The NCLB, passed in 2001, can be considered a precursor to Common Core. The NCLB demonstrated a new (and harsh, according to critics) approach to education policy by the federal government.
Before Common Core, California had its own mathematics curriculum-content standards. They had been written largely by the faculty of the Mathematics Department at Stanford University and were adopted by the state in December 1997. … If any state has math standards right, it’s California.
The state-led effort to develop the Common Core State Standards was launched in 2009 by state leaders, including governors and state commissioners of education from 48 states, two territories and the District of Columbia, through their membership in the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices (NGA …
Ten years ago, states across the country began to embrace a new set of tougher learning standards in public schools. This new model, called Common Core, was meant to transform how students are taught and what they learn. The goal was to raise the bar and level the playing field for schools across the country.
|State||Common Core Adoption|
States were given an incentive to adopt the Common Core Standards through the possibility of competitive federal Race to the Top grants. U.S. President Barack Obama and U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan announced the Race to the Top competitive grants on July 24, 2009, as a motivator for education reform.
In 1958, President Eisenhower signed the National Defense Education Act, which poured money into the American education system at all levels. One result of this was the so-called New Math, which focused more on conceptual understanding of mathematics over rote memorization of arithmetic.
The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) was the previous reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. Passed by Congress in 2001 with clear bipartisan support, NCLB was signed into law by President George W. Bush in January of 2002.
Opponents on the right objected to the federal government’s support of the standards, warned of the dangerous precedent of allowing Washington to meddle in curriculum matters, and derided CCSS as “Obamacore.” Opponents on the left blasted the new assessments associated with the standards, objected to teacher …
While the majority of teachers, 57 percent, say Common Core will be positive for most students, a third don’t think it will make a difference. Eight percent say it will be negative. Elementary school teachers have a sunnier outlook on the standards than middle and high school teachers.
The magnitude of the negative effects [of Common Core] tend to increase over time. … Some blame the failure of Common Core on process issues, such as lack of adequate teacher training, but the key culprits are the standards themselves and the type of teaching promoted by Common Core.
While the evidence indicates that Common Core failed to improve academic achievement, the standards did prompt states to raise their benchmarks for student learning.
Obama didn’t create the Core; he fast-tracked adoption. His administration also used $350 million to bankroll two testing consortia, PARCC and Smarter Balanced, that would develop standardized tests aligned to these new standards.
So why do so many people hate the Common Core? … While the goals of Common Core are laudable, many parents and teachers don’t think they had a seat at the table when standards were developed. To parents and teachers who feel they were entirely left out of the process, the standards may feel heavy-handed.
The Commonwealth of Virginia did not adopt the Common Core because they have already invested large amounts of money and time in developing Virginia Standards of Learning (the SOLs)—standards they believe to be superior to Common Core standards.
45 states have adopted Common Core, including California.
Myth: The Common Core State Standards are not internationally benchmarked. Fact: Standards from top-performing countries played a significant role in the development of the math and English language arts/literacy standards.
One likely reason: U.S. high schools teach math differently than other countries. Classes here often focus on formulas and procedures rather than teaching students to think creatively about solving complex problems involving all sorts of mathematics, experts said.
The first major change, coined New Math, was launched into American schools in the early 1960s. New Math stressed conceptual understanding of the principles of mathematics and de-emphasized technical computing skills. With New Math, out went the rote drill and practice of math facts and formulas.
After 13 years and much debate, the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) has come to an end. A new law called the “Every Student Succeeds Act” was enacted on December 10. It replaces NCLB and eliminates some of its most controversial provisions.