Study Shows Common Core Actually Slows Improvement
There is a Michigan State University study done by Schmidt and Houang in 2012 that is often sited as justification of Common Core Standards effectiveness at improving student performance in math. The study looked at student scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in 2009 of states whose standards were close to Common Core and those whose standards were very different. The study’s first conclusion was that there was a correlation between alignment to CCSSI standards and improved performance on the NAEP. An update of that study throws that correlation out the window.If you have done your homework on Common Core you know that the basis for the standards was the American Diploma Project which produced a final report in 2006 on college and career ready standards based on their economic analysis of growth business sectors in five states. Thirty five states signed on as ADP Partners. Those states began work early to migrate their standards closer to those of the ADP. The ADP only had end of school competencies so there was virtually no alignment to CCSS for the early grades because those standards were not included in the ADP competencies. However, by 2009, the year that the MSU study looked at for NAEP scores, there were several states who could be said to have good alignment to Common Core even though the CCSS standards would not be officially completed for another year. The study initially showed a correlation between those states and higher NAEP scores. This was used as evidence that CCSS math “deserved to be seriously implemented.” [William H. Schmidt and Richard T. Houang, “Curricular Coherence and the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics,” Educational Researcher 41, no. 8 (2012): pp. 307.] If you would like to read an explanation of all the
