them,
so they are safely stowed away.

In Social Studies, when the students were learning about
landforms like mountains, valleys, lakes, etc, Cscope didn’t
provide any visuals. We all know how important it is for
children to actually “see” new vocabulary words, especially if
they are special populations or have special needs. We teachers
had to buy sets of pictures from teacher supply stores or find
and print
pictures from the internet. The same can be said for pictures
of rainforests, deserts, and taigas in Science when discussing
plant environments. And our library doesn’t have 9 sets of
biography books, written on the 2nd grade level, including the
famous people that Cscope has randomly picked out of the air.
Again, we’re having to make copies of what we find to give to
the kids.

Concepts, especially in math, have not been looped or reviewed
at all in the Cscope curriculum. So if we want our students to
review what they have learned, we have to do our own
looping/reviewing. We are good teachers, and we choose to do
this on our own, but shouldn’t Cscope take the time to do so as
well? 2nd Grade Saxon, for example, while not perfect, had a
pretty good looping/reviewing system.

We teachers are having to make and buy posters, make
mini-books, copy books, make and buy manipulatives, etc. This
takes personal and school time, materials, and money, not to
mention paper and ink for the copiers and printers. If the
Cscope writers would take it upon themselves to put together
“packs” of materials, then we teachers wouldn’t have to do it,
and would thus have more time to actually use the materials
with our students. Other state-
adopted curriculums do this all the time. They provide many of
the books, materials, manipulatives, workbooks, stories and
songs on tapes and CDs, etc. Cscope provides the lessons and a
few power points, but that is all.

My third issue with Cscope has to do with the scope and sequence.
In Cscope Social Studies last year, the concept of national
elections was not brought up until March. But even with such an
historic election/current event occurring in November
(Obama/McCain), Cscope chose not to change the order of their
lessons. If we wanted our students to have any concept of what
was going on in the country around them, we had veer off Cscope.

2nd Grade Social Studies, Unit 5: Texas Public School Week is
in March, and yet, Cscope has us teaching about Texas in the
fall. The Hee-Haw Hoedown Jamboree, the Texas songs, and the
square-dancing activities are still in March, but there’s no
educational value attached to them anymore. Or maybe, since our
school is trying to make things fun and get parents involved,
we should change the order of the lessons and put our study of
Texas back in
March. And since Texas Public School Week is a state-mandated
event, that would really make more sense.

2nd Grade Science, Unit 6: The lessons in this unit need to be
rearranged, and one needs to be combined into Unit 4. Cscope
has us teaching about various aspects of the weather (Unit 4),
then Seasons (Unit 5), then the moon’s cycle, the
constellations, and then the water cycle (Unit 6). Even though
I have pointed this particular lesson out to them (the water
cycle), how it would be better to do when we are actually
learning about the weather, they refuse to change the sequence.
So we have done this on our own.

*Hold on a second: The point of Cscope is to have every school
teaching the same things at the same times. This way, students
don’t miss things when they move to new districts. But if my
grade level changes the scope and sequence to better fit the
needs of our students, then that uniformity across the state is
no more. So, basically, Cscope doesn’t want to take the time to
actually make sense of the order of their lessons; they want
individual teachers to do it. That seems to go against their
own selling point.

The phrase “selling points” brings me to my final issue with
Cscope. One “selling point” was that the information, lessons,
and activities would be up-to-date. This sounds great, because
textbooks cannot be updated quickly. But the ELA portion of
Cscope is not up-to-date. The ELA TEKS have been revised, but
Cscope lessons do not reflect this change. This is a major
change, but Cscope hasn’t updated to meet the current
standards. Therefore, ELA teachers will be teaching with
outdated materials anyway.

Speaking of selling points, have you seen the commercial for
“Sham-Wow!”? If you believe the commercial, this special cloth
will pick up any liquid, in any amount, really fast and
efficiently. That’s what the commercial says. But if you order
their product and use it, you will find that it doesn’t work
nearly as well as they promise it will. Now you have basically
another towel, one that does the same job other towels can do.
And you may have been reminded of the lesson “Don’t believe
everything you see.”

That’s what I think has happened with Cscope. Cscope is a good
idea. There are many good points about it. But in reality, it’s
not all it has been promised to be, and that is where
the “resistance” comes into play. So, to sum up, it is not fair
to simply state that some teachers are resisting the change to
Cscope, without placing our resistance into context. For the
record, we are not resistant to change. But we do have valid
concerns about this curriculum, and I thank you for letting me
voice them.

Re: Wow Lisa, you did a great job of summing it up! :)
Posted by: to Lisa from Implementation varies per district. on
6/27/09

Excellent job, Lisa. Specific examples make your argument credible.

Re: What is C-Scope? YIKES!! poor curriculum indeed
Posted by: Why are districts buying into this mess? on 6/29/09
I've never heard of any curriculum having such a load of mistakes!
What gives?! Who is writing it?

Posted by: mrsmsr on 6/27/09
Lisa, thank you for being so specific about the problems
inherent in C-
Scope.

Posted by: JRC on 6/27/09
Lisa, you did a great job sharing specific issues in C-Scope.
The district I
teach is will be starting our 3rd year in C-Scope. Many of us
have similar
issues with the curriculum.
By the way I teach in a ESC XIII district where C-Scope
originated. We will
be implementing SS this year district wide along with Math &
Science (taught
the last 2 years). We were suppose to be adding ELA but because
of not being
updated are waiting a year for that.
The years to come will be interesting to see where this goes
state wide.

Posted by: Lisa on 6/28/09
Your responses have taught me something: if we want to sway the
powers that be in our school districts, we have to educate
them. They know that some teachers have problems with cscope.
That hasn't really opened their eyes to the problems of this
curriculum, because they
chuck it up to laziness or unwillingness to try something new.
They cling to the "idealized commercial" because that's what
they want to believe. But they have no actual
experience working with it. They won't know the specifics, the
reasons, and the examples unless we put it all out in front of
them. So thank y'all very much! Now I have a better fix on how
to deal with everything. (And maybe, just maybe, I won't have
to put the bumper-sticker that reads "Cscope Sucks!" on my
super's truck...) :-)

Re: What is C-Scope?/The newly designed administrator
Posted by: Young Gun on 6/28/09
You are lucky. What happened to us is a young new administrator
came along...you know the kind that taught in the classroom for
three seconds. They are the new breed of adminstrators. They
come along and crap on everything that is in place so in a few
months, they can show the school board how they've "improved"
the school/district. It doesn't matter if you document what
works. They don't care. So be careful on hiring new
administrators. Ask them questions about any changes that they
want to bring to your school/district. It's like
they couldn't cut it in the corporate world so they like to
"play business man/woman" in a school. The problem is that we
have human beings in our rooms, not products. The new design of
administrator that I'm seeing is terrible with social skills
but brilliant with
analying data, spitting out rehashed Zig Ziglar crap, and
producing "viable results" on reams of paper. Hire one of
these, and your work hours will double. I'm NOT exaggerating.

Posted by: aggie'swife on 6/29/09
We had several go to the c-scope conference/workshop. The math
teachers were not impressed. They said it was basically just
showing you how to use it. They did not get their questions
resolved, so they will take "those questions" up again within
the district. Math,
in particular, (like someone else mentioned on this board) has
new materials, textbooks, supplemental materials, ppts, etc.
that are great. C-scope does not line up with what they have.
The science TEKS changed, so c-scope is already off for the new
TEKS. Our science coordinator (who also went to the conference)
said that "we" will have to rearrange things, because it
doesn't line up now. For instance, levers & pulleys formerly
8th grade will now be taught in 6th grade. Genetics (on the 6th
grade c-scope will have to be pushed up to 7th grade). Just to
mention a couple.

In our district, they monitor how often you go onto our
specific C scope site, no time means that you will have an
email sent to you. I actually (finally) after a year of "using" the
curriculum, got to sit down and look at the lessons and the
attached supporting material. Not bad, of course any thing has
problems, and as a 20+ year veteran, (4 MORE YEARS!!! –sounds
like a political rally!) I will keep the administrators happy
and use what I can (or want to)

Posted by: Floored on 7/20/09
In my district, the administrators would periodically look up
which teachers have or have not logged on to the c-scope site.
My name kept coming up as not logging on at all, therefore, I
must not be using it. Here's the kicker: Finally someone told
me that it's not the logging ON that counts, it's the logging
OFF. Apparently, you can't just click on the X in the upper
right hand corner to close (log off) the c-scope site, like you
can with just about every other site on the web. You actually
have to click on c-scope's "log off" button before it counts
that you've actually been logged on. Well, stomp me flat and
call me a pancake! Stupid c-scope...

Posted by: wow on 7/21/09
I go on once a week because I am the one who posts the lessons
each week. I never log off. I wonder if they realize I have
been on. I will have to ask my principal. They don't tell us
whether or not they know we have been on. They just document.

On another note. My teaching partner talked with one of the
original planners of c-scope. I am in one of the ESC districts
that wrote it. They said it was never meant to be a place for
lessons. It was only supposed to be a scope and sequence that
aligned the curriculum across grade levels. She said that
districts begged for lessons. They wrote lessons as examples.
They are not meant to replace good ideas/lessons that teachers
have. They are meant to assist if necessary.

Posted by: lessons? on 7/21/09
C-scope has lessons? Our district does not have the lessons. We
have to follow the timeline but use our own lesson. I wonder if
that costs extra.

Post: CScope YET ANOTHER THREAD ABOUT C-SCOPE
Posted by: One of Many on 7/29/09
This is, by far, one of the worst things to ever come along in
education. I can't believe so many district curriculum
coordinators are buying into such a flawed, watered-down, piece
of crap curriculum.

On 7/30/09, hmmm...it seems that this wrote:
nightmarish curriculum is now spreading into region 5.
How can we stop it?

Posted by: LG on 7/30/09
Truthfully, your best weapon is to get to know C-Scope very
well. Administrators and school boards don't listen to what
they perceive as "whiny" or "overly emotional" teachers. When
you question or state your concerns to your administrators or
C-Scope presenters, be specific, not general: Grade X, Unit X,
Lesson X, Page X. And print out C-Scope pages for them to look
at because administrators and school board members won't have a
clue what you're talking about otherwise.

The C-Scope presenters from Region 5 will probably tell you
that if you see errors or mistakes, to send them an email about
it so they can fix it. But don't let 'em off that easy. Ask
them to defend why the mistakes are there at all, because they
supposedly do have editors.

Ask and keep asking when C-Scope will match the current TEKS,
especially Reading, since the new TEKS have taken effect but
are not reflected in C-Scope. I believe new Science TEKS will
take effect next year (2010). Also ask how C-Scope will address
RTI and special populations of students.

The C-Scope curriculum provides plans, lessons, worksheets, and
a few powerpoints. Schools will have to make or provide
additional books and teaching materials. It might be a good
idea to have schools and/or grade levels keep track of how much
money (school and personal) is spent on these supplies, in
addition to the C-Scope curriculum costs. Cscope is not
state-adopted, therefore it's up to individual districts to pay
for it. If administrators and school boards know the actual
cost of implementing the curriculum (because we all know that
the cost of purchasing the curriculum is not the total cost),
they might see the light.
Good luck!

Posted by: Thanks, LG, we are gathering info. on 7/30/09
However, we have no way of printing out lessons to search for
mistakes. I suppose the committee will be allowed access to
some lessons to see, just as we did when we listened to a
presentation in May. We only heard what the presenter had to
say, and based on
that, there were so many reasons C-Scope doesn't seem to be a
good curriculum. We also have read many things on this site and
others which certainly make c-scope sound like a plan for
dumbing down any curriculum which master teachers have worked
so hard to perfect.

http://www.proteacher.net/discussions/showthread.php?t=84597&highlight=C-Scope

Here are a few comments from this site:

My district has a scope and sequence, and we are encouraged to
still closely to it. However, if you don't then nothing is
really said. I am NEVER where I should be in science and social
studies. That is because I really teach the material and not
rush through. My grade level scores are great, so we are left
alone.

And these schools that are using it...how are their TAKS
scores? I teach in a little bitty school, and admit I haven't
heard of C-Scope, but I do know that my campus has been
exemplary for 4 years running. While my grade level does try to
stay together by weeks, we adjust for how well the kids are
catching on. Sometimes one of us may spend an extra week on
something the others finished already. I can't imagine going on
just because a program said I had to in order to stay all
together!!

This program is AWFUL!!! We implemented it and everyone hated
it. It's natural for some teachers to balk at new things, but I
kid you not..I did not hear ONE positive comment out of our
entire district (and we are big). I will say that the math and
science seemed better than the ELA and Social Studies
component. The Reading is a bunch of fluff. There are no
reading materials provided, so you have to find all your own
stuff and try to tie their lessons into the books you can find.
In social studies, it's tons of preparation and no reading
material. You have to find the material to support their
lessons through your social studies text or library. I don't
know what they mean when they say everything is provided! All
the lessons are provided (in a sequence that is choppy and
makes no sense to most of us), but the materials to do the
lessons have to be found elsewhere. Half way through the year,
it was just basically ignored by all. I hope the writers of
this program took the feedback and made some major changes to
improve this for the upcoming year. If you want to hear more
negative stuff (as if I haven't provided enough of that,
right?), try going to www.teachers.net and click on the state
message boards, choose Texas and you will find LOTS of threads
about specific problems. I don't think you will find anything
positive though. Good luck!

I have been teaching a long time and never have seen such a
mess and they call this a curriculum. If your district is
implementing this plan on late nights at school. I stay at
school until 6 or 6:30 every night just so I can be ready for
the next day. I have taught it for 6 weeks now. It jumps from
this concept to that in a matter of 2 or 3 days and there is no
reteach time. So your kids better get it the first time. Some
lessons are way over their heads and some lessons are low low.
And it assumes that every kid knows the same thing. So if you
get a kid that doesn't know as much you have lost him at the
beginning. I am not a negative person and I like trying new
techniques and curriculums but this needs to be burned. The
lessons do not flow. You as a teacher are jumping from rainbows
in science to school authorities in S/S and math in not to bad
but we are been on 1-5 for 6 weeks. And Hey next week we start
patterning. And the 6 weeks assessments are a joke. Example the
1st 6 weeks in science on the assessment we are to test them of
plant growth from a seed using sequencing cards. We did not
teach plant growth in any of the Cscope lessons this 6 weeks.
Where did that come from. But we have to test. And in 1st grade
those babies are expected to write a story with 8 complete
sentences on the second day of school. I am not happy and I
don't know if I will continue teaching in this district or not.

Ultimately, this country is growing more and more socialistic.
Everyone will be the same (on paper) with the same achievement
(on paper) and get the same education (on paper) and all
graduate from high school ready to start medical school
(bull####). NCLB is evil and all these politicians behind it
have polluted the public education system. I'm quitting a job I
used to love on Monday. I've had it!!! And FYI...I'm considered
a positive person/team player at work. I'm not the typical
Lizard Lounge that is always negative. I'm simply tired of
creating "data" instead of creating life-long learners.

C-Scope is the worst curriculum! It is put the students in
groups everyday while they teach themselves then teach the
class. Can you imagine your students learning depending on the
teaching of other students for almost EVERY lesson! Ridiculous!
Also, several lessons just hand the student a printed sheet or
printed notes then they copy them onto another paper. Come On!
The C-Scope people say they are actual lessons by real teachers
but who is to say that those teachers have better lessons than
you were already teaching. And all your good stuff goes out the
window because all those kids presenting every other day takes
up way too much time. C-Scope does have a FEW good lessons and
as a resource C-Scope would be great! Too bad though that our
distict is enforcing this as our full curriculum and not just
as a resource.

http://www.proteacher.net/discussions/showthread.php?t=126425&highlight=C-Scope
1st grade comments
sample:
I do not like the CSCOPE sequencing. We did plants in late
October. We did lima bean and baggies planting and they didn't
do well at all. I think it was too cold. I hate to think how
much our district paid for this curriculum. We had to cut out
our basal program to allow for CSCOPE. Our team has found
problems with many lessons not being grade level appropriate. I
definitely miss theme/season integrated curriculum. The common
assessments are too difficult for us to use. Of course this is
one 1st grade teams opinion.

http://www.proteacher.net/discussions/showthread.php?t=159672&highlight=C-Scope
sample comment:

I'm sure it will be updated over the summer. We have IMO wasted
so much time, copy paper and laminate to use the lessons, it's
ridiculous. Many of the school districts in the country are
limiting the amount of copies teachers can make and CSCOPE has
us killing a tree a day. Ugh Next years lessons will be
different and require more copying etc. I don't understand why
districts are paying for this?????????

http://www.proteacher.net/discussions/showthread.php?t=117983&highlight=C-Scope
sample comments:
Our district began this in math and science this year also. It
has been very difficult on those teachers. I believe it has
also affected learning in other subjects as well. I am two
weeks behind where I usually am at this time of the year
because my students take a very long time doing work. I even
assign what they don't finish for homework, but it still takes
longer.

At our school, we actually have an aide whose sole job it is to
copy, laminate, and cut out materials for C-SCOPE.

Our district is in CScope hell.... we have been required to use
all of... every lesson! We have no help... we fill out the POs
to order supplies, we have to go to WalMart to pick up what you
can't order.... no aide to help with copies and laminating...
we do it ALL!!! Most importantly, we don't believe in the way
it is presented... the sequence of skills is VERY different. I
teach 4th and we are to teach the kids a completely different
way of long multiplication. CScope states the traditional
method to be a misconception even though it comes up with the
correct answer! Spelling is non-existent and has been
"outlawed" in our district. Oh-- 4th grade writing TAKS... the
writing process is only taught 1 week each six weeks and then
we don't teach reading that week!!!!! CScope is making us all
at our school question our profession!!!

http://www.proteacher.net/discussions/showthread.php?t=140238&highlight=C-Scope
sample comments:

I was just curious if there are any other districts using
C-Scope curriculum. We started it this year. It has some good
parts, but it is so overwhelming with Assessment and the
teaching of each units. OUr district is spending a loooootttt
of money on supplies for each unit like a knitting needle,
beans, noodles, bags, etc.

It's becoming toooooo much. When can we just get in our room
and teach our students with what we know is best. We've
becoming so data driven (I hate that word now- data)

It's not like I got my degree on line. I am more than capable
of teaching my students.

Venting in TEXAS!

we do! And no one at my school likes it. I haven't heard
anything positive from the teachers I know at the other
campuses either. I'm sure our small district spent a fortune on
it and I'm afraid to ask how much! Plus like you said, we have
to buy lots of other stuff! It's ridiculous. Plus the scope and
sequence doesn't make sense and one concept is taught (in math
for example), before we teach a skill or skills necessary to do
that work. Urghh! So much work for the teachers. Their common
assessments are way too difficult and definitely not grade
level appropriate!!!!! Can you tell how I feel about it??? I
hope and pray that I can outlive it's "popularity". Ok, I could
go on, but you get the idea.

Frustrated in TX!!!

Besides the numerous typos and inaccuracies....
Having to buy additional materials out of pocket until a bunch
of us said "heck no!".......
Scope and sequence out-of-order.....

Guess I don't have much good to say about it either!

We have it and are required to use it in science, however, we
can supplement.
I guess I'm glad we have it. I don't use every single lesson,
and even the lesson I use I may modify. It is nice to have a
complete curriculum...even if you have to modify. Yes, it has
its shortcomings...but I'd rather have it than not have it.

We have to use it as the end-all, be-all. No supplementing,
modifying, etc. That's what makes it difficult.

I hate writing this! I am a teacher who absolutely LOVES
teaching and HATES C-Scope.... C-Scope presenters say you
should always supplement their curriculum, however, they allow
no time for enrichment! Their presenters say C-Scope levels the
field of teachers so that a student doesn't complain that
another teacher is teaching "better" or a more "exciting"
class. With C-Scope all teachers teach the same. In other
words, lets pull everyone down to the same boring, incomplete
lessons. Our district is seriously wrong about C-Scope. If we
are really in this for the kids, C-Scope is the worst possible
answer!

http://www.proteacher.net/discussions/showthread.php?t=58502

CScope Curriculum
09-24-2007, 05:00 PM

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?

c-scope
09-27-2007, 03:01 AM

I am from Texas and our district is not using C-scope yet(since
I have never seen it, I cannot be very helpful), but on another
discussion board it is a huge topic. Most of the discussion is
on how awful it is for all grade levels. You might go to
www.teachers.net, and open the chatboards page. Then open the
state page (bottom right) and open Texas. There has been lots
of discussion on C-scope. It might be helpful

stay away from c-scope
01-14-2008, 03:35 PM

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.

Chemistry Teacher
01-30-2008, 06:57 PM

You are correct. CScope has changed our campus as well. It was
forced on us in its unfinished state. When the higher ups
realize its no good, we demand an apology for the wasted
inservices.
cscope mess
03-19-2008, 11:48 AM

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!

Curriculum
05-14-2008, 07:29 PM

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.

CScope
05-24-2008, 07:44 PM

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!

buying it or using it?
07-12-2008, 01:16 PM

Do you mean is our district buying it? or are we using it? I'm
sure our district will buy it---I don't know of any teachers at
our school who will use it.

Any Good Experiences?
07-20-2008, 07:38 PM

Is there any teacher out there who has had a good experience
with cscope?

cscope-the hated curriculum
10-11-2008, 10:48 AM

cscope has caused a terrific divide between teachers, admin,
and the service center. We hate it, and they espouse it with
almost evangelical fervor. It's awful!

10-25-2008, 02:00 PM

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!

NotSoSure
11-18-2008, 01:21 PM

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?!?!?!?

C-Scope
12-28-2008, 02:24 AM

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.

Regards,

Bobby Mims
Tyler, Texas

lawut-texas.com
903-574-1787

I Hate C-scope
12-28-2008, 10:25 PM

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 a Nightmare
02-07-2009, 06:56 PM

For Mr. Mims:

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.

birdman
03-30-2009, 05:19 AM

I have begun to sub in my tried and true lessons whenever i can...

Reinvent The Wheel
03-30-2009, 08:52 AM

Go Ahead And Enforce C-scope At Schools Or Districts That Have
Shown Poor Academic Performance. But Leave Academically Strong
Schools And Teachers, With Successful Curriculums, Alone.

1st grade teacher
03-31-2009, 06:04 PM

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!!

Post: curriculum director/C-Scope
Posted by: Mrs. Ed on 9/01/09
Our curriculum director should be fired. I've never
experienced nor seen such misery. This curriculum sucks,
sucks, sucks.

Re: curriculum director/C-Scope
Posted by: Tired Teacher on 9/02/09
There was an excellent response to a similar question this
summer if there is a way for you to find it. Someone listed in
detail many problems that they had with CScope. It was very well
presented.
After 1 week of CScope, here is my opinion. I have seen nothing
new. There is a great emphasis on dividing into groups,
playing "games", and justifying your answer. For example, for
almost all math problems, they want the students to write 3-4
sentences telling step by step how they found the answer. I
can't tell that the students are learning the information any
better. We'll see as the year goes on.
The detail is astonishing. So "academically" correct. A unit
that lasts a week may be 80 pages long. With no color, no
bullets, no visual cues, it is hard to read and impossible to
scan quickly. The teacher's key pages are numbered differently
than the students' pages, so I am confused and lost frequently.
The red portions of the Key pages will not print out to our copy
machine. The shaded portions of graphs, etc. on the student's
copies do not print either. It takes hours and lots of ink and
cardstock to print the game cards and other "manipulatives".
Then you get to cut them out.
Some will say it is only to supplement your text. With five
preps, it is all I can do to make my way through CScope. I
don't have time to try to correlate it with my wonderful text
that now sits on the shelf. (For example, unit 1 includes
information that is taught in 3 different chapters of my book,
so it is not simply a chapter correlation.) Tests are from
WebCatt and may have questions on them that don't match what you
have taught.
The worst part--the frustration of knowing that you have to keep
your mouth shut, because the principals and superintendents have
been told that there will be teachers who don't like CScope and
they are always the old, set in their ways teachers who don't
like new, innovative ideas. After admin has been told that,
they won't even listen to you. (Haven't seen the new and
innovative part yet.)
You have to give them credit, CScope is the best "snow job" I
have ever seen. They have sold it to most schools in Texas. (Or
so they say.) It amazes me how many have been fooled. It shows
the power and influence of the Service Centers, because CScope
cannot even come close to my textbooks in quality, accuracy,
visual appearance, organization or ease of use. My textbooks
are correlated to TEKS and TAKS, too, so I don't see it has an
advantage there, either.

Share This Post | Report This Post

Next Post >>

Posts on this thread, including this one