Questions for the Common Core Debate

Utah Common Core Standards Debate

6:00 - 8:00

MONDAY, JANUARY 6, 2014

MT LOGAN MIDDLE SCHOOL

875 NORTH 200 EAST

LOGAN, UTAH

The schools.utah.gov website states "The [Common Core] standards are designed to be robust and relevant to the real world, reflecting the knowledge and skills that our young people need for success in college and careers. With American Students fully prepared for the future, our communities will be best positioned to compete successfully in the global economy."

How does something that is simultaneously promoted as "just standards" do so much? Isn't this sort of rhetoric, if Common Core really is "just standards" a little over the top?

The claim that the Common Core standards will somehow create students "ready to compete in the emerging global market" (from utahpublicschools.org) is an idea found throughout the school board's defense of Common Core. ("Locally driven, globally competitive" from schools.utah.gov)

Just what sorts of global jobs do you think a nationally standardized high school graduate will be ready to compete for?

Follow-up question: Clearly, to be competitive in a global marketplace, specialized training and education beyond high school would be required. How does focusing so much energy on making sure our students learn the same info at the same pace for Math and English as the rest of the nation's high school students lead to "global competitiveness?"

Follow-up question: Clearly, the school board is trying to answer concerns about students readiness for college level math, and overall preparation for the global job market. How has Common Core and it's focus on math and English standards demonstrated it will meet these needs better than other alternatives like charter schools and specialized programs within the schools? Would not our efforts and resources be better spent increasing student access to THESE alternatives? Are we really to believe new math standards will result in MORE students enrolled in college level math? Isn't that faulty cause and effect logic?

The Common Core standards were not released until June 2010 (see utahnsforpublicschools.org). How is it possible to get "14 months of public input" between their release and their adoption on August 8, 2010?

follow-up question: How many parents did the school board interact with at that time whose primary concern in education was that our students were NOT learning the same information at the same pace as the students in Wisconsin?

Question for Tami Pyfer: You stated on a radio interview that, as Common Core IS just standards; there was no additional prescription to help kids who were falling behind or struggling. If we aren't helping more kids, or making learning better, isn't it more accurate to describe the standards as a change to education instead of an improvement?

The Gates Foundation spent 3 million to develop Common Core standards (edutooia.org/common-core-state-standards-resources). Bill Gates invested heavily with the benefit in mind he described as "a large uniform base of customers looking at using products that can help every kid learn and every teacher get better." (youtube.com/watch?v=xTK_6VKpf4) If the Common Core succeeds by Mr. Gates measurement, what interest does the state school board have in a "large uniform base of customers"? And why should parents be excited about this intended outcome? (Gates full quote is: "Identifying common stands is just the starting point. We'll only know if this effort has succeeded when the curriculum and tests are aligned to these standards. Secretary Arnie Duncan recently announced $350 million of the stimulus package will be used to create just these kinds of tests.... When the tests are aligned to the common standards, the curriculum will line up as well... For the first time there will be a large uniform base of customers looking at using products that can help every kid learn and every teacher get better.")

What is the direct benefit to students and families of the State School Board's mandatory adoption of Common Core in all public schools throughout the state? Why could we not allow districts to vet the standards according to the local desires of parents?

In answer to the outcry over the Common Core standards, the State School Board has reminded us we have always had state standards. Why was adopting the Common Core preferable to simply upping our own standards, perhaps even beyond standards set by the core?

follow-up question: If our standards were so woefully below the rest of the nation, and are now targeted to be on par, by what mechanism, measurement, or target date will we determine that we would like to exceed the standards to allow our students "to compete in the global market place"? Or is the plan to remain in-step with the rest of the states going forward? And if that is the plan, how will this increase our competitiveness?

Question for Tami Pyfer: You have said that despite public resistance, you are unwilling to stop short of full implementation of Common Core and to do so would be irresponsible. (KVNU FTP Broadcast in July 2013) When WILL you assess the success or failure of the adoption of the standards? How will you decipher a failure of the standards from a failure of the teachers, schools, or students?

The current cost of a public k12 education in Utah is around $85,000 per student. How will Utah's adoption of national standards affect that figure?
follow-up question: Doesn't that seem a little pricey for an education only promising to meet "minimum standards?"

The state's p20W data system encompasses pre-kindergarten through higher education and workforce training. From schools.utah.gov/data, it reads "Utah has a robust state student logitudinal data system collecting on a wide range of student data." What is included in the "wide range of data"? Where can a parent find an exhaustive list of what is included? The state has had issues in the past with data security. What assurances are provided to parents that their data will not be stolen, inappropriately shared or misused?