The Common Core State Standard is a set of academic standards in Mathematics and English Language Literacy. State education standard have been around since the early 1990’s. By the early 2000’s, every state had developed its own definition of proficiency. The CCSS was then developed in 2009 for the lack of standardization. According to the Orange County Department of Education, the overarching goals of the common core are to ensure that students are, “Meeting college expectations prepared to succeed in our global economy and society; Provide rigorous content; Applications of higher knowledge.
Those who are in favor of CCSS as seen in Gary Boulards “The Common Good?”, argue that, “The CCSS prepare students for a competitive global economy.” The second argument is, “The CCSS have been designed to leave room for tailoring.” On the contrary, some argue that, “The CCSS does not guarantee improvements in testing on a global scale.” Secondly, they argue “The CCSS cannot be tailored to all the diverse populations of our nation.” I believe the implementation of a national academic standard is a positive step, but the CCSS benefits some political groups and important human aspects of education will suffer unless it is revised.
Those who argue that the CCSS prepares students for the global economy believe in the importance of giving children top quality education. The U.S. lags behind other developed countries in educational achievement as measured by international assessments, “Making it increasingly difficult for Americans to participate in the global economy.” It is believed that the CCSS are an important step in bringing the education system back on par with those of other countries so that American workers are prepared to thrive.
On the other hand, there is the argument that no two people are the same and no two school districts are exactly the same. States across the U.S. differ as well. No two people learn to the same degree in the same manner. Dave Stuart Jr, a high school teacher, explains the skills CCSS does not adapt. “The Common Core State Standards for literacy were intentionally designed with a “less is more” ethos. Despite that, there’s still too many of them for average teachers like me to implement effectively. That’s why I cut them, choosing to achieve excellence with a few skills and strategies rather than achieve mediocrity with them all.”With this in mind, Common Core centralizes decisions as to whether and when to use lectures, reading material, video, computer, etc. It leaves little room for tailoring an educational program to the needs of any given school district in the country.
A child’s educations is definitely a priority and having every child learn the same content sounds wonderful and achievable. Contrarily, I do not completely agree with the ways in which the CCSS tries to accomplish this goal. Those who completely agree with the CCSS tend to sugar coat the ways in which Constructivism is being applied in classroom settings. Myree Conway, pro-common core, states, “If you are a teacher who poses challenging questions, engages students in classroom discussions, and encourages problem solving and critical thinking, chances are you are ready for this new approach.” Although some argue that the CCSS promotes critical thinking skills and student-centered learning reduces the quality of education and student learning, engagement, and success. The impact is also on student psychological well-being: Something needed to truly learn.