Critical Common Core Concerns (C^4)

There are several things that must be considered and

addressed very soon about Common Core (CC) Standards. 

Please share these concerns with YOUR State Representatives!

 
(1) CC violates our Constitution and blatantly usurps state's rights in the control of course of education. 
 
(2) CC framework development violates NCLB law that prevents federal officials from activities that “mandate, direct, or control” a state’s, district’s or school’s “specific instructional content, academic achievement standards and assessments, curriculum or program of instruction.” 

(3) CC state standards adoption and framework development in the majority of examples is in violation of open meetings laws and common practices in public, civic procedures that must allow time for public input, feedback, and revision. 
 
(4) CC will inevitably be expensive for states to implement, especially those that did not receive RttT federal (coercive) funding.  Each state's legislative representatives must demand a cost-benefit analysis from CC, as well as one from an independent firm, for their state.  (The comparison is sure to be enlightening.)
 
(5) CC standards adoption and framework development disenfranchises state education policy boards, authorized under the our state laws, to make decisions in educational matters.  Which begs the question: "Why would members of the National Governor's Association (NGA) wish to relinquish that control?"
 
It's a good thing that Texas has NOT signed-on!  TX and CA standards often drive textbook content because of their sizable markets.  With the Texas hold-out, teachers in other state can have some hope that high quality math content will be available post CC. (That is, IF they have the option to teach it!). 
 

Informational Reading:
 
Can the Federal Government Fund Curriculum Materials?
Christopher T. Cross, who is a partner in the Washington-based education consulting firm Cross & Joftus, noted that the 1979 law that created the most recent iteration of the U.S. Department of Education prohibits the federal funding of curriculum. Cross helped write that law when he was the Republican staff director of the House committee on education and labor in 1978.

 'Curriculum' Definition Raises Red Flags
"It’s impossible to make a plausible argument that decisions about even “big ideas” in curriculum won’t prescribe what happens in classrooms"
Neal P. McCluskey, a policy analyst at the Cato Institute.

Posted via email from concernedabouteducation's posterous