Common Core Pros & Cons
The strengths and weaknesses of the Common Core State Standards Initiative
(page 1 of 2)
The fiery colors and eye-of-the-storm logo employed by the Common Core State Standards Initiative (CCSS) make for an apt depiction of the churning concerns the national academic mandates continue to elicit. A year after we first reported on the controversy spurred by its widespread adoption — CCSS is now implemented in some form in 45 states, including Delaware, New Jersey and Pennsylvania — supporters and opponents are firmly rooted in their stances.
“It’s not a radical system,” says Maurice J. Elias, PhD, a psychology professor at Rutgers University and Edutopia.com blogger. “It does really make sense in some ways.” CCSS unifies a set of K-12 language arts and math teaching standards with the hopes of producing high school graduates better prepared to succeed in a globally competitive world.
While outcome-based education has been in use since the Clinton administration, CCSS is different because it is much more detailed, with a very specific sequence, Elias explains. He posits that the way the standards were introduced in 2010 instilled lingering worries: States initially felt very strong pressure from the federal government to sign on, he says, adding “Political and money factors led to a steamroller effect.”
“It was shocking that such a complete overhaul was taking place,” says Brandon Bushong, a parent detractor from Wilmington, DE. Cheryl Boise, a founding member of Pennsylvanians Against Common Core, is just as uneasy: “There are more questions than there are good answers.”
Common Core pros
Consistency. Common Core standards have been adopted nearly nationwide, which eliminates educational discrepancies from district to district and state to state. Therefore, kids who move anywhere should be in step with the other students at their new school — an advantage Elias calls the initiative’s main asset.
District-by-district customization. “The Common Core standards are the guidelines,” says Susan Bunting, EdD, superintendent of the Indian River School District in Selbyville, DE. Specific curricula are up to the individual districts and schools, so instruction and texts are locally determined. “We have committees that include parents who choose textbooks. None of that has changed,” she explains.
Rigor. Common Core proponents use the word “rigorous” to describe the standards, developed to “pursue conceptual understanding, procedural skills and fluency, and application with equal intensity.” According to Bunting, the new curriculum provides a much greater transfer into real-world situations: “Rote learning is out of date.” The standards are designed to teach deep reading and analysis, “not the regurgitation of info to get a student through the test,” she says.
Common Core concerns
Does it do what it promises? CCSS is new enough that its success is as yet unproved. “There’s no great evidence that this [curriculum] is better,” says Bushong. Elias believes it will take a good 12 years, as long as a student’s road from 1st grade to high school graduation, to fairly evaluate the system.
Developmental issues. While Elias doesn’t think the standards are impossible, they rely on complex, evidence-based texts and practices and concentrate a greater focus on fewer topics, which he says may ask some students, especially those in early grades, “to accelerate at a rate that is not developmentally reasonable.”
Parental input. Because of the “top-down approach” of the Common Core coming from the federal government, some parents fear that they’ve lost the ability to participate in their child’s education. “This is a highly defined bureaucratic structure,” says Boise. “Learning [should not be] a bureaucratic process.”
Testing. The issue for many parents is less the Common Core itself than the annual testing regimen connected to it, says Elias: “We’ve created a high-stakes environment for these tests that makes no sense. There’s no reason why we should be testing kids every year. This benefits only the testing services,” as well as the districts that evaluate teachers based on student test results. A small cadre of parents do exercise their right to opt their kids out of taking standardized tests each year, but Elias theorizes that “if all parents opted out from testing, the whole system would crumble.”
Data mining. Under CCSS, when children sit for tests, their demographic data is collected and connected to their scores. It has been rumored that everything from religious affiliation to school bus stop location is collected. Bunting assures that the data is used internally for the children’s good, but many parents fear that perhaps Big Brother is keeping tabs on their kids.
“There are always going to be growing pains as you transition to something new,” says Bunting, who openly welcomes parent questions and comments about CCSS. That’s an approach Bushong supports: “If you’re concerned, speak out,” he advises.
Suzanne Koup-Larsen is a contributing writer to MetroKids.