Earlier today, I was interviewed by an AP reporter regarding Common Core. My task was to explain why some teachers dislike it so much. Apparently, educators in DC just love Common Core, and can't understand why so many of us denounce it. I tried to break down the main problems I have found with the standards.
First, when looking at the standards established for K-5, I can see that the breadth of concepts is enormous, while the depth at which these concepts are explored is minuscule. Second, many of these concepts go far beyond the foundational knowledge and skills that educators believe should be the focus at these grade levels. Finally, concepts introduced in these grade levels under CC are not consistent with what we know about cognitive development. In other words, much of the "rigor" introduced is completely lost on students simply because they lack the cognitive mechanisms necessary for those skills.
My solution is simple. If we return to curriculum standards that allow K-5 students to gather strong, foundational knowledge, the sought after "rigor" would be possible in grades 6-12. At this stage, students will have had the chance to develop the cognitive skills and tools needed to take foundational thinking and, through the introduction of higher order thinking skills, transform into the critical thinkers we want to see.
I was asked if I thought the standards within CC were too high. Sensing a tiny trap, I responded by saying that I believed the CC was fraught with what I call "misplaced rigor." It's not that we don't want our students to master the concepts, it's just that they should tackle them at developmentally appropriate moments.
I will update once I have received the finished article.
