The creation and implementation of Common Core has been extremely controversial and extensively discussed by politicians all over the country. Politicians are still split over the new education standards, as are Alexandra and Anna.
Alexandra’s Take:
The Common Core Initiative has been unsuccessful since it’s early implementation. Expensive, unreasonable and entirely ineffective, I am at a loss to understand why the standards of common core are still in use and being implemented in schools.
Although, optional for states to adopt the Common Core standards have since been adopted by more than forty states. Because the federal government can not directly mandate state education, the Obama Administration offered incentives and grants to states who adopted the Common Core standards. While the federal government can not directly influence state education system they can complicate the process and offer grants and incentives to steer state legistlatures into the direction they please. The potential to bring home a cut of the five billion dollars from the Race to the Top Program. The New York Times described this system of waivers as “the most sweeping use of executive authority to rewrite federal education law since Washington expanded its involvement in education in the 1960s.”
In response to this indirect federal involvement, The Local State Education Act has been passed as a way to prevent additional federal involvlement in state education. Under this act, states would be able to opt out of these controversial standards while not being penalized in terms of grants and funding. So why was this amendment necessary? If the federal government was not direclty involved in the implementation of Common Core why would a bill need to be implemented to protect states?
On the financial front, states will spend an estimated ten billion dollars up front and as much as eight hundred million dollars per year for the first seven years the program is being implemented. These costs would include Common Core approved textbooks, teacher training and the price of exams. So with the national defecit being what it now, how is it responsible of our lawmakers to propose such extensive spending on a program that may not even work? Doesn’t that seem fairly unreasonable?
Although setting national standards for math and english may seem like a good idea, why are we adopting the Common Core Standards? The Common Core standards are not the highest level of standards within the United States so why are we not adopting the best for our children? The curriculum is “instruction-based” limiting how students can be taught and thus are not suited to the needs of the individual student.
Additionally student achievement in participating states has declined as a result of implementing these standards. Twelve states have introduced legislation to withdraw from the program and Indiana has repealed the standards entirely. So why are we still using this expensive, ineffective and unreasonable standards in our schools? I wish I knew…
Anna’s Take:
Common Core has been a debate among politicians since it’s implementation. Sure, it has its drawbacks but so do various other government mandates. The fact of the matter is, the United States has fallen behind in education. Obviously, this is a problem and the standards we have been holding our students to are not working. Common Core is a step in the right direction for American education. Common Core is great in theory; it just needs to be fixed in practice.
Representatives from forty-eight states, two territories, and the District of Columbia came together to help design the Common Core standards. So far, forty-two states and the District of Columbia have voluntarily begun to implement and teach these standards. They are designed to prepare students for college and the work force. Teachers had a role in designing these standards as well. The National Education Association (NEA), American Federation of Teachers (AFT), National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM), and National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE), among other associations were also consulted when designing the Common Core standards.
Common Core is a step in the right direction for the American education system. The Common Core standards are internationally bench-marked meaning that standards from top-performing countries were used when designing the curriculum for common core. In fact, according to the Common Core website, “the college- and career-ready standards provide an appendix listing the evidence that was consulted in drafting the standards, including the international standards that were consulted in the development process.”
One argument against Common Core is that it brings all states down to the lowest common denominator and that states with high standards are going to be taking a step backwards. This is actually false. According to the Common Core website, even states with high standards will be encouraged to push those standards above and beyond. In fact, since the Common Core standards were designed, there has been an agreement that no state will lower its’ standards.
Another common myth about the Common Core standards is that the federal government will implement them. Common Core is a state-led effort and is in no way mandatory. The federal government did not even play a role in the development of Common Core. Common Core is not a national curriculum, it is a shared set of goals between states. The Common Core started as a state-initiative and it will remain that way.
Common Core standards offer teachers a way to measure a student’s progress throughout the year. It will be easier for a teacher to recognize if a child is falling behind. The standards are not meant to tell a teacher how to do their job. They establish what children need to learn, not how they should learn it. Teachers will still make their own lesson plans and cater to the children that are present in their classrooms. The standards provide teachers with a set of goals to ensure that students are progressing correctly.