According to an Achieve poll, 68% of teachers and 74% of voters approve of the common core state (sic) standards (either “very favorable” or “favorable”)[http://www.achieve.org/GrowingAwarenessCCSS]. A poll of Education Next readers showed less enthusiasm, with 40% supporting the common core at the time of this writing (either “completely” or “somewhat”) [http://educationnext.org/ednext-readers-poll-common-core/].
I wonder how the poll results would turn out if those taking the poll realized that the common core state (sic) standards mean a massive increase in testing (about 20 times NCLB levels) and will be very expensive, at a time when money is very tight.
I wonder how the results would be if those polled realized that there is no evidence that increased testing will boost achievement, and that there is no justification for the common core in the first place: The problem is poverty. The US child poverty rate is now 23%, the highest among all industrialized countries. Poverty has a devastating impact on school performance.
I wonder how those polled would respond if they knew that the billions to be spent on tests could be used to protect children against the effects of poverty.
For sources, see S. Krashen, “Our schools are not broken” [http://sdkrashen.com/index.php?cat=4]
My concern with Common Core is mainly tied to the loss of local control; here in Washington State we’ll be giving away our math standards, which are pretty good, to the whims of those in Washington D.C., and that doesn’t feel like a good idea. If the point was to raise the standards in some of our backwaters around the country, my guess is that those states are the ones who haven’t signed on to Common Core. They’re probably also the same states that are saying no to the Affordable Care Act.
This is why a conservative argument is so compelling in this regard.