My previous post contained an incorrect URL. Sorry. Here's another try.
Some physics teachers may be interested in a recent post "National
Education Standards for the United States?" [Hake (2009)].
The abstract reads:
****************************************
ABSTRACT: The "Common Core State Standards Initiative" (CCSSI),
aimed at developing National Education Standards (NES) for the U.S.,
has recently been widely reported in the media, the Academic
Discussion List sphere (ADLsphere), and the Blogosphere. Thus far,
the reaction to the CCSSI & NES has been mostly negative [e.g.,
Brady, Clement, Haim, Horton, Ohanian, Marshak, Meier, Taylor, and
Urner; with a few positive exceptions [Derbes, Korsunsky,
Weingarten]. Adding to the positive are Schmidt, Houang, & Shakrani
(2009) who, in a report "International Lessons About National
Standards": (a) make the case for NES in the U.S., based on an
in-depth study of NES in 10 other countries: Russia, France, Brazil,
Canada, China, India, Germany, South Korea, Singapore, and the
Netherlands, which "are making significant improvement in mathematics
and science achievement and operate along a spectrum of national and
local educational control"; (b) distill from their international
study one important lesson: "It's NOT true that national standards
portend loss of local control," plus four recommendations for the
U.S. national standards effort; and (c) conclude: "We know what the
standards of top-achieving nations look like. They are focused,
coherent, and rigorous. And they're that way because the systems
themselves are focused and coherent. It's time to get on the national
standards bandwagon. . . . . The process of establishing national
standards will surely require time, patience, and a great deal of
compromise. But we postpone the inevitable at our peril."
****************************************