Common Core in place regardless of rhetoric
As we prepare to start a new academic year, the specter of a new presidential campaign season looms. Its issues are numerous, but one that just about all candidates have addressed is the future of Common Core.
Common Core identifies what students should learn about reading and mathematics from kindergarten through high school in order to prepare them for college and careers. It does not provide enough detail to allow teachers to use it in planning instruction, but it does provide a foundation districts can use to create standards-aligned curriculum — planned course documents for each course and grade. If they are provided with training and new books and materials that match their curricula, teachers can create their units and lessons.
Common Core is not necessarily an improvement, because there were no national standards upon which to improve. However, some researchers, such as Stanford University’s James Milgram, suggest that the new standards are an enormous improvement over the patchwork most states had in place. Some states like California, Florida, Massachusetts, Tennessee and Minnesota had rigorous standards before the onset of Common Core, but most had weak standards or none at all.
Despite what some presidential candidates claim, Common Core was not developed by the federal government and certainly was not the creation of President Barack Obama. In 2007 and 2008 — well before his election — the National Governors’ Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers proposed the development of standards. The federal government played no role in their development.
Support came from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. It sprinkled about $150 million around the country to dozens of groups, such as the American Federation of Teachers ($4.4 million) and the National Education Association ($1 million), and organizations such as the Khan Academy ($4 million) to gain support for Common Core.
The federal government did not mandate its adoption. Via the American Recovery and Restoration Act, it made $4.35 billion available to the states. To qualify for a share, states had to agree to develop rigorous college- and career-ready standards, but not necessarily Common Core. Because it was available, most states, like Pennsylvania, opted for Common Core.
In 2013, 44 states and the District of Columbia did likewise. Twenty did so with modifications, thus displaying that the federal government allowed flexibility. Minnesota, for example, adopted only the English standards.
Alaska, Nebraska, Texas and Virginia rejected it. Indiana, Oklahoma and South Carolina adopted it, but later withdrew. Missouri and North Carolina are in the process of withdrawing. In New Jersey, presidential candidate and Gov. Chris Christie wants to abandon Common Core, but keep its test. That should be fun.
Pennsylvania adopted Common Core, and thus qualified for a $51 million federal grant. In 2014, after a mixed message that slowed curriculum development, the state replaced Common Core with the Pennsylvania Academic Standards, mostly by changing the name on the cover of the document.
Despite all the noise, all of the states that rejected “Obamacore,” which they claimed was federal overreach, have adopted Common Core-like standards. In 2012, Alaska adopted standards that are almost identical to Common Core. Nebraska Common Core in place regardless of rhetoric - Opinion - The Times-Tribune:
