Educational reformer Diane Ravitch who is a proponent of educational legislation and standards discusses her criticism below:
Aside from criticism is the anomaly, Massachusetts. As our New York times article we are discussing tomorrow states, "Yet he staunchly defended the effort, saying Massachusetts went through the same pains two decades ago after it adopted new standards, and now consistently scores as high as the top countries do on international measures." However, this took two decades to achieve, and the standards taught today face many issues such as educators who are unaware of how to teach standards effectively, the acquisition of technology, textbooks, and materials that will prepare each student equally for standardized testing. Critics of Common Core advocate this is simply impossible and students will continue to be considered inadequate, especially in lower-income areas where access to materials and technology is limited.
I feel as though the adoption of standards is necessary in order to close the achievement gap between high-income and low-income areas. It goes without saying that students are given more opportunity in high-income areas, than those in low-income areas. It is simply impossible to meet achievement standards with some of the problems these areas, families, and schools face. Furthermore, educators are not equipped yet to teach in alignment with Common Core, and we are seeing students fearful of mathematics and other disciplines. There is a great issue with Common Core, and states such as Oklahoma have already repealed the standards and implemented their own. I am not sure what the real solution would be, but Federal control of education and the equal distribution of funds is a plan that could provide students equal opportunity. Additionally, it is unfair to lower-income areas to meet standards and receive funding if they are not properly prepared to teach Common Core. Common Core in my opinion has done nothing but perpetuate an already existing problem in education, and the legislation was passed almost in secret without the public fully understanding the implications.
Dan, I agree with your stand on Common Core. Although I like the idea of a new way of going about a standardized exams, Common Core is causing more problems than it is eliminating. Besides being created in secret and by people that don't have a degree anywhere close to education, the way Common Core needs to be taken poses many issues for low-income schools. In one of the schools I observed in (Benito Juarez), the school literally has to take up a whole month on testing their students for Common Core because there is only 20 computers in the entire building that contains more than 500 students. Consistently taking students out of their classes to take this exam is not only wasting precious time that can be used towards teaching and learning instead of test-taking for results that have no value behind them. Another issue Common Core has is failing to address the needs of students with special needs, and unfortunately their scores are automatically going to go down, along with many other student's scores because the content is not grade-appropriate. Like any other standardized exam, Common Core had the potential to be something great, and won't be because it was created by people who don't understand the education system and teaching like educators (teachers) do.
ReplyDeleteDan, I really like your insightful post. Although the Common Core standards sound like a great, the standardized testing does not help. I feel as though, who ever created these standards, learned nothing from No Child Left Behind. At the school, I'm doing observation hours, UNO Charter School, they took a month to finish up the testing. My cooperating teacher was upset because it took away from valuable classroom time. I do believe we should have high expectations for our students but not assess them through hard tests. The New York Times article from this week's readings is a great example of how it is failing students from low-income schools.
ReplyDelete