kitchen table math, the sequel: Common Core math

Wednesday, September 7, 2011

SteveH said...: "If the Common Core’s architects are done explaining its virtues–if they think that eighteen months of explaining its merits to a moderately attentive audience of self-selected elites amidst tumultuous debates over health care reform and the stimulus is sufficient–and that everyone needs to just sit down and get with the program, then I feel comfortable predicting that this whole exercise will end real poorly."

He's just pissed-off that nobody jumped when he sent out the request. Maybe Education Next is not the platform that it thinks it is. Are they read by the non- "self-selected elites"? How will this article reach the people who haven't been involved in the debate?

"We’ve asked these folks to pen 1,500 words explaining why the Common Core math standards are rigorous and well-designed."

That doesn't mean that I think the standards will work well, but it won't be due to a PR machine which is in low gear. Success is not just a matter of buy-in. You can't just raise the bar without addressing the problem that no matter what the standards are, nobody is ensuring that they are achieved on a year-by-year basis. Nobody wants to ensure that the skills part of the balance equation gets done.

Besides, the standards are not rigorous enough for those wanting STEM careers. It doesn't get the job done. You can't trust the spiral and you can't trust the standards. All they have done is to raise a very low bar.; September 7, 2011 at 7:58 PM

kitchen table math, the sequel