The Common Good?
I've often wondered why there's so much fighting over Common Core. I mean, is the concept that high school graduates should have certain basic skills and be aware of certain facts in math and English controversial?
Maybe this is the right way to do it, or not. But it's odd how angry Common Core makes people, both on the Right and Left.
I was going to write more about this issue, but I went to the Common Core website and it froze my computer and I had to reboot. So now I'm against it.
posted by LAGuy @ 12:08 AM
6 Comments:
Really? Isn't it obviously both a waste of time and a camel nose?
If they want to set up an association and see how many members they get, wonderful. Have at it. (Say, how's that supreme court case on unions coming?)
But to impose it as law? We have enough stupid teachers, administrators and legislators as it is. Turning even more of them into an even bigger phalanx isn't going to do much good, and will do tremendous harm.
Based solely on who's against it, I'm for it,
We have public education. That's not going away. Once we have that, what's wrong with having standards? Shouldn't students know basic things at certain levels?
What a silly question, LAGuy. If you want to talk about that, make another post.
What we're talking about is having the Office of Obama (Newt Gingrich or Jeb Bush, if you prefer, Anonymous) decide it or having it decided elsewhere. I'd object to having the states decide it, really. It's not even clear they need minimal diploma standards. Most do, I think, but quite a few don't. That could be as well left to the school.
In the end I suppose I'm arguing it's up to the boards of the schools and the parents.
Now, if lil' Jeb (does that feel good, A?) wants to form the Jeb institute or a compact or whatever and rate all those bitter clinger school boards with one eye in the middle of their collective forehead, why, lil' Jeb can do that all day long and issue all the reports he wants. (And, truth be told, plenty of those boards are in fact dumb enough that they'll join right up, or dance to the tune.)
Do you oppose SATs to, and other tests, showing how poor local schools and boards are doing, and punishing students because they got stuck in schools that decided they didn't need to compete seriously?
I'm all for public funding of elementary and secondary education. I am not in favor of public provision of that education, at least not beyond the local level. Public schools are fine, operated by local school boards, and the standards imposed by those school boards should even apply to private schools that choose to operate in the same district. But State level, and certainly national imposition of standards for education are unworkable and unwise. Competition among schools and school districts will produce the best results for our children, especially considering there is a huge range of what different families in different places consider the best results for the children.
I disliked No Child Left Behind, I equally dislike Common Core. Let the demand from local communities of parents determine what and how their students should be educated. Make public funding available for any reasonable education program (yes with some basic standards, of course). If the States and National Gov't want to provide standardized tests for comparison purposes, that's fine with me too. But curriculum mandates should not come from the National Gov't, or even from the State gov't in most cases, besides some basic requirements to qualify for funding.
Post a Comment
<< Home