Common Core Benefits

In the article, “Quarrel over Common Core: A Pennsylvania Primer” by Randy Kraft (2014), Common Core and the controversy surrounding it are discussed heavily. Kraft’s thesis is to inform the audience about Common Core and explain, impartially, the arguments for and against it. In 2010, Pennsylvania took on the Common Core Standards. These standards were put in place to ensure that students of Pennsylvania were on the same academic level by graduation, and enable them to be better equipped to compete in a global marketplace (p. 1).

Common core standards should be taught in the dominant way to solve the problem first, and when the majority of the students understand the concept, other complex ways to solve the problem can be taught from a variety of choices to choose from. This process is time consuming, but it is a guaranteed way to increase the child’s brain level of understanding, since they are at an age that is still under developed and have trouble solving challenging

Many school districts and teachers have openly stated they do not agree with the Common Core standards and wish they did not have to implement them, but to get the funding the school needs they do. With curriculum changes currently happening all around the country, wherever the reader is have heard about the upcoming changes and have formed their own opinion on it. This is the closest anyone could get to the Colorado situation without actually being there. Common Core is such a controversial topic that many people think over reaches the federal governments grasp on education (CBS, 2014, para. 22). The states hold the power of education, which is why, up until now in history, there have been no national standards.

“A basic Common Core idea is that the standards are supposed to emphasize depth over breadth, ensure students really master concepts, and build on previous learning (“scaffolding” is the term some educators prefer) (Paulson).” In other words, content is not taught by the “mile wide and an inch deep” idiom that represents what has been employed in the past. Instead, students are given more time to learn content specific objectives which provide a more solid foundation for future

In 2009, during Obama’s presidency, Common Core was introduced to the public. According to the Common Core State Standards Initiative, Common Core is “a set of high-quality academic standards in mathematics and English language arts/literacy (ELA)” created “to ensure that all students graduate from high school with the skills and knowledge necessary to succeed in college, career, and life, regardless of where they live.” However, the controversy on Common Core arose as many opponents such as Diane Ravitch found faults in the Common Core standards in the design of the standard and its inability to perform what it is designed to do and the purpose of ststandardized testing. Will the students benefit from these standards or will these standards

Even with all the cons associated with the Common Core Standards, I think the new Common

The United States Common Core State Standards for Education The Common Core State Standards is a controversial subject among educators, parents and general public. What most people do not realize is state standards have been around since the 1900’S, and every state has had their own standards in the early 2000’s. Each state standard has levels or benchmarks, which state what the student should be proficient in per grade level. Most of these standards are in place for third grade through high school.

It was discovered that in education there were certain areas that were universal and common among learning. The two main subjects of concern were English language arts and mathematics. Common core is the new curriculum implemented now in school systems to develop learning. Common Core Standards are a clear set of shared goals and expectations for the knowledge and skills students need in English language arts and mathematics at each grade level so they can be prepared to succeed in college, career, and life. Although, Common Core seems to be here to stay this article addresses concerns in reference to content, instruction, and assessment.

When I talk to my colleagues who are opposed to the common core, many of them say that common core has one size fits all approach that is not effective, applicable and will not work.

When students could be learning meaningful information, teachers are using up that time and giving them tests and exams. Although, we want to be blaming teachers, states and schools are supposed to give out mandatory tests. Who is to blame? According to washington article post, Valerie Strauss, says “The average student in America’s big-city public schools takes some 112 mandatory standardized tests between pre-kindergarten and the end of 12th grade — an average of about eight a year, the study says. ” The state is to blame.

Each student is different and learns differently. There needs to be modifications for special needs students. The price tag of common core is hurting school districts. The anxiety of test taking is causing psychological effects on some students. The communication between parents and children regarding school work is just about lost and teachers now teach towards the test.

High school education is stuck within the constraints of “common core standards”. These

Recently, the Common Core State Standards were developed and kids were going to be tested more than ever. However, all of this education reform has been a failure because our testing scores have not improved, the testing makes children suffer, and it doesn’t improve how teachers teach. Education reforms has had little effect on our testing scores. The average score for a 17 year old student doing a reading test in the beginning of school is 285 and over 40

Therefore, the curriculum will continue to narrow even more than it did under George W. Bush’s No Child Left Behind Program, as a result of the link created between teacher wages and student scores. Furthermore, there will be less time available for the arts, as most arts classes do not have standardized test to evaluate student performance (Ravitch).

In fact 70 percent of educators surveyed in 2015 say that tests are not developmentally appropriate. Furthermore many students suffer a great deal of stress because of standardized tests. What’s most shocking is that instead of lower income schools getting better after tests were implemented they have actually gotten worse. School could essentially be taught by robots. At this point most teachers in my district have to teach a curriculum that is developed by the state instead of their own curriculum.