On the Common Core website, the first headline a visitor sees says, "Preparing America's Student's for Success." Below the headline, there is a diagram that leads to more information on why Common Core is important, understanding how the core was created, and even a link to view all common core standards. Information about Common Core is readily available, and I would even argue that it is far more accessible than past curriculum. Regardless, Common Core has received much negative feedback. In this blog post, I am going to explore the goals and mission of the Common Core State Standards, and discuss the implications of this new curriculum on our schools and students.
Work on the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) began in 2009 by state leaders in 48 states, two territories, and Washington D.C. The leaders found a need to create consistent, real-world learning goals so that all students in the United States would be prepared for college, career, and life. They wanted to create standards that would be uniform throughout the entire country, so that all states would have the same definition of proficiency. The standards were informed by teachers, school leaders, the public, and current best state standards. The work continued for several years, and today, 42 states, Washington D.C., and four territories have adopted the curriculum. The main goal is that by the time a student graduates high school, they will be proficient in all CCSS, ensuring that they will have the skills and knowledge to be successful in college or in a career. Since then, many organizations have backed the CCSS initiative. The NEA (National Education Association) believes that the standards have the potential to provide a challenging and complete education for all children. The NEA also discusses the goals of the CCSS, and explains, "The goal of the Common Core State Standards is to provide a clear, consistent understanding of what students are expected to learn, so teachers and parents know what they need to do to help them. The standards are designed to be robust and relevant to the real world, reflecting the knowledge and skills that young people need for success in college and careers." Another powerful organization in education, the American Federation of Teachers explains that, "if implemented carefully and with the needed supports and resources, these new standards will help improve education for all students."
The CCSS were created and designed with a great deal of thought and effort. Much research was done in the process to ensure that the standards were meeting the goals and needs of the students they are meant to serve. As a young adult, I can speak to the fact that the job world is becoming increasingly more demanding, and finding a job is no easy task. The creators of CCSS had this in mind as they developed the standards. The ultimate goal of the new standards is to ensure that when a student finish high school, he or she can and will be successful as they move forward. If standards don't change and develop, students won't be able to meet the needs and demands of the work force either. While some states and schools absolutely had excellent standards and have been doing a solid job educating students for life after high school, many states were falling behind. This is apparent when looking at the achievement gap in this country. Although I do not agree with all common core methods, I do agree that a change was needed, and uniform standards and expectations throughout the United States of America's schools is very important.
As a teacher, I have worked both with Common Core, and with more traditional curriculum. In all honestly, I prefer the CCSS. There are a vast amount of resources available, and standards and curriculum are easily accessible. I enjoy the fact that so many states have adopted the curriculum, because it opens so many more doors and helps to make a great number of resources available. The old saying, "two heads are better than one," is true here; with the majority of the states in the U.S. using this curriculum, it is easy to find exciting CCSS aligned resources when browsing the web or to chat with another teacher in another state who may have more experience with CC already.
One area I would like to address, where much gripe comes from, is the math curriculum. I have heard countless parents complain about the confusing new ways that math is being taught. As a teacher, I understand both sides of the argument. While traditional math seems "easier" to adults who have never learned Common Core, it does not mean that it is the only good way to teach. So many students have difficulty learning math. Common Core offers methods that make sense to many students. For example, Common Core is very hands on and visual. Instead of simply memorizing the multiplication chart in 3rd grade and spitting out the answers when asked, children now are expected to be able to show how they thought about the answer. I was just working with a student who told me she really didn't understand multiplication, and couldn't memorize things easily. After a few minutes, she picked up her pencil and drew three dots. She then proceeded to draw 5 lines on each dot. Finally, she counted all the lines, and exclaimed that she knew the answer: 3 times 5 is 15! I was amazed. I hadn't said a word to her in all this time. She had used a method that I had never been taught in school, and she didn't memorize the answer, but she actually understood how she got the answer. Now I realize not every child is the same, and many students prefer to memorize information and speed through math quickly. But let me ask you: Would you prefer that your child be able to spit out information and then forget it just as quickly, or would you prefer that your child truly understand something, and know how to apply their thinking in other areas of life?
One area I would like to address, where much gripe comes from, is the math curriculum. I have heard countless parents complain about the confusing new ways that math is being taught. As a teacher, I understand both sides of the argument. While traditional math seems "easier" to adults who have never learned Common Core, it does not mean that it is the only good way to teach. So many students have difficulty learning math. Common Core offers methods that make sense to many students. For example, Common Core is very hands on and visual. Instead of simply memorizing the multiplication chart in 3rd grade and spitting out the answers when asked, children now are expected to be able to show how they thought about the answer. I was just working with a student who told me she really didn't understand multiplication, and couldn't memorize things easily. After a few minutes, she picked up her pencil and drew three dots. She then proceeded to draw 5 lines on each dot. Finally, she counted all the lines, and exclaimed that she knew the answer: 3 times 5 is 15! I was amazed. I hadn't said a word to her in all this time. She had used a method that I had never been taught in school, and she didn't memorize the answer, but she actually understood how she got the answer. Now I realize not every child is the same, and many students prefer to memorize information and speed through math quickly. But let me ask you: Would you prefer that your child be able to spit out information and then forget it just as quickly, or would you prefer that your child truly understand something, and know how to apply their thinking in other areas of life?
According to the Council of Chief State School Officers(CCSS), "states have chosen to upgrade their standards by adopting and implementing either the Common Core State Standards or other college- and career-ready standards. As a result, students are gaining a deeper understanding of subject matter, are learning to think critically, and are applying their learning to real-world problems." The Common Core State Standards are progressive and different. They require parents, teachers, and students collaborate and put in extra time and energy. But is that such a bad thing? I think, at the end of the day, it is time for change, and it is time we ensure that all students in our country are receiving a good education, backed by solid, research proven curriculum that prepares students for the real world.
In addition to my research on the CCSS, I visited several international organizations' websites. I found a great deal of interesting information that doesn't specifically fit into my above post, but that I would like to share. When visiting the UNESCO site, I found that the organization has recently launched an online training program to support people who work with students with autism spectrum disorder, learning disabilities, and/or mental health problems. They believe that there is not enough training available, and are doing their part to help by providing free, easily accessible training. I then visited the UNICEF page, and read about the disadvantage that girls have in education. UNICEF reported that in 2013, 31 million girls at primary school age, and 32 million girls at lower secondary school age were not in school. UNICEF is working with various organizations to reach and empower girls so that they can get the education that they deserve. On the OECD site, I read about technology and education. They reported that although many schools have begun relying heavily on technology in the classroom, it is not making a significance difference in learning outcomes. Schools need to find a better approach to using technology in the classroom in order for it to be a good, powerful tool. I found that OECD is working on an Innovative Learning Environment Project, where they are studying the conditions and dynamics that help young people to learn best. On the Global Partnership for Education page, I read about how investing in education is the single best way to reduce poverty. Even if students left school with only a basic reading level, 171 million people could have the potential to be raised out of poverty. All of the sites and organizations I learned about had intriguing information that only sparks my desire to learn more and to continue to be an advocate for education.
About the Standards. (n.d.). Retrieved September 23, 2015, from http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/
Background on Common Core State Standards. (n.d.). Retrieved September 23, 2015, from http://www.nea.org/home/56612.htm
Common Core State Standards. (n.d.). Retrieved September 23, 2015, from http://www.aft.org/position/common-core-state-standards
Education. (n.d.). Retrieved September 23, 2015, from http://www.oecd.org/education
Education for the 21st Century. (n.d.). Retrieved September 23, 2015, from http://en.unesco.org/themes/education-21st-century
Education: Global Partnership for Education. (n.d.). Retrieved September 23, 2015, from http://www.globalpartnership.org/education
Girls Education and Gender Equality. (n.d.). Retrieved September 23, 2015, from http://www.unicef.org/education/bege_70640.html
In addition to my research on the CCSS, I visited several international organizations' websites. I found a great deal of interesting information that doesn't specifically fit into my above post, but that I would like to share. When visiting the UNESCO site, I found that the organization has recently launched an online training program to support people who work with students with autism spectrum disorder, learning disabilities, and/or mental health problems. They believe that there is not enough training available, and are doing their part to help by providing free, easily accessible training. I then visited the UNICEF page, and read about the disadvantage that girls have in education. UNICEF reported that in 2013, 31 million girls at primary school age, and 32 million girls at lower secondary school age were not in school. UNICEF is working with various organizations to reach and empower girls so that they can get the education that they deserve. On the OECD site, I read about technology and education. They reported that although many schools have begun relying heavily on technology in the classroom, it is not making a significance difference in learning outcomes. Schools need to find a better approach to using technology in the classroom in order for it to be a good, powerful tool. I found that OECD is working on an Innovative Learning Environment Project, where they are studying the conditions and dynamics that help young people to learn best. On the Global Partnership for Education page, I read about how investing in education is the single best way to reduce poverty. Even if students left school with only a basic reading level, 171 million people could have the potential to be raised out of poverty. All of the sites and organizations I learned about had intriguing information that only sparks my desire to learn more and to continue to be an advocate for education.
About the Standards. (n.d.). Retrieved September 23, 2015, from http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/
Background on Common Core State Standards. (n.d.). Retrieved September 23, 2015, from http://www.nea.org/home/56612.htm
Common Core State Standards. (n.d.). Retrieved September 23, 2015, from http://www.aft.org/position/common-core-state-standards
Education. (n.d.). Retrieved September 23, 2015, from http://www.oecd.org/education
Education for the 21st Century. (n.d.). Retrieved September 23, 2015, from http://en.unesco.org/themes/education-21st-century
Education: Global Partnership for Education. (n.d.). Retrieved September 23, 2015, from http://www.globalpartnership.org/education
Girls Education and Gender Equality. (n.d.). Retrieved September 23, 2015, from http://www.unicef.org/education/bege_70640.html
Innovative Learning Environments - OECD. (n.d.). Retrieved September 23, 2015, from http://www.oecd.org/edu/ceri/innovativelearningenvironments.htm
Standards, Assessment & Accountability. (n.d.). Retrieved September 23, 2015, fromhttp://www.ccsso.org/What_We_Do/Standards_Assessment_and_Accountability
