Education Reformers Get Smart
Johnathan Chase
"Leadership is not about your title, it’s about your behavior." ~ Robin Sharma
Education reformers have resorted to ever changing claims and adopted "Would you believe...?" tactics from the Maxwell Smart play book in order to "sell" the academic benefits of the Common Core State Standards and the efficacy of standardized assessments that are aligned to them.
When it comes to ensuring that students will be "ready" for college and careers, the PARCC web site confidently explains...
"The PARCC CCR Determinations in ELA/literacy and mathematics describe the academic knowledge, skills, and practices in English language arts/literacy and mathematics students must demonstrate to show they are able to enter directly into and succeed in entry-level, credit-bearing courses and relevant technical courses in those content areas at two- and four-year public institutions of higher education.
The CCR Determination will provide policymakers, educators, parents, and students with a clear signal about the level of academic preparation needed for success in these postsecondary courses. It will provide a strong indicator of college and career readiness that can be used to set performance goals at any level and show progress towards those goals.
Finally, students who attain a CCR Determination in ELA/literacy and/or mathematics will have a tangible benefit – direct entry into relevant entry-level, credit-bearing courses without need for remediation at participating institutions of higher education."
College & Career Ready Determinations and Performance-Level Descriptors
Scroll down to the bottom of the above referenced web page and you will find a link to a PDF document that provides further clarification and a disclaimer regarding the ability of PARCC to reliably determine the "readiness" of students...
"It must be noted that the academic knowledge, skills, and practices defined by the PARCC CCR Determinations in ELA/literacy and mathematics are an essential part of students’ readiness for college and careers, but do not encompass the full range of knowledge, skills, and practices students need for success in postsecondary programs and careers.
For example, Conley (2012) includes learning skills and techniques such as persistence, motivation, and time management as critical elements of college and career readiness, along with transition skills and knowledge such as awareness of postsecondary norms and culture and career awareness. The Association of Career Technical Education (2010) includes employability skills and technical skills, as well as academic skills, as critical components of career readiness.
A comprehensive determination of college and career readiness that would include additional factors such as these is beyond the scope of the PARCC assessments in ELA/literacy and mathematics...
Since these non-academic factors are so important, PARCC College- and Career-Ready Determinations can only provide an estimate of the likelihood that students who earn them have the academic preparation necessary to succeed in entry-level, credit-bearing courses."
When it comes to the role experienced classroom teachers played in the process of writing the Common Core State Standards, the CCSS web site begins by stating they played a critical role, but then goes on to explain that they were part of the "supporting cast" that responded and provided feedback to the lead developers...
"Teachers played a critical role in development. The Common Core State Standards drafting process relied on teachers and standards experts from across the country...They served on the Work Groups and Feedback Groups for the ELA and math standards....Teachers were members of teams states convened to provide regular feedback on drafts of the standards...Teachers provided input on the Common Core State Standards during the two public comment periods."
Common Core State Standards Development Process
2011 Comments made by David Coleman, a chief architect of the Standards provide a more detailed picture regarding the qualifications of the assembled "experts" that were recruited to write the Standards, and the role teachers were expected or permitted to play in the Standards development process...
"I actually think it's really important to try to base what I'm about to say to you on evidence I share with you rather than on the sands of my qualifications...
Student Achievement Partners, all you need to know about us are a couple things. One is we're composed of that collection of unqualified people who were involved in developing the common standards. And our only qualification was our attention to and command of the evidence behind them.
That is, it was our insistence in the standards process that it was not enough to say you wanted to or thought that kids should know these things, that you had to have evidence to support it, frankly because it was our conviction that the only way to get an eraser into the standards writing room was with evidence behind it...
In terms of Student Achievement Partners we're composed largely of those people who were involved in authoring the standards and developing the evidence, even though as it's rightly told, you know, both teachers' unions, teachers from throughout the country, parents, 48 states – everybody was involved in writing these standards...
And now let's get to what do we mean tonight about what you should be doing over the next two years regarding the standards. Let's start with math and then do literacy. I'll probably spend a little more time on literacy because as weak as my qualifications are there, in math they're even more desperate in their lacking."
2011 Keynote Speech, David Coleman - Institute For Learning
When members with actual classroom experience were added to the group, it is clear they mostly played a secondary or supporting role, as open discussion and debate of the Standards was not expected or encouraged.
Participants were welcome to drop comments in the suggestion box, but pencils and erasers were in limited supply, and preferably checked at the door.
While Coleman assured his audience in 2011 that teachers were meaningfully involved in the development of college and career ready standards, apparently many higher education teachers still had not received an invite as late as 2014...
"In sterile, air-conditioned conference rooms across the state, educators will be gathering this summer to prepare for the new standards soon to be in place in most of the nation’s kindergartens through high schools called Common Core.
But the people at these meetings won’t be primary- or secondary-school teachers. They’ll be university professors, planning changes to accommodate the imminent arrival of students being taught in dramatically new ways.
Even though the Common Core has been promoted as a means of better preparing America’s children for college and careers, the people who run higher education have, for the most part, gotten involved only late in the process, they and others say."
Higher education scrambles to get ready for the Common Core, Jon Marcus, 6/24/14
Only a month later, Jon Marcus reported on a new report regarding the lack of preparation and involvement of the higher education community...
"America’s primary and secondary schools may be busy preparing for the onset of the Common Core standards, meant to better prepare students for college, but one key partner isn’t even close to ready: colleges and universities themselves...
Even though the Common Core was meant largely to improve the college readiness of high school graduates, the report says, “Many of those within higher education were not involved in developing or endorsing the Common Core standards and assessments, and have not considered how they might change their own practices to align with this K–12 initiative. Indeed, many are not even aware of the Common Core.”
The findings follow earlier alarms that the people who run higher education have, for the most part, gotten involved only late in the Common Core process...
One reason, it said, is that it’s hard to come up with a single definition of what makes a student ready for college. Another is the huge variety of colleges and universities."
Report: Higher Education Behind On Common Core, Jon Marcus 7/23/14
Little doubt that there was a select and exclusive rather than diverse and inclusive group of "experts" summoned by Coleman to do the “heavy lifting” of developing and drafting the Common Core State Standards.
As this elite Common Core A-Team gathered for their first meeting, I can almost hear their leader rejoicing...
Numerous critics of the Common Core have also expressed concern that the coupling of standardized tests to the Learning Standards for student AND teacher accountability purposes, will negatively impact classroom instruction and lead to more test prep.
According to the "Implementation and Future Work" section of the Common Core web site...
"Teachers know best about what works in the classroom. That is why these standards establish what students need to learn, but do not dictate how teachers should teach. Instead, schools and teachers decide how best to help students reach the standards"
Common Core State Standards: Frequently Asked Questions
Despite this assurance of teacher autonomy, other documents created to provide guidance regarding proper implementation of the Common Core State Standards explain that teachers must “Shift” their instruction so…
"Students build knowledge about the world (domains/ content areas) through TEXT rather than the teacher or activities."
~ Pedagogical Shifts demanded by the Common Core State Standards
Another document describing proper implementation of Common Core instructional “shifts” includes the declarations…
"Students must get smart in Science and Social Studies through reading…Get smarter through text …What is written is much more complex than what we say"
~ Common Core State Standards: Shifts for Students and Parents
While the FAQ section clearly states that the Common Core does not dictate instruction, David "Get Smart" Coleman boldly declared in his 2011 Keynote Speech that the standards are intentionally designed to be measured by tests and teachers are expected to teach to them…
“… these standards are worthy of nothing if the assessments built on them are not worthy of teaching to, period…
There is no force strong enough on this earth to prevent that. There is no amount of hand-waving, there?s no amount of saying, “They teach to the standards, not the test; we don?t do that here.” Whatever...
Tests exert an enormous effect on instructional practice, direct and indirect, and its hence our obligation to make tests that are worthy of that kind of attention.”
