CCSS Flunks Complexity Test
The Winter 2016 issue of the AASA Journal of Scholarship and Practice includes an important piece of research by Dario Sforza, Eunyoung Kim, and Christopher Tienken, showing that when it comes to demanding complex thinking, the Common Core Standards are neither all that nor the bag of chips.
You may recognize Tienken's name-- the Seton Hall professor previously produced research showing that demographic data was sufficient to predict results on the Big Standardized Test. He's also featured in this video from 2014 that does a pretty good job of debunking the whole magical testing biz.
The researchers in this set out to test the oft-repeated claim that The Core replaces old lower order flat-brained standards with new requirements for lots of higher-order thinking. They did this by doing a content analysis of the standards themselves and doing the same analysis of New Jersey's pre-Core standards. They focused on 9-12 standards because they're more closely associated with the end result of education; I reckon it also allowed them to sidestep questions about developmental appropriateness.
The researchers used Webb's Depth of Knowledge framework to analyze standards, and to be honest CURMUDGUCATION: CCSS Flunks Complexity Test: