There has been a lot of arguing between factions over education the past few years. At the center of most of the debates is the recent federal standard educational guideline known as Common Core. An initiative that was developed by the National Governor's Association and the Council of Chief State School Officials with input from school leaders, teachers and state officials in an attempt to make certain that students around the country are succeeding at a standard level of education by outlining what a student should know by the end of each school year. Implementing the program is a voluntary choice for each state. Terrible notion isn't it? Well, according to some critics... it is. It is the big bad federal ruler slapping the individuality pencil out of our children's hand in the classroom ruining their education potential in the process. It's the worm in the apple of the teacher's freedom to explore alternate avenues of education and has been accused of everything from impossible math practices, dirty, vulgar books on the suggested reading list, invasion of privacy via data collecting and populace management.
It has also become a hot topic among presidential hopefuls who have been wagging their tyrannical tongues over the issue promising to repeal the policy. Well, it seems, my loyal reader, that the ones we are looking toward to run our county know as much about Common Core as it's loudest critics do. The first and biggest problem with their promises to do away with the program is that Common Core is not a federal law, it's just a guideline to follow, created independently and only adopted by the federal government and therefore cannot be repealed. Decisions to refuse practice of Common Core is made at the state level and some states have chosen to do so because it is only a suggestion of certain academic outlines. It was not federally created, it is not a curriculum and it is not enforced. Choices on curriculum, textbooks, technology and other materials are completely up to local districts. So if anyone has a problem with Common Core standards they need look no further than their local board of education, not the federal government.
Still having trouble with just what exactly is the problem? Don't feel too out of the loop, my fellow Observers, so am I. I've looked at the policy, read the information and numerous AP articles about it, understand the intention of it and although I realize that no "standard" practice is perfect, I really don't have a lot of concern over what seems to be something, as a parent, critics are telling me I should. Let's take a look at some of the top reasons naysayers are so against the program and try to break them down realistically, shall we?
Common Core opposition claims that Common Core is a federal takeover of our education system and it is unconstitutional because the constitution makes no mention of federal involvement in education. No, it's not... on both counts. Again, it is only a federally adopted guideline... not law. The states hold the power over implementation, not the federal government. It is also compliant with the new K-12 education law passed last year called the Every Student Succeeds Act that replaces the state waiver defunct No Child Left Behind Act, which sends most of the education policy making power back to the states local districts. So in reality, congress has already done away with what critics claim is the main problem with Common Core and what the candidates are promising to do about something that never existed in the first place. I hope you followed all that because my head is already staring to hurt from me shaking it.
It's bad for parents because they will have no say in their child's education. Untrue. We will have just as much power in choosing a curriculum that we have now, which is not much to begin with. Local boards of education set the curriculum, not the parents. We can offer our opinions but we cannot make education policy. If you want to find out how much power you actually have, I urge you to go to a board of education budget or curriculum meeting. Chances are, you probably won't even be able to ask a question until an open forum meeting usually after the decisions have already been made for you. Forget the Feds, most of the time it's our own town boards that railroad us when it comes to our children education.
It's bad for taxpayers due to costs associated with putting Common Core in place. I'd like to ask all these financial geniuses, clueing the rest of us in, just exactly when any initiative, education or otherwise, isn't bad for the taxpayers? School budgets certainly are a burden on them, especially the ones without children, but if an idea is sound, as responsible parents and adults, what choice do we have but to spend the money?
The federal government bribed states into implementing Common Core with a share of 4.35 billion offered up to states that took the bait. True.... somewhat... but it's not as bad as critics make it out to be. It is correct that money was set aside for states that that adopted the program, but it's not the evil carrot dangling in front of the money starved education budget donkey to get states on board. It was intended to help states adjust to the new standards and contrary to popular belief, came with no strings attached. If the states chose to modify the standard or even abolish it, they were allowed to do so with no financial penalty. As a matter of fact, some states spent additional money on top of the federal funds to make the transition easier. What also weakens critic's arguments is the amount itself. 4.35 billion definitely sounds like a lot to the individual, but we are talking about dividing that amount between every state. To put it in perspective, Woodbury, Connecticut, the town I live in, with a population of around 10,000 allotted $32,736,726.00 for it's 2015 school budget. If you put that up against the rest of the nation, 4.35 billion doesn't go far. Another factor is that although Common Core is tied to federal grant money to persuade states to adopt higher education standards, no mention in the policy links only Common Core to these funds. States that initiate any improved educational standards are eligible for the so called "Race to the Top" money. One final thought on the financial side of the coin. Far be it for me to point out that we could also use a program, like Common Core, to identify where our educational problems exist, state by state, in a way to direct educational money to those students that need it most.... but I could be wrong.
Common Core is just another No Child Left Behind. Not even close. That program was indeed tied to federal education money which is exactly why it failed because in order to get on the scholastic gravy train school systems had to meet the federal standards set by the policy. It created a rift in our education framework as never before that ended up placing borderline and lower scoring students in remedial classes to exempt their testing scores from the districts average. In essence, a lot of children got left behind in the monetary wake of the program.
It's bad for students because it's a "one size fits all" curriculum and not diversified enough to fit all states educational needs. Again, untrue. As already stated it is not a curriculum. It is a offered guideline where the power of implementation and modification lies with the local level administrators and can be adjusted, without penalty, to help students that may need a different teaching approach. Even though several states have opted out of the program, over 40 states are still involved with Common Core and more than a few have modified it's principles as they saw fit for their states needs. For example:
Alaska did not adopt Common Core statewide but several Alaska School districts did.
Arizona renamed Common Core through an executive order by Governor Jan Brewer to Arizona's College and Career Ready Standards. Although only the name was changed, not the standards, Arizona legislators insist the state is acting independently.
Florida has tweaked the standard's name as well, but in a different way by removing the mention of "Common Core" in the state law that initiated it. The state has also called for a national test to see if children are meeting the new standard.
Iowa merged Common Core standards into what they call Iowa Core.
Kentucky increased the standards set by Common Core but used the federal guideline as their base.
Minnesota only implemented the English and Language Arts portions of Common Core and drafted their own Math standards.
This is just a few of the many states that have implemented and modified Common Core standards. On the other hand, states that have created their own independent standards outside of the program, oddly enough emulate Common Core standards in their initiatives.....hmmmm.....sounds pretty diversified to me.... but what do I know?
So just what is the problem people have with Common Core? I think we find the answer within our own misconceptions and the exaggeration of the facts, especially from our leaders or the ones that want to be. To start with, along with promising to repeal something that is not federally mandated, candidates have stated that America is #28 or worse worldwide in education (I'm presuming they are referring to the PISA rankings, because they never state where they get their numbers from) and Common Core is the main focus of blame for the ranking along with the Department of Education. But according to Pearson Education, a British education and assessment service, as of January 2015, the United States ranks #14 in education. Still not great, but definitely better than 28 or worse, even though what the statistics don't tell you is that the US has never done well on those assessments even when we were "great". On a more positive note, America does rank #2 in ignorance on social statistics according to Ranking America. Yes, I am using "positive" sarcastically, but I think it may explain why so many agree with bogus statistics and feel disdain for a program intended to raise our international education ranking. Otherwise, the opposition to it doesn't make much sense.
While opponents would have us believe that Common Core is the federal equivalent of the Wicked Witch of the West, unleashing her dunce hat distributing flying monkeys to snatch up our children's education by making their parents bend to her will for their release, in reality it is simply a choice given to every state in an effort to help our students share equal knowledge. To those that may have trouble believing what I'm writing about because I'm not in the education field ....well, I used to be, but... fair enough. What about teachers? Do we trust them? Can we agree on what they think about Common Core? From what I've read during my research, most educators are in favor of what Common Core offers, have been waiting for a set standard education package to replace the failed No Child Left Behind and are frustrated with opponents creating this educational politically driven feud. A lot of them feel, as I do, that we need a way to monitor the progress of our children's education. If we don't have a state by state similar national educational guideline in place to follow and teach what is expected of our students and is accepted by colleges and employers when they graduate, we do our children an injustice. I repeat, no "guideline" is perfect, but we have to start somewhere and build upon the foundation created by an agreed national curriculum. As parents, we have to ask ourselves that if no standard is set to aid us in understanding exactly how our children are progressing... how will we know when they're not? Strictly an Observation. If you'll excuse me, The Wizard of Oz is on.
