J.R. Wilson: Common Core and the Vehicle of our Future

by J.R. Wilson Common Core: The Vehicle of Our Future? Have you ever bought a new car? Was your experience with the dealerships and salespeople enjoyable and pleasant? Did you experience buyer’s remorse? When you buy a car you are buying something that will reliably deliver you to your destination. Your state adopted the Common [...]

by J.R. Wilson

Common Core: The Vehicle of Our Future?

Have you ever bought a new car? Was your experience with the dealerships and salespeople enjoyable and pleasant? Did you experience buyer’s remorse?

When you buy a car you are buying something that will reliably deliver you to your destination. Your state adopted the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and you, as a taxpayer, are in the process paying for something you will never own. The CCSS will not get our students college and career ready, insure student academic success, provide a secure future, or protect our liberty. A new car will get you to your destination while the CCSS is an expensive vehicle that will drive our country further down the road of mediocrity.

	Car	Common Core State Standards

Shopping	You decide what car best fits your needs. You shop around and find the best car for your money. You get to test drive the cars of your choice to help you make your decision.	You had no say in these standards. They are not the best standards around. For less money, you can get better standards that have been tested. You didn’t get to test these standards – or see any testing of these standards – before they were bought for you with your tax money.
Decision to Buy	You make the decision to buy, or – just as important – to not buy.	You bought these standards though you may not know it. You bought these standards even if you protested their purchase. The decision to buy, or to not buy, was never up to you.
Purchase	You are buying a car. You get to select and decide the make, model, package, and options you want.	You don’t know what you’re buying. The Common Core began with math and language arts standards. Then it included tests. Then it included other subjects, including social studies, science, and civics. Then it included curricular materials. Then it included a data system. Then it included an early learning program. Then it included public colleges. All of this is prescribed, and none of this is proven.
Selling Points	Most car salesmen are knowledgeable about the features of the car. Buyers still need to be responsible and do their own fact checking.	Many of the selling points used to sell these standards sound wonderful, but in truth are deceptive. Be responsible and do your own fact checking. The deeper you dig, the more dismayed you may become.
Costs	You know exactly how much the car will cost you once you have settled on a price. Once the car is paid for it is yours.	You have no idea how much these standards are going to cost you as a taxpayer. Across the country, it will be at least $70 billion. Those who made the decision to buy these standards did so without a true feasibility and cost analysis. The costs will be ongoing. The public does not own the Common Core Standards or tests and has no ability to improve or change them.
Safety & Quality Control	The car has to meet required safety standards. The automaker has put the car and many of its components through a lot of testing and checks to make sure the components work well together.	There are no required safeguards to protect our children’s academic success, their future, and our liberty. No pilot testing was done with these standards. It is unknown whether they will reach the desired results or how well the various components will work together. It is unknown how anyone will be held accountable for outcomes. Much is still unknown about how these initiatives came together, and who will profit from them.
Insurance	You can get insurance for your car when you buy it.	No insurance is available although you still have to pay premiums. There is no insurance protecting our children’s academic success, their future, or our liberties.
Maintenance	You can take the car to the dealer or any other auto mechanic. If you don’t like the car, you can get rid of it and buy a different car.	There is no dealer to take the standards to for repair. Modifications can only be made by the owners (two non-government entities) with approval of 49 states and territories. No one will ask for, nor welcome, input from parents, voters or taxpayers. You will not be able to change the standards if you don’t like them. The federal government now prescribes these standards via RTTT and NCLB waivers.
Warranty	Most cars come with a warranty. There is also the opportunity to purchase extended warranties.	No warranty is available.
Lemon Laws	There are some protections provided by state and federal lemon laws.	There are no lemon law protections.
CarFax	Records of maintenance and repairs will be kept in a database with the information available to others. CarFax.	Based on these standards, our children will be assessed. The assessment data along with other data will be compiled in a state longitudinal data system with possible unlimited intergovernmental access to the data, and without parent knowledge or permission. KidFax?

J.R. Wilson is a parent and an education advocate with 25+ years experience in public education as an elementary teacher, curriculum consultant, staff development coordinator, and principal.

Comments

Barry Garelick

September 5, 2012 at 5:53 pm

Extras: When you buy a car, you get an option for various extras (CD player, power steering, power brakes, etc). With the Common Core math standards, there are no options for the “hidden extras”; namely the pedagogical agenda. The first three pages of the standards are called “Standards of Mathematical Practice” or SMP. There are eight standards that are based on NCTM’s process standards. These are pedagogical standards that push vagueries like “mathematical sense-making” which is a code word for “habits of mind” which is a code word for having students practice techniques of problem solving long before they even make sense.

Seminars and webinars that are cropping up on how to implement the Common Core math standards spend the majority of time on these Standards of Math Practices. What happened to the content? It was trumped by process just as it was with NCTM’s standards.

Common Core math is mandated reform. But don’t worry. It comes with. The only extra money you’ll pay is for tutoring for your child.

Reply
Chet Linton

September 5, 2012 at 9:21 pm

The Common Core State Standards were designed by educator teams from 48 states. The CCSS were written based upon the research of what works. These new standards will help prepare students for college or career, very intentionally. When implemented with fidelity, they are more rigorous, than most preCommon Core state standards. Teachers will be better (there is more work initially) and students more successful.

Reply
mcp_43

September 6, 2012 at 5:57 am

I wonder what percentage of those on the educator teams taught the corresponding classes in the last five years. This means the people developing the first grade standards taught first grade, the people developing the second grade standards taught second grade, etc.

Reply
Steve Ryerson

September 6, 2012 at 7:48 am

I see no problem with common core recommendations, states & localities need guidelines. However common core requirements are a different animal entirely. Many will be confined and held back from what they could have accomplished. Similar to insisting that a particular third grade youngster do only third grade work when he’s far more capable.

Reply
Barry Garelick

September 6, 2012 at 7:51 am

What research specifically? Could you provide cites? Many readers would like to know. The Standards for Math Practice seem rather constructivist to my naive eyes, and as far as I know, there isn’t any research that meets scientific standards to support their use. Or are you talking about the content standards that call for standard algorithms for multiplication and division to be taught in 4th grade rather than second, and until then to have students use “strategies” for multiplying and dividing, much like Everyday Math? Or are you talking about the watered down algebra standards? Or maybe you mean the transformation-based geometry that will manifest itself as having students make quilt designs and other cute “group work” projects, while ignoring the nature of proof as has been ignored for the past 20 or so years? And please provide details on how the new standards will help prepare students for college or career, “very intentionally” as you say. And how many teachers were part of the “educator teams from 48 states” and last question: Are you sure they represented 48 states?

Reply
Erin Tuttle

September 6, 2012 at 8:19 am

Mr. Linton, The common core standards were written by Achieve.org, a dc based interest group. States were hardly involved with the writing of these standards. The common core chief architects David Coleman and Jason Simba have admitted that the common core definition of college ready is for a two year, unselective community college- not a four year university. Please go to http://www.truthinamericaneducation.com for a real education of what the common core standards truly represent. BTW, common core standards have never been field tested in a classroom to prove any claims as to their effectiveness. Do you buy a car without a test-drive? I didn’t think so..

Reply
Cameron Pipkin

September 6, 2012 at 8:25 am

I wonder where some of these “facts” come from. A few corrections:

1) These standards have been tested in both New York and Boston, where they had unprecedented success over a period of years.

2) The Common Core Standards are a state-to-state initiative and completely voluntary. We had just as much choice in their implementation as we do in the passage of any legislation in state governments. If you weren’t paying attention when they were passed, that’s a you issue, not a problem with the Standards.

3) Not sure what you’re referring to when you say that the only institutions that can make modifications are two non-government entities. I can only assume you’re talking about PARCC and SBAC, the assessment consortia, neither of which have anything to do with “modifications” to the Standards. All these groups do is write assessments. In fact, the Common Core Standards allow for modifications, made at the state level.

I’ll stop there, but nearly half the points you make are either misleading or flat out incorrect.

If this article reflects your genuine concern with the Common Core Standards, then I have good news: things aren’t nearly as bad as you think. With a little bit more research I’m confident that you’ll find that many of your notions are unfounded, and that the Common Core is above board, well written, and far superior to most current state education standards.

Reply
- Niki Hayes
  
  September 7, 2012 at 7:04 am
  
  The Common Core standards were tested in New York and Boston with unprecedented results over a period of years? I don’t believe it. Please cite sources to verify this claim.
  
  And the standards were not, according to factual reporting over the past two years, “well written” or “above board” and they cannot be considered “far superior” to most state standards until we see their results of our children’s learning.
  
  Frankly, I always worry when someone argues for “fidelity of implementation.” That means sticking with a program even if it is not working because it’s bound to be human efforts that are failing, not the program’s design. Reform/fuzzy proponents have been making that claim for years: It’s all the teachers’ fault, not their weak and incoherent training nor the lousy curriculum materials.
  
  This sweeping decision excluded classroom teachers and parents. That’s a fact. That means it has been an unproductive move for CHILDREN by politically-driven educators/leaders. So what else is new?
  
  Reply
Barry Garelick

September 6, 2012 at 9:33 pm

Cameron:

Please provide more details on the testing of the CC math standards in New York and Boston. I wasn’t aware of this. When was the testing done; who did it? Were the results published? Is there a website where it is discussed?

As for the standards being a state initiative and “completely voluntary”, many of us were paying strict attention to what was going on. But states were lured by the Race to the Top money. To qualify, states had to show that they were using standards by a consortium of states. Yes, states could have had the option of adopting California’s, or Massachusetts’ or Indiana’s very good math standards, but given the lure of the money and the fact that the CC standards were right there, that was the path of least resistance. See Erin Tuttle’s comment above yours for info on who wrote the standards.

Reply
J.R. Wilson

September 8, 2012 at 8:40 am

Some comments supporting the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) appear to be from the boilerplate propaganda blather commonly used to promote the CCSS. Repetition does not make it true. It does make me wonder to what extent people have actually looked into the issues surrounding the CCSS. It also makes me wonder if those who are supporting the CCSS stand to gain from the CCSS. Providing CCSS related support, consulting services, and professional development to schools and school districts has become a lucrative endeavor for many and it is good business for those folks to support the CCSS. Some commenters appear to have first hand knowledge about this business.

The Common Core State Standards were designed by educator teams from 48 states.

Really? This sounds great, as does most of the promotional blather. Who are those educator teams? Is there a list of names somewhere? Please share it. I would like to see it. More frequently now I see statements saying that classroom teachers and school administrators wrote these standards. Information is available about who wrote these standards. You can download the list of people who were on the Work Teams (writing groups) and the Feedback Groups at this link https://www.box.com/s/41e5d1e428c3349bec2a. This information was released only after pressure was put on the NGA, CCSSO, and CCSSI to do so. How many regular classroom teachers do you see listed? How many of the people listed have had any significant experience teaching K-12? The CCSSI Public License page at http://corestandards.org/public-license
States: “NGA Center/CCSSO shall be acknowledged as the sole owners and developers of the Common Core State Standards, and no claims to the contrary shall be made.” Designing the standards and writing them may be two different things but I have never seen any evidence that educator teams from 48 states designed the standards. States were provided non-public drafts of the CCSS and at least some states had teachers provide feedback, probably under strict confidentiality agreements. Feedback, input, design, develop, and write may be the same to some people but not to me.

The same Public License page also states that the Common Core State Standards “are the property of the NGA Center and CCSSO, and NGA Center and CCSSO retain all right, title, and interest in and too the same.” They own and hold the copyright to the CCSS. They, not SBAC and PARCC, in addition to all other adopting states would have to agree to any changes to the standards. Or can the NGA Center and CCSSO make such changes without agreement of the adopting states? Hmmm.. as owners of this property, what if they decided to sell it to the highest bidder? Would Pearson be interested? Whie the names may sound otherwise, as well as decisions they make, the NGA and the CCSSO are both non-government entities.

I hear of people, including state officials and legislators, across the country saying they can change these standards as they see fit. I am not convinced having never seen any document authorizing states to make changes to these standards beyond adding 15% to them. This has been a clear agreement governors and state superintendents made for their states when they signed the Common Core Standards Memorandum of Agreement in May/June 2009. See
https://www.box.com/s/spg70f8l10zh3gic1cug. I would like to see the document(s) and the specific clause(s) that authorize states to modify the standards.

I hope teachers are not required to implement these standards with fidelity. To do so will short change the academic education of our youth. Teachers should be allowed to exercise their professional judgment to meet the needs of the students they work with and implementing the CCSS with fidelity will not allow them to do this.

I want to choose which car to buy and not be told by someone else, without my input, what I have to buy. I want the decisions about education in my community schools to be made locally. These decisions should not be directed, strongly advised, set up to be “voluntary” with pressure, coercion, force, or strings attached to implement the policy and practices desired by the federal government, private corporations, non-profits, and other non-government entities who are far removed from the classroom.

Reply