Tuesday, October 14, 2014

Not So Rotten: Why I Like the Common Core

This may be an unpopular thing for me to say, but I am a teacher, a conservative, and I don't hate the Common Core. 

The Common Core State Standards (CCSS) are simply the next educational trend to come down the pike. It is superior to some previous education initiatives and, perhaps, inferior to others. I am not naïve enough to believe that the CCSS is the answer to all of the problems plaguing public schools today; nevertheless, I do see several advantages.

Lately there has been a lot of discussion about the Common Core. Many people have weighed in on the discussion and have offered their ardent opinions (no experience or expertise necessary) as to why the standards are good or bad. I have seen critiques based on blatantly false information (No, the CCSS is not eliminating the classics from school curriculum; on the contrary, many classic novels and primary source documents are among the recommended reading in the CCSS English Language Arts Appendices). I have also read concerns about the level of federal involvement, the difficulty of the CCSS at the elementary level, the poor implementation of standards, and various problems with CCSS curriculum and assessments. I cannot attest to the validity of all of these arguments, and I cannot address the myriad issues that have been expressed regarding the mathematics standards. However, I can describe my experience with the English Language Arts Literacy standards for History/ Social Studies, and my impression of the CCSS in general.

1. The Common Core allows teachers more freedom in the classroom.

I am a “highly qualified” professional educator. I appreciate being trusted to make decisions regarding curriculum and instruction in my classroom. The Common Core affords me that opportunity. Contrary to criticisms that the CCSS impose a “one-size-fits-all” curriculum on states, and dictate what teachers ought to teach, I find that the CCSS allow me greater freedom as an educator. 

Previous social studies standards had an overabundance of prescribed topics and themes, often with a fixed chronological order. Social studies content has great breadth; under the old standards, teachers struggled to teach all the required topics, at the expense of reaching any significant level of depth. Depth and, by default, engagement and critical thinking were often sacrificed as teachers rushed through the content. Teachers resorted to bombarding students with incomprehensible facts and dates—boring and overwhelming the majority of them. 

Rather than require teachers to cover a broad range of topics, the Common Core, as applied to social studies, has three areas of emphasis: reading, writing, and speaking and listening.  In the CCSS, students are taught to read and understand informational texts, think critically, support arguments with evidence, articulate ideas, and respond thoughtfully to others’ ideas through the medium of social studies (or science, or language arts). 

2. The Common Core emphasizes the use of primary sources.

As any social studies teacher knows, the use of primary souces is essential to effective teaching. Primary sources—first-hand historical accounts and documents that were created in the time period to which they refer—are uncolored by modern interpretations or biases. They also give the reader the opportunity to gain a first-hand perspective of the people who actually experienced historical events. When using primary sources, students are forced to draw their own conclusions, rather than the sometimes shallow, cookie cutter explanations and interpretations offered by many textbooks. The CCSS recommends the use of primary documents in the social studies classroom, some of the recommended documents include: Winston Churchill’s speech “Blood, Toil, Tears, and Sweat,” the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution, and the Gettysburg Address. 

3. The Common Core State Standards begin with what students ought to know upon graduation from high school and work backwards.

This particular feature of the Common Core has been criticized by many elementary school teachers. I am not an elementary school teacher, and I cannot confirm the appropriateness of the CCSS at the elementary level, one way or the other. However, I do believe that the basic premise of starting at high school and working backwards is sound. It is similar to “Backward Design,” an instructional method that most teachers are taught in their teacher education courses, regardless of grade level. In Backward Design, teachers start by focusing on the ultimate knowledge students need to learn in a particular unit. Teachers then work backwards by determining how to assess whether or not the objective has been met, and devising lessons to move students toward the objective. After all, if you were planning a road trip you would first need to determine where you were going before you could decide how to get there. If high school graduation and “college and career readiness” is the ultimate goal of our school systems, it makes sense that we start with the ultimate objective and  work in reverse to determine what students need to learn at each grade along the way.

4. The Common Core focuses on college and career readiness.

Like it or not, our schools are failing miserably in preparing our children for life after high school. Too many students leave high school with sub-par academic skills and are wholly unprepared for the sheer amount of reading and writing required by even basic freshmen level courses. The academic gap between senior year of high school and freshmen year of college is proving too wide for many students to bridge. Similarly, whether they choose to pursue college or enter the workforce immediately after graduation, high school graduates are fundamentally lacking in critical skills. The CCSS stress the importance of critical thinking, problem solving, evidence-based arguments, speaking and listening skills, and the reading of informational texts (ie: not just stories).

5. The Common Core concentrates on critical thinking.

Too often in my classroom, I am faced with students who simply want to know where to find the answer. They don’t want to engage their brains, they don’t want to investigate or discover, they simply want to skim a textbook for a keyword and find a “fill-in-the-blank” answer. While this is partly due to stereotypical adolescent laziness, it is also due to flaws in our educational model. Students are bombarded with so much information (see point #1) that there is little time for true engagement with the material. Teachers are so concerned with covering content and increasing test scores, that there is no time left for authentic learning. In my experience, when presented with an engaging topic and a stimulating question, students’ love of learning is re-awakened. Junior high students love to talk. They love to debate and argue. The Common Core emphasizes classroom discourse. Students are encouraged to wrestle with difficult topics, form opinions based on textual evidence, express those opinions effectively in written and oral form, listen to others’ opinions, and respond thoughtfully and respectfully. They are encouraged to evaluate information, draw conclusions, create analogies and examples, design and test solutions, discuss, debate, and THINK!

6. The Common Core is more challenging, and sets the bar higher, than many current academic standards.

An unfortunate side-effect of well-intentioned efforts like full-inclusion and No Child Left Behind, has led to a “dumbing-down” of curriculum. Really excellent teachers are able to effectively differentiate instruction and meet the needs of every student. However, most teachers are over-worked and underpaid. Teachers are expected to teach 30 students ranging in ability from high needs special education student to ELL student to gifted and talented student, and maintain classroom discipline—often with inadequate planning time, poor resources and little support. What’s more, issuing a failing grade is heavily frowned upon. In many schools, teachers are forced to justify failing a student through documentation of parent phone calls, conferences, academic interventions, etc. No Child Left Behind adds additional pressure to pass standardized tests through federal financial incentives. All this, has led to widespread teacher burnout and, in some instances, to a reduction in rigor. An overworked teacher may make schoolwork easier so as to accommodate poorly performing students. A district faced with cuts in federal funding may opt for easier standardized tests to ensure that more students demonstrate academic progress. The CCSS sets high standards for all schools to meet.

7. The Common Core State Standards are the same in all states (that have adopted them).

This aspect of the Common Core has garnered a great deal of criticism, particularly among conservatives. Personally, I prefer the federal government to have minimal involvement in education, and believe that past federal initiatives (No Child Left Behind) have often been detrimental to the quality of American education. However, like it or not, the federal government is already involved in our schools through NCLB, Title I, and a host of other programs linked to federal funding. The Common Core is not a federally mandated curriculum. States have many educational choices—states can choose whether or not to adopt the CCS, how and when to implement the standards, and what specific curriculum to employ. All the CCSS is, is a set of basic standards that delineate what all American students should be able to reach in order to be considered proficient at a given grade level. 

These type of consistent standards are sorely overdue. What students learn in 5th grade in Alabama is not what students learn in 5th grade in Minnesota. This can be problematic when students move from one state to another and are faced with an increase in rigor. Also, if the gap in rigor continues through high school, a high school diploma in California is not equal a high school diploma in Massachusetts. The reverberations of these gaps are even found at the college level and beyond.

As I stated previously, the Common Core is far from perfect and is certainly not an instant fix for our struggling school system. However, there are many positive aspects that I believe have been ignored in all the political posturing, misinformation, and alarmism that have surrounded them.

For more information, or read the standards for yourself. Please visit the CCSS website. 


No comments:

Post a Comment