Navigating the Challenges of Common Core and Outcome-Based Education
The concept of a common core of learning aims to provide a shared educational foundation that can help students achieve a consistent level of preparation across the nation. However, as Jennifer Smith points out, the devil is in the details. The current implementation of common core education has faced several challenges, particularly in terms of aligning with the developmental needs of students.
Aligning with Child Development Data
The common core standards have been criticized for not aligning with child developmental data. For instance, teaching advanced mathematical concepts like algebra to elementary students is premature and can be counterproductive. Learning is most effective when it is tailored to the developmental stages of the student. By trying to force early algebraic concepts on third graders, the common core curriculum may undermine the foundational skills necessary for higher-level mathematics.
The Pre-Common Core State of Affairs
Before the implementation of the common core, schools in the southern states were struggling with inadequate performance on standardized tests. These tests were used to compare the performance of U.S. students with those around the world. A prime example is the comparison of 7th grade tests in Massachusetts with those in Texas, where there was a stark disparity. This points to the urgent need for a nationwide standard that ensures all students have equitable access to quality education.
Challenges in Implementing Common Core
The transition to common core has brought about several challenges, which I have experienced firsthand as a student. For instance, the formatting of common core exams has made them more challenging. Previously, standardized tests in California like the STAR tests required minimal effort, merely filling in bubbles and possibly writing a few paragraphs. In contrast, common core tests required students to write detailed justifications, even in middle school algebra exams. Additionally, the integration of technology into exams, such as having to graph on a computer, has also added complexity.
Curriculum Compression and Mastery
The curriculum in my high school was compressed from the traditional sequence of Algebra I, Geometry, Algebra II, Precalculus, and Calculus to Math I, Math II, Math III, and Calculus. While more students are now taking calculus, whether they are adequately prepared for it remains a significant concern. The removal of transitional areas between these subjects has led to a rushed curriculum that may hinder true mastery of foundational skills.
National Standards: A Double-Edged Sword
While national standards are admirable in principle, their implementation has been fraught with challenges. The reliance on computerized exams introduces several issues. Although computerized exams are essential in the real world, they require robust technology infrastructure. In my experience, classrooms with limited access to computers can hinder the effectiveness of these exams. Additionally, the lack of familiarity with testing devices can lead to inefficiencies, such as not knowing how to use the graphing calculator.
Enforcing and Depoliticizing National Standards
National standards should be enforced, but this should not be done through frequent standardized tests. These exams should complement, rather than replace, state-level assessments. Furthermore, such tests should be conducted only periodically to avoid overburdening students and teachers. Moreover, the national standards should be depoliticized. Both the Bush and Obama administrations attempted to implement nationwide testing, and it would be ideal to have bipartisan support for these initiatives. Cooperation between political parties is crucial to ensure that these standards benefit all students.