The Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts Instruction in Graded 6-12: Origins, Goals, Challenges post

Common Core State Standards seem like a good idea in theory; if all students across the country are being taught to these same standards, then the students who have to move to different schools across town, across the state, or across the country will be on the same page as far as what they are going to be learning. Each student will know what is expected of them, and each teacher will know what they need to prepare to help their students reach those standards. But each program, in each district is different according to how the teachers and administrators interpret the different standards. Each student is different, and they have different needs. “In the Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts Instruction in Graded 6-12: Origins, Goals, Challenges” I liked how they noted to the pros and cons of Common Core, but what they really highlighted was the gap between students who live in poverty compared to those who live in the middle and upper class. Students who live in low SES districts do not have the same access to materials like computers, internet, or other forms of technology to enhance their learning experience and access learning materials. Another thing is so often people who plan curriculum are planning on what students need in order to pass a test, but standardized tests do not reflect intelligence, and they do not reflect student learning. The emphasis that standardized tests are the only way to reflect intelligence is ridiculous. There are so many students who learn differently and to have them all be tested by one test is unfair and not a true representation of their comprehension of learning objectives. To have any student have to learn to one specific teaching practice doesn’t work, and neither do one set of standards.

But like I said, Common Core State Standards are a good idea in theory.