Letters: Common Core, profit and burnout

I have a feeling that the process used for Obamacare was also used on the Common Core ["Speakers: NY 'set children up to fail'," News, Nov. 27]. Both have the right goals: raising health care and educational standards for everyone.

Unfortunately, apparently only the business sides of both were used to craft the details. So the people who sell healthcare and education products are making loads of money with their PowerPoint displays and binders full of templates that don't translate to the real world.

At the same time, the people who actually provide health care and actually teach are having the life beat out of them as they try to keep these woefully inadequate and misguided programs from harming those they try to help.

We have got to stop creating programs from within the corporate think tanks without first going to people responsible for implementing those programs.

The shame is that both the Common Core and the health care rollouts play into the hands of those who believe that government shouldn't be in the business of helping everyone achieve the best health and welfare.

Abby G. Burton, Plainview

Editor's note: The writer is a school teacher.

It is time to place the proverbial finger in the Common Core curriculum dike to end the rush of emotion and negativity flowing from its implementation. Is there a way we can reduce the stress levels for all, minimize the ongoing and, in some cases, unproductive rhetoric while maintaining the value and rigor for students? The answer is yes! It is time to stop giving homework.

Much of today's homework is Common Core related. This appears to make sense since the standards are new. But what doesn't make sense is lots of new and challenging homework at the expense of the emotional health of students and the well-being of the family. After spending a full school day immersed in intense Common Core instruction, students will gain little, if anything, by extending their school day with more of the same.

For homework to have any value, it must be reviewed the next day. This leaves little time for new instruction.

A synthesis of homework research provides little conclusive evidence that homework improves or enhances student achievement. Finland, which is touted for high student achievement, hardly gives any homework. French President Francois Hollande announced in October 2012 his plans to get rid of homework as part of his education reforms.

School administrators, teachers and parents should harness their collective energies for a "no homework" policy.

Philip S. Cicero, Massapequa

Editor's note: The writer is a retired school superintendent.

Supporters of the Common Core seem to believe that teachers and administrators don't want the accountability connected to testing. They foolishly think that this opposition is just a roll-out problem, people will get used to it, and we will be better off. They refuse to recognize the revolution occurring right in front of them.

Teachers put their students first. The overwhelming majority were graded effective or above even with a faulty, inappropriate and invalid test. So the premise that teachers have a self-serving motive is nullified. Teachers oppose these tests because they are not developmentally aligned to the students on their grade level.

Administrators understand that tying test scores to teacher evaluations creates an atmosphere that poisons schools. When your job depends on a score based on an invalid test, and students who have given up because it is just above their ability, you cannot get an accurate depiction of a teacher's proficiency.

As a veteran, retired teacher, I cannot recall a time when teachers, administrators, superintendents and parents have been so aligned. That has to mean something. Yes, there is a revolution occurring, and the next step is to keep our children home on testing days.

Philip Tamberino, South Huntington

Delay flood insurance rate increases

A Newsday editorial stated that the National Flood Insurance Program should be left as it is, and that rates should be allowed to rise for 25 percent a year until they eventually match private market insurance rates ["Flood insurance needs reforms," Nov. 12]. The editorial argued that people who live on the water should not be subsidized.

Contrary to what Newsday suggests, Congress itself now recognizes that the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act is fundamentally flawed. It phases in full actuarial rates for properties purchased after July 2012, and "grandfathers" other properties by allowing them to keep the lower rate from older flood maps.

The law also directed the Federal Emergency Management Agency to report on the affordability of these rate changes, a report that is now long overdue. Even Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), the sponsor of the current law, now supports a delay in rate hikes to allow for the study's completion.

The legally required transition to true risk rates, which are quite debatable, has plagued consumers with increases beyond what anyone imagined possible.

The prudent approach is to enact the four-year delay in rate increases to the National Flood Insurance Program until FEMA completes its study, to create a system for targeted rate relief and to establish an office of advocate for flood insurance rate and mapping concerns. Congress should not let unresearched and unsubstantiated rate increases go into effect.

Joseph E. Mottola, West Babylon

Editor's note: The writer is the chief executive of the Long Island Board of Realtors® Inc.