7
$\begingroup$

Although the implementation of curricula and assessments that align to the Common Core has been a slow roll-out across many states, the standards themselves are close to ten years old now. I don't imagine that anyone ever thought that Common Core would be etched in stone, a perfect set of standards that would remain forever unchanged. But I have not heard of any attempt to revise them, or even any mechanism by which that would be possible.

In my opinion, the best way of coming to a good set of standards would be by some iterative process of revision over the course of many years. If Common Core is to be successful, at least from the standpoint of coherence of the standards, it only makes sense to revisit them after they've been in use for some time and their failings become apparent.

Will we ever see CCSSM version 2.0 that takes into account lessons learned from actual implementation of the standards?

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ IMHO, the goal of CCSM was to revive flawed 1990s math programs and to shackle states with high-stake tests administered by private corporations. It was about money, not about math. I do not expect these "standards" to evolve. Instead, something else will come up, like Facebook's Summit Learning. $\endgroup$ – Rusty Core Aug 22 at 22:36
  • $\begingroup$ It's a fallacy to think that curriculum (what we cover, and making whole country cover same stuff) was the key factor in improving outcomes. $\endgroup$ – guest Sep 4 at 5:46
  • $\begingroup$ Agreed on the control imperative. It's basically same instinct of the NCLB Act. But I think, it's not the issues with measurement holding back education. $\endgroup$ – guest Sep 4 at 5:48
5
$\begingroup$

Not a completely satisfying answer, but there is this from the FAQ at corestandards.org, emphasizing that the onus is on the states:


Who will manage the Common Core State Standards in the future?
The Common Core State Standards are and will remain a state-led effort, and adoption of the standards and any potential revisions will continue to be a voluntary state decision. The National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and the Council of Chief State School Officers will continue to serve as the two leading organizations with ownership of the Common Core and will make decisions about the timing and substance of future revisions to the standards in consultation with the states. Federal funds have never and will never be used to support the development or governance of the Common Core or any future revisions of the standards. Any future revisions will be made based on research and evidence. Governance of the standards will be independent of governance of related assessments.

This may be a bit more informative (and recent), from edtechtimes, February 15, 2017:

Mathematics changes: Across all grade levels in mathematics, the nine states revised 26.5 percent of the standards, with 73.5 percent of the standards were kept the same. The number of math standards revised ranged from 17 changes in one state to 282 changes in another. Moreover, eight of the nine states added math standards, with a total of 51 new standards added.

Similar information is in an Education Week article, Even When States Revise Standards, the Core of the Common Core Remains, Vol. 37, Issue 14, Pages 1, 14, November 13, 2017.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Is there any evidence that the two governing bodies of the CCSSM are still actively engaged? From my perspective, the outlook appears increasingly fractured, with states starting to edge away from Common Core and the related assessments after some initial enthusiasm, often for political reasons. $\endgroup$ – Richard Sullivan Aug 22 at 0:57
  • $\begingroup$ And I know the intent was always to allow states to make customizations to the Common Core, but even aside from changing or adding to the standards themselves, many states layer on various guiding documents with interpretations, course sequences, and assessment limits. It results in a kind of divergence from Common Core, and I'm not sure how that could end up in a revision of the Common Core itself. Maybe CCSSM could incorporate some best practices of the various state customizations? I don't know. $\endgroup$ – Richard Sullivan Aug 22 at 1:00
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @RichardSullivan: "still actively engaged?" I see evidence of the opposite, in that corestandards.org appears to be nearly inactive. But I don't really know. Perhaps some U.S. math teachers here know more. $\endgroup$ – Joseph O'Rourke Aug 22 at 1:05
  • $\begingroup$ Largely (essentially) a link-only answer (three links) which borrows quotes from two of the links you cite. Better to have simply commented with the relevant links, as you really don't answer the question. $\endgroup$ – Namaste Aug 26 at 20:53

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.