What standards can't do

As much as supporters emphasize their democratic origins, the Common Core math standards were essentially crafted by three men, writes Sarah Garland for The Hechinger Report. Some argue this has improved them. Backlash against them has annoyed and baffled their authors, who argue CCSS math has little fuzziness. Students must memorize times tables and be able to undertake "meat-and-potatoes" problems by third grade, for example -- requirements many so-called Common Core curricula ignore. One advisor to the CCSS process blames poor reception on bad -- and ubiquitous -- textbooks that publishers are reluctant to change. Regardless, public education still struggles to lift the academic achievement of disadvantaged students and American students in general. The drafters of the math standards now acknowledge better standards aren't enough; curricula must also change. For American public schooling to transform as it should, curricula, textbooks, and teaching must also transform. And that is the crux: As powerful in reshaping American classrooms as the standards could be, they don't include lesson plans, teaching methods, or alternative teaching strategies. Even as opponents cry federal overreach, the standards cannot ensure textbook publishers, test makers, superintendents, principals, and teachers will interpret them in ways that improve American public education. More

Source:  Public Education News Blast

Published by LEAP

Los Angeles Education Partnership (LAEP) is an education support organization that works as a collaborative partner in high-poverty communities.