Okay, so I recently posed the question below on my Facebook page, and I have been asked what my opinion was. So, here ya go!
At the risk of igniting a potentially passionate debate, and, in the
wake of my own developing perceptions of NC's common core
initiative, I ask, what are your views of common core? Just
remember to be respectful, please :).
With the question I posted a link to this video of an Arkansas mom who was strongly advocating against common core in her state. This video is one of many voicing credible concerns with Common Core. Kenneth Ye, a high school student in Tennessee, hails Common Core initiatives in his state as "...technically proficient but creatively bankrupt" in this message to his local school board. And Massachusetts is one of a growing number of states to have halted the implementation of Common Core. You can check out Sandra Stotsky's, a former member of the Common Core Validation Committee in MA, views on this initiative over at the Wall Street Journal. NC Lt. Gov. Dan Forest shares a less than favorable opinion of common core, and the Civitas Institute has a page devoted to halting common core in NC. Not everyone is opposed to common core, as a simple google search reveals.
Mike Huckabee encourages Republicans to give it a chance, and Eric The Younger responds to Kenneth Ye's school board plea in his commentary found at the Peach Pundit. Still, the questions remain: What is common core? What is it touted to accomplish? And, as we say in the south, "how's it going"?
Common Core is a list of standards, espoused by the Federal government, that states may elect to adopt. 45 states, including North Carolina, have done so. Understand that the idea of educational standards is not new; in North Carolina the Standard Course of Study outlined state educational guidelines prior to the adoption of common core. Common core is unique, with a mission to create national consistency in curricular expectations and educational outcomes; all of the 45 states that have voluntarily adopted the common core have the same, general educational standards. The second aim of common core was to create a more narrow breadth of educational concepts that are covered in greater depth. Let's dig into that one a bit more.
For YEARS (and I am not exaggerating here), teachers spoke with me at length about their concerns with the "mile wide, inch deep" curriculum that resulted from both the NC Standard Course of Study and district selected curricular materials. They felt that the materials touched on a plethora of topics, without ever attaining solid student understanding in any area, resulting in students that often lacked basic proficiencies. Now, please understand that I am of the mind set that rules either need to make sense or they need to be loosely followed until revised. Sorry folks, but that's just how it is. I encouraged teachers to make certain that their students were proficient with the basics before moving to loftier concepts. I will never forget the wide-eyed, almost child-like amazement in the face of one teacher, in particular, as she asked me something along the lines of, "you mean I can teach this kid what he needs to know rather that what the book says to teach him at this point in the year?" I watched the tension leave out of her body as her bewilderment was replaced by a joyous smile when I said, "Yep! That's exactly what I'm saying." The real kicker...her kids, the ones that she was considering referring for a special education evaluation, began to make progress, some even meeting the next benchmark. My apologies for the lengthy digression. The point I attempt to make is this...that for quite some time the curricular objectives have been vast and shallow, an educational grievance that common core aimed to eliminate.
So, in answering the first two questions, common core was touted as the educational initiative that we'd all been waiting for. One that would erase inter-state educational disparities through the implementation of "common" standards; an initiative that would provide all students with a solidified "core" of academic basics upon which they could build. Now, as ideas go, that one was pretty great, right? Great, yes, but also lofty.
As a student of implementation science (you can find out more about that here), my eye detects some detrimental mistakes. First, if I told you that I was going to make certain that there were national standards for education, such that students in California demonstrated the same proficiencies as those in New York, Tennessee, Florida, North Carolina, and so on, what would you say? As an educator, I can unequivocally say that I would cheer with great enthusiasm!!!
Then, I take it a step further and assure you that my idea will make certain that all students have the basic educational tenets (i.e., proficient readers, writers, mathematicians). No more students graduating high school reading at an 8th grade level. No more students who cannot do basic mathematical calculations (heck, I might even go back to public school given my subpar mathematical prowess). No sir! That will be eliminated because my program is going to focus on making certain all students have a core of basic educational skills that are necessary to survive our collegial, economic, and societal environments. What would you think? I think I should be recommended for a Nobel prize!
My point is this... The ideas of common core are ideal; they are what every American parent and teacher wants for their children and students. We want education in one state to be as rigorous as education in any other state, and we want to make certain that our children and students have a deep, genuine understanding of reading, writing, and mathematics. See that word in italics; that word rigorous? Not once did I mention it when describing common core.
That isn't to say that common core cannot be rigorous. Indeed, Kentucky is one state that appears to be on the right track. This, however, appears to be the exception rather than the norm. You see, common core is a federally supported initiative, and one can be certain that the glorious ideals were tweaked in federal hands. The tweaked version was passed onto each state that signed on; each state received the same version, with the same standards. The general standards may even look the exact same from one state's department of public instruction (DPI) to the next. Don't be deceived. Individual state DPIs placed their marks upon the uniform standards they were given. Their tweaks may not be apparent in the standards written on their websites. No sir, buddy. Their tweaks are in their interpretation of those standards and their implementation of that interpretation across the state.
Do you know what happens next? Individual schools receive the state department's common core standards, accompanied with "trainings" (I use this term very loosely) and guidance for what the delivery of each standard should look like in the classroom. Each school gets the same "training", but, each school is different. The common core must fit into the school's climate, culture, schedule. Each school has different expectations, different values, different methods. If you're following my line of thought, then you know what is going to happen next. More tweaks!! This time at the school level, where designated leaders in each school share their knowledge of common core and district provided guidance with school-based colleagues. No more tweaks? If only.
The common core, with the guidance from the state department of public instruction, the local school district, and the individual school building has now been placed in the hands of teachers. From personal experiences during the months prior to the implementation of common core across a school system, as well as personal conversations with teachers actively hashing it out "in the trenches", let me assure you that "placed" was the appropriate word. Teachers were told what to do (the standards! the core!). They were given a couple of books, a few questionable "trainings", and told to "implement with success"! So, guess what!?!?!?! More tweaks!!! Grade levels met and discussed how the heck they were going to do this in their classrooms. Teachers, taking from the wisdom shared at the grade level meetings, took to their classrooms to make common core a reality.
Again, my point... for any idea to work, for it to truly fulfill the goals for which it was intended, implementation must follow a somewhat standard trajectory. People that have a vested interest (we call those stake holders) need to be included from the ground up, not just once it reaches their state, district, or classroom. Trainings must be thoroughly planned, with consistent follow-up and assessment of what's working and what's not going so well. Revisions are inevitable, yes, but they should be approached with both the events currently unfolding and the final goal in mind. In order to do this, those "in the trenches" must be highly knowledgeable about the initiative they are attempting to implement. Knowledge isn't created in a vacuum, and it isn't best obtained through a book. Knowledge is most powerful through experience and collaboration. Isn't that what this whole education system for our children is about anyway? Adults are no different in the ways in which they acquire and retain knowledge best.
You see, the issue is not with the idea of establishing a national set of educational standards and priorities, and it's most certainly not with the idea of developing a strong base of foundational literacy and mathematical skills upon which students can build increasingly complex webs of understanding. No, the issue is with the implementation of those ideas in each and every classroom. While the standards may be "common" the ways in which they are implemented vary greatly from state to state, district to district, and even from classroom to classroom within a single building. Teachers are so focused on getting this common core thing "right" that the big picture, the one where we nurture children, encourage critical reasoning, and foster a growing sense of personal success, worth and value, that picture is being replaced with teachers that are even more frazzled, even more uncertain, and even more focused on the interpretations of abstract ideals without operational guidelines for how to achieve them.
While I fully support the ideals of a "common core", I am disenchanted with the implementation of those ideals within the state of North Carolina. I hear too many teachers saying that they either don't understand how to fully implement it, or that they ignore the initiative all together. Still others select "the good parts of it" while disregarding the "bad". The saddest part, the part that I'm observing right now, on an excruciatingly personal level, is the educational trajectory of my son.
He's bright. I saw him soar in kindergarten with a phenomenal teacher who made certain her students had a solid foundational basis. He loved school, he loved learning (he even set up his own reading log for the summer), and he made tremendous gains in literacy, math, and writing. Fast forward half of an educational year, and the picture is less bright. I see a child who loathes school, asking me each morning if he has to go. A child who can pass his spelling test on Monday night. One who is bored to tears with his math assignments. Think I'm just "that mom"? The one who believes her child is more gifted than he is? I'm not.
I have spoken with his teacher numerous times. Her pedagogy is sound, her frustrations clear. Regardless of her feelings about the implementation [my word, not her's] of the "new curriculum", it is a format that she must follow. So, to keep my son's educational curiosity peeked, my husband and I offered him an incentive. Ya know, his paycheck for doing something he didn't want to do, much like the paycheck many people receive for doing a job that they are less than interested in. The incentive: do all of your homework for the week on Monday night...spelling, reading, math...do it all. It has to be correct and you have 45 minutes to do it. Do that, and the rest of the week we'll dive into chapter books, we'll schedule trips to the museum, we'll even do that four letter word that is shunned upon in contemporary learning...play! Do you know what happened? My son did all of his homework (other than the redundant, laborious quantity type stuff) in 30 minutes and sometimes less!!
We have since seen our son become once again curious. A sigh of relief and a burst of joy to this mama's heart, to be certain!! While I honestly don't know what the insides of his teacher's day to day classroom operation looks like, I believe that she provides instruction similar to the instruction provided by many other teachers. As I said before, through our many conversations it appears that her pedagogy is sound! What's more, I believe that she tries to add as much "sparkle" (i.e., FUN) whenever she can.
You see, I believe in public education. I've seen the positive impact that public education done right can have on children. I don't believe in mandating new initiatives without training. I don't believe in needlessly adding to the already high amounts of stress that teachers experience. Good or bad, change is hard. I'll give you that. And, as I said, we learn best through experience. However, experience without guidance, experience without training, experience without essential knowledge, well, that's just an experience. It may end up right, it may fall short of victory. You see, I'm the professional that supports the ideals of a common core, but the mama who is beyond disillusioned with North Carolina's implementation.
So, what are your thoughts on common core? Do you have an example of it being done well? Concerns? Make sure to share in the comments section, but, as I reminded on Facebook, be respectful :)!
