Some subscribers to Phys-L might be interested in a recent post "The
Contentious Common Core Controversy" [Hake (2013)]. The abstract
reads:
ABSTRACT: The Common Core State Standards (CCSS)
<http://www.corestandards.org/> have engendered considerable
controversy - see e.g., "Resistance to Common Core standards growing"
[Strauss (2013)] at <http://wapo.st/Y7kwdK>. Stimulated by Diane
Ravitch's (2013) admonition at <http://bit.ly/XGpEpK> "to think
critically about the standards," I searched Google for "Common Core
State Standards" to obtain 3,010,000 hits at <http://bit.ly/15QLBZR>
on 03 March 2013 10:15-0800. Careful consideration of all those leads
me to suggest the following sixteen as especially valuable:
ANTI- CCSS
1. "Eight problems with Common Core Standards" [Brady (2012)] at
<http://wapo.st/15Z4kTg>.
PRO-CCSS
9. "Creating a Comprehensive System for Evaluating and Supporting
Effective Teaching" [Darling-Hammond et al. (2012)] at
<http://stanford.io/Wj1w1E>;
12. "What English classes should look like in Common Core era" [Jago (2013)] at
<http://wapo.st/XdE2cM>;
13. "International Lessons About National Standards" [Schmidt,
Houang, & Shakrani (2009)] at <http://bit.ly/xPjmJ4>.
14. "Seizing the Moment for Mathematics" [Schmidt (2012)] at
<http://bit.ly/Z0BbS2>;
15. "On Naked Standards - And Free Curriculum" Tucker (2012) at
<http://bit.ly/Y531xl>;
16. "The Case for National Standards" [Weingarten (2009)] at
<http://wapo.st/XbIJ6K>.
For an earlier review of the pros and cons of the Common Core
Standards see "National Education Standards for the United States?"
[Hake (2009)] at <http://bit.ly/Z0DMLK>. In a subsequent post I shall
discuss the "Next Generation Science Standards" (NGSS)
<http://bit.ly/y1gJPx> and their relationship to the "Common Core
State Standards."
***************************************************
"I have come to the conclusion that the Common Core standards effort
is fundamentally flawed by the process with which they have been
foisted upon the nation. . . . . They were developed by an
organization called Achieve and the National Governors Association
both of which were generously funded by the Gates Foundation. . . . .
Their creation was neither grassroots nor did it emanate from the
states. . . . . . it was well understood by states that they would
not be eligible for Race to the Top funding unless they adopted the
Common Core standards. . . . . "
- Diane Ravitch (2013) at <http://bit.ly/XGpEpK>
"The countries that consistently outperform the United States on
international assessments all have national standards, with core
curriculum, assessments and time for professional development for
teachers based on those standards. . . . . Should fate, as determined
by a student's Zip code, dictate how much algebra he or she is
taught? . . . . Education is a local issue, but there is a body of
knowledge about what children should know and be able to do that
should guide decisions about curriculum and testing."
- Randi Weingarten (2009), president of the American Federation of
Teachers at <http://wapo.st/XbIJ6K>.
"So much orchestrated attention is being showered on the Common Core
Standards, the main reason for poor student performance is being
ignored - a level of childhood poverty the consequences of which no
amount of schooling can effectively counter."
- Marion Brady (2012) at <http://wapo.st/15Z4kTg>.
REFERENCES [URL shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 03 March 2013.]
Hake, R.R. 2013. " The Contentious Common Core Controversy," online
on the OPEN! AERA-H archives at <http://bit.ly/Y7ocMv>. Post of 3 Mar
2013 11:01:22 to AERA-H and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the
complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists and
are also on my blog "Hake'sEdStuff" at <http://bit.ly/Z7TV0W> with a
provision for comments.