Common Core: 3. Equity and Equality at Stake

The Common Core State Standards (CCSS) are touted as a curriculum that will, according to the official CCSS website (http://www.corestandards.org), “provide a consistent, clear understanding of what students are expected to learn.”

Despite claims that development of the standards has been a “state-led” effort merely coordinated by the National Governors Association (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO), they are in fact a national curriculum. CCSS increases federal control of education and does so without, as is true historically, substantially increasing federal funding. The financial burdens of implementing the new standards reside mainly at the state and local levels.

The control and finance issues are worrying but more so is the matter of how the standards will affect teaching and learning. According to the CCSS leaders: “The standards promote equity by ensuring all students, no matter where they live, are well prepared with the skills and knowledge necessary to collaborate and compete with their peers in the United States and abroad.”

This is essentially the same stance taken by the Committee of Ten in 1892, when a single, rigorous academic curriculum was advocated for all students (see Part 1 of this series). This approach was not found to be equitable a century ago, and skepticism about it working this time around is justified. The reason is blindingly simple: all students are not alike. Their backgrounds, goals, aspirations, interests, abilities, and many other traits vary widely, and success for all cannot be guaranteed by a single-minded curriculum. Socioeconomic status (SES)—in particular, poverty—looms large as a factor in school success.

Standards are not at issue. Indeed, education standards are essential as general guides for teaching and learning. Commentators Brooks and Dietz point out in a recent article in Educational Leadership (Dec. 2012/Jan. 2013), “The Common Core standards themselves aren’t the problem.” The problem is that CCSS “conflates standards with standardization.” And standardization tends to ignore human differences, such as socioeconomic status (SES), thereby producing inherent inequity. “Diversity,” say Brooks and Dietz, “is on the verge of extinction—diversity of curriculum, instructional practices, and assessment.”