A Chink in the Common Core Armor

For the last several years, we’ve seen a parade of prominent educators, businessmen, and politicians extolling the virtues of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS).  Big money has been spent, and in the educational enterprise, big means really big.  The US Department of Education conditioned some state funding on the basis of states accepting and implementing the new standards. 

Partly because of the probably correct perception our public education system was failing, the CCSS were adopted with virtually no testing by at least forty states.  It was hoped, actually expected, that most states would now be rowing with common ores and the result would be a stronger national educational system.   But these standards are intellectually demanding as to what is taught and importantly to how they are to be taught.   Many of our students and teachers were not up to the challenge.  The teachers were given insufficient training, and the students were left in the wake of this giant oil tanker navigating through uncharted and troubled waters.  Only as the testing has begun have the early-on efficacy questions been raised – in mass. 

This should not be surprising.  Even a small change in curriculum can disturb the delicate process of learning and the demands placed upon a vast corps of teachers.  Some states have opted out of the CCSS, e.g. Indiana, Oklahoma, and most states are making modifications to them and particularly the testing. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/02/50-states-common-core_n_5751864.html)

An even a more surprising consequence, and certainly unintended, is the rise of a national test “opting out” movement because the Common Core is now a national platform.   Indeed, there are “how to” website giving detailed instructions about the process.  (http://saynotocommoncore.com/)

While some states wish very much to maintain the standards, some states have decided they need to be modified.  For example, the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) has recently given educators in New York and Connecticut funding to revise the CCSS.  Said AFT President Randi Weingarten, “These grants are about giving educators some seed money to take their ideas about educational standards and convert them into practice. Many educators support higher standards but are concerned about particular aspects, especially the Common Core standards' poor implementation and their developmental appropriateness, particularly in the early grades.”  Wide latitude is given critiquing the Common Core standards or writing new ones, as judged needed or necessary. 

We may expect other states, not simply opting out altogether, to also make modification according to perceived needs.  The net result may be a dissembling of a proposed national curriculum to a multiverse of state curricula – just what was in place only a few years ago.   It is hoped the overall level of standards will comprise an upgrade to curricula previously in place. 

Is this good?  The upgrade, if that is the net result, for sure.  But the transition will be troublesome for all too many teachers. The students? As usual, the students must learn from whatever dish is served.