Taking Issue: Common Core Standards

taking issue

Read the brief introduction below, as well as the question and the pros and cons list that follow. Then answer the question using your own words and position.

common core StandardS

Question

Should the Common Core State Standards be adopted in your state? (Think about this question as you read the PRo and CoN arguments listed here. What is your response to this issue?)

Arguments PRo

1. In the global economy, it is imperative that all American students, regardless of their state, be competent in English language and mathematics so they are well prepared for college and entry into the workforce. 2. The Standards will correct the inequity in which students in some states receive a higher quality of education than students in other states. 3. Standards will encourage states and schools within them to “Race to the Top” by improving curriculum and instruction. 4. Achieving or failing to meet standards informs parents and the public about the condition of American education.

Arguments CoN

1. The Common Core State Standards initiative is a veiled attempt to impose a national curriculum on public schools that violates the historic tradition of state and local control of education. 2. The imposition of uniform standards will force teachers to teach for the standardized tests; this will limit their creativity and flexibility in meeting students’ needs. 3. The assessments, through standardized testing, will be a source of profits for testing corporations that will drive the direction of public education. 4. Standards should be set at the local district level with the full participation of parents and teachers, not by bureaucrats and corporate executives.

Question Reprise: What Is Your Stand?

Reflect again on the following question by explaining your stand about this issue: Should your state adopt the Common Core State Standards?

www.washingtonpost.com (December 1, 2014). ““Everything you need to know about Common Core,” Diane Ravitch, The Washington Post ”;

The report recommended a high school curriculum of “Five New Basics,” which included four years of English; three years of mathematics, science, and social studies; and a half year of computer science.93 However, the recommended reforms were left as they had been historically, to the states.

The standards movement gained more momentum when Congress enacted the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) in 2001, which President George Bush had strongly endorsed. NCLB put into federal law some of the earlier trends for setting higher academic standards, emphasizing basic skills, and school and teacher accountability. It emphasized, as did the later Common Core, the basic skills of reading and arithmetic as necessary foundations for later academic success and the need to assess students’ competency in meeting standards in these subjects. Although it did not establish a national curriculum nor national testing, NCLB required the states to establish testing programs to assess annually all students’ reading and mathematics competencies from grades 3 to 8. Throughout its history, NCLB has been controversial. Its proponents contend that the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) has shown improvements in reading and mathematics, and that schools and teachers are now being held accountable for the success or failure of instruction. Opponents allege that the NCLB’s reliance on standardized testing forces teachers to spend too much time “teaching for the test,” and not enough time on developing students’ creativity and problem-solving skills.