Common Core. Such a simple term. Should we care about it?
Common Core State Standards (CCSS) for English Language Arts & Literacy is a culmination of an extended broad-based movement to create a level of standard in schools across the United States. This new standard, now adopted by 46 states across the country, is an effort to help ensure that all students are career and college ready in literacy no later than the end of high school.
As with anything that the government tries to do, there has been an outcry from the fringe. I’m not here to take sides; I am here to deliver the facts—you can decide whether this will be good for our new breed of writers and readers.
The mission statement directly from the CCSS website is as follows:
“The Common Core State Standards provide a consistent, clear 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 our young people need for success in college and careers. With American students fully prepared for the future, our communities will be best positioned to compete successfully in the global economy.”
This has become such a big deal that Publisher’s Weekly just held a Discussion Series this week in front of a sold-out audience. Why would Publisher’s Weekly be so interested in the outcome of Common Core? There’s a potential to see a big shift in how textbooks are written and distributed, and how students are taught to read and write.
Here’s a sampling of some of the standards of proficiency for grades 9-10 from the corestandards.org website.
- Write arguments to support claims in an analysis of substantive topics or texts, using valid reasoning and relevant and sufficient evidence.
- Write informative/explanatory texts to examine and convey complex ideas, concepts, and information clearly and accurately through the effective selection, organization, and analysis of content.
- Gather relevant information from multiple authoritative print and digital sources, using advanced searches effectively; assess the usefulness of each source in answering the research question; integrate information into the text selectively to maintain the flow of ideas, avoiding plagiarism and following a standard format for citation.
- Draw evidence from literary or informational texts to support analysis, reflection, and research.
If you have school-aged children in the United States, I think it is important for you to be aware of the processes that shape our kids’ curriculum in writing and reading. If you are reading this blog, you are most likely an author, publisher, or reader. These are the future readers and for many of us, current readers, of what we do every day.
The outcry from the conservative movement is to keep the federal government out of individual lives. It is true that this is a federal program; however, it is up to the states to decide if they will incorporate the standards. There is no requirement to have these standards.
The outcry from the liberal or progressive movement is more specific to the standards. The standards promote the necessary skills to succeed in college or career. In other words, they are training our students to pass tests. According to the CCSS, the initiative “… requires well-researched informational text and readings that engage critical analysis.” Overall, the CCSS materials focus on non-fiction. Reading just the standards highlighted above, you would tend to agree with the focus on non-fiction.
That’s not the case, though. If you drill down into the standards, you will see some very encouraging goals that will help produce great writers and knowledgeable readers:
CCSS.ELA-Literacy.W.9-10.3 Write narratives to develop real or imagined experiences or events using effective technique, well-chosen details, and well-structured event sequences.
- Engage and orient the reader by setting out a problem, situation, or observation, establishing one or multiple point(s) of view, and introducing a narrator and/or characters; create a smooth progression of experiences or events.
- Use narrative techniques, such as dialogue, pacing, description, reflection, and multiple plot lines, to develop experiences, events, and/or characters.
- Use a variety of techniques to sequence events so that they build on one another to create a coherent whole.
- Use precise words and phrases, telling details, and sensory language to convey a vivid picture of the experiences, events, setting, and/or characters.
- Provide a conclusion that follows from and reflects on what is experienced, observed, or resolved over the course of the narrative.
In the end, you can make your personal judgment as to the importance of the standards. There’s no question that anything that can help our kids read and write more should be a good thing. What’s your take? Is this an important issue to you?
While I live in Canada, and so some may say this is not my issue, as a teacher’s assistant for undergrad university students, I have seen firsthand, the effect of poor literacy skills on students’ work. So many could not put together a coherent sentence or a logical argument. I was, quite literally, shocked by what I encountered at that level of education.
Literacy gives an individual the skill to seek out information on their own, to critically analyze what they read, and gives birth to innovative thought. Without it we are at the mercy of leaders with agendas of their own, who have a stake in keeping their ‘subjects’ ignorant. No wonder there are so many leaders in the underdeveloped world that see literacy as a threat. Once a person can read they have access to more than what their ‘leaders’ preach.
Great comment, Yvonne.
You are absolutely right. Unfortunately, it appears that some wish to “dumb down” our youth, or even worse, glorify ignorance. If this set of standards can help, I’m all for it, but only time will tell.
I truly do care about CCSS, having worked in the K-12 system, because my understanding of the true intent of CCSS is not just another set of standards but a way to move toward higher order thinking rather than what can be tested by multiple choice. As with the standards you point out, they are going to allow kids to go deep into their understanding rather than cramming a lot of narrow standards into a speed test.The assessments being developed are very different, much more about how the student reasons to get to an answer. The way I see it, teaching to the test is perfectly fine when the test is designed well and actually assesses what you want the kids to learn–the critical thinking that will set them up to be lifelong learners and able to adapt to a constantly changing world. My concern is that it is not going to be given a chance to be implemented correctly and die before we see the real possible benefits. Thanks for bringing this up, Jim.
You are right on the mark, Krista.
I do see this as a different approach, however, like you, I’m suspect as to the ability to CORRECTLY implement the program.
As with any program, the States that make education a priority, will turn out the best students.
Thanks for such an insightful comment.
If this encourages kids to be more creative and to write more coherently, then I’m all for it. Those kids will be buying our books, one of these days. 😉
Some of them are buying our books already! Thanks for the input.
The problems with “teaching to the test” are legion… It assume all learners are alike, which isn’t so. It assumes all children test equally well – which isn’t so. It removes the ability of a skilled teacher to push students beyond those goals.
There’s also enormous stress on teachers to produce good scores, as their own performance is rated by their students’ performance in many states. That stress gets handed down to students by the teachers. I’ve seen high school students trying to deal with this version of “shit rolls downhill”, and it isn’t pretty.
My wife used to be a high school biology teacher. Now she homeschools our three kids instead. They’ll get a MUCH better education that way.
I can relate, Kevin.
I have a 5 yr old that reads at a 3rd grade level. He’s in pre-kindergarten now and we already see your comments in action. We don’t want to homeschool, but where it wasn’t a consideration before, it is now a topic of conversation.
In the end, I think that if parents can take part in their child’s education and not rely on the “system” to do the dirty work, all our children would be in a better place.
Thanks for sharing you outlook.
Thanks for this post, Jim. I’d been hearing about this, specifically it has been conservative radio host Glen Beck’s latest target (which frankly makes my default position to be 100% for it). He’s raised some concerns regarding this as a chance to collect data for data mining which (if he isn’t FOS as usual) would be a privacy concern. But it sure looks to me like the examples of the standards you’ve given are a good thing. Surely better than the law recently passed in Texas that is supposed to forbid teaching of critical thinking.
You nailed it on the head, Al.
That’s another example of the “dumbing down” of America. If you can teach kids to not “think” then you won’t challenge the idiots who tell you how to think.
It scares me that the reasons against on the “right” are not at all related to education, only privacy, big government and the right to remain ignorant.
Although I no longer teach high school English, I am truly grateful for the CCSS. They go above and beyond typical state stands, and they also help level the playing field. Large school districts can afford better curriculum development than smaller schools. The CCSS do not tell teachers exactly what they must teach. Conservatives who feel that way do not understand what it means to align curriculum with learning standards. One of the many reasons I left teaching was because a pre-packaged video curriculum was bought without any teachers’ input. The CCSS will help ensure better literacy skills for the 21st century, whereas pre-packaged materials made by big companies is about making profit, just like standardized testing is about profits as well. The CCSS allows a more project-driven approach with real-world implications. That’s not to say all schools, administrators, and teachers will implement the standards effectively….
Jeri, thank you for your insight. Having been in the trenches you have seen these actions in play. It’s great to hear your thoughts from a teachers perspective.
As you say, though, the end result will rest in the hands of the people who implement the program. Let’s hope the majority want to improve literacy skills for our future writers and readers.
Jim,
Thank you for the insight into CCSS. I agree that higher standards are called for. My friend told me a story about her son enrolling his senior year in a class called “Life Skills” for easy credit. One of the things they taught was how to sweep a floor. My taxes paid for that. If you don’t teach children to think and to expect more of themselves they will aspire to sweep floors.