The bitter taste of Common Core
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Sunday, July 14, 2013, 9:00 p.m.
States that sign on to the supposedly “optional” one-size-fits-all Common Core education standards might well find themselves gradually locked in as this latest cure for what ails public education expands into the SAT and ACT college-readiness assessment exams.
That means not only public schools but also private schools will have little choice but to take up Common Core State Standards in preparing students for these exams.
Pennsylvania is among 45 states that have agreed to adopt the standards, which specify what concepts should be mastered by students at each grade level in individual subjects. But as The Heritage Foundation points out, opting out will become increasingly difficult. This, as the SAT is “aligned to the Common Core,” according to a College Board email quoted in a Washington Post report.
Last year, 1.66 million students took the college-entry SAT exam, according to the College Board.
Critics argue that Common Core's education standards are ideologically and unduly influenced by meddlesome third parties. Says Ze'ev Wurman, a software architect and math-advisory expert in California and Washington, D.C., “No state has any reason left to aspire for first-rate standards, as all states will be judged by the same mediocre national benchmark enforced by the federal government.”
That is, unless enough states, given their taste of Common Core, spit out this latest cure-all for the malaise of public education.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Pittsburgh Laurels & Lances
- More reefer sanity
- Another EPA crock: Sulfur silliness
- Greensburg Laurels & Lances