Last month, I wrote a blog post about the merits and shortcomings of standardized testing in the U.S., hoping to address fundamental issues with testing infrastructure and highlight some areas of improvement. Looking back, though, I feel it was remiss to discuss standardized tests without mentioning their inextricable connection to a centerpiece American educational policy: the Common Core Standards initiative.
Everybody knows that Common Core is a hot-button topic – it’s talked about at practically every major, televised political event. But what is less known about the 2009 initiative is the role it’s played in crafting school-wide curriculums, and how it’s shaped several key policy decisions. So this week, I’ve decided to take an in-depth into the controversies of Common Core and assess its impacts on the educational system.
Origins
Founded in 2009, the Common Core Standards Initiative is a rigorous set of mathematical and literacy goals which “[outlines] what a student should know and be able to do at the end of each grade.” The program – sponsored by the National Governors Association – was designed to ensure adequate preparation for students to pursue higher education or enter the work force.
Common Core works closely with Race to the Top, an educational grant that incentivizes school reforms meeting government criteria through capital funding. Both agendas have stimulated federal involvement in schooling nationwide, establishing greater use of data systems, professor and student feedback, and standardized curriculums.
Today, 42 states – as well as Washington D.C. – have adopted Common Core standards. However, Common Core has faced recent backlash from some state governments who believe that its rigid structure has undermined the influence of local governments on their school districts.
Creating Tangible Standards
Over the past decade, test scores in the U.S. have stalled dramatically. Per a study published in 2011 by Harvard’s Program on Education, “the overall rate of proficiency in reading for U. S. students [was] 31%, [placing] the U. S. 17th among the nations.” The story with math is even worse; on the International Student Assessment, an internationally administered exam that tests 15 year old’s mathematical skills, reading comprehension, and scientific literacy, the U.S. ranked 37th worldwide in average math scores.
Common Core has helped identify these critical deficiencies in math and reading among students, which, in the future, could be highly valuable in addressing educational growth. It has also produced accountability in education from school administrators and faculty.
There is a clear misconception about the values of Common Core standards. People often associate Common Core with rote, mechanical analysis, when in fact it has made consistent efforts to engender a more holistic skill set. “When I look at the standards, there is a push away from some of the basic, repetitive skills and a push toward critical thinking,” says John Spencer, educator and author. “I see less “identify” and more “evaluate and analyze.”
Drawbacks of Common Core
Although Common Core was developed to help stabilize fluctuating educational standards, it has instead created an imbalance in the subject material taught in schools, both at the primary and secondary level. In order to accommodate Common Core’s robust course material, many school districts have slashed their electives, including music and drawing classes. This alarming trend poses a serious problem for students. Arts not only serve as a creative outlets for students, but also foster imaginative thinking and individuality, skills that cannot be taught in a traditional classroom setting.
Additionally, it is still difficult to gauge if student performance has actually improved under Common Core. According to research conducted by the Pew Research Center, scores in math declined from 2013 to 2015, while English marks remained the same over the same period. This is especially troubling considering the wide variability in state benchmarks for “adequate” test scores.
So, why is this the case?
Part of the answer is just that – variability. With substantial differences in state math and literacy expectations, it’s hard to accurately evaluate students’ progress in English and math until they take national exams.
More concerning, however, is the unprofessional relationship between policy makers and large educational corporations. As I touched upon in a previous blog post, companies like Pearson and McGraw-Hill wield an inordinate amount of power in the education sector, which possibly compromises the validity Common Core curriculums.
What’s Next?
In recent years, Common Core has come under significant fire from both sides of the political aisle. The idea behind Common Core is noble in intent, but many have criticized its implementation and execution.
It’ll be interesting to see how state school systems respond to Common Core in the coming years, particularly as more data is gathered about its effectiveness in improving test scores. For now though, it’s clear that Common Core must rethink its structure and methodology if it wants to stick around long-term.