Teaching Students Not Standards
There's a lot that I like about the Common Core standards. For one, as a former high school English teacher, I'm thrilled by the literacy standards for secondary math, science, and social studies. I also think the standards for speaking, writing, listening and reading build nicely from kinder to twelfth grade, creating a space for teachers to talk and plan together across grade levels.
In fact, when I consider the importance of having standards in education, I think of this quote by JFK, "All of us do not have equal talent, but all of us should have an equal opportunity to develop our talents." Having standards in education -- a set of skills and goals for all students -- speaks directly to this quote.
However, I think it's important to clarify that we don't really teach standards. We teach children. Standards are simply guidelines, and these guidelines will and should adjust and modify according to the needs of an individual student and the groups we teach. Unfortunately, this may not be what's happening with the Common Core.
And, Suddenly, a Wrong Turn
A recent New York Times' article indicated that critics of these new standards are beginning to emerge where there were once allies. In the article, a Long Island high school principal's support of the new standards has significantly waned, and she had this to say as to why:
"We see kids...they don't want to go to school anymore."
I can't disagree with this. I'm seeing it, too. So why might this be happening, and why the increasing number of critics? My hunch is that it is not about the document itself, but more about the implementation.
The new standards are meant to give teachers freedom when designing the learning -- more choices in the text and content they use, and the context in which the lesson is taught. Though when you think about the words of the Long Island principal and the overall growing resistance, it leads me to believe educators throughout our land are not being given the freedom and voice that was intended. Dictation and distortion of the Common Core might be, in fact, gaining the upper hand. And this upper hand is mightier, I'm afraid, in schools located in low-income communities of color.
Four Pitfalls with Educational Standards
I'd like now to call out exactly how I've seen this dictation and distortion of education standards play out in schools and I'd like to offer up some suggestions for taking action:
Pitfall #1: The Hyperfocus
This is when one standard or two or three receive an inordinate amount of talk and focus at a school. Perhaps there was a workshop all the teachers attended, or a vendor provided materials on this standard in hopes that the school would purchase more. (Vendors and publishers will push for hyperfocus on certain standards -- those they can re-brand from older standards or those they already have materials for, for example.)
Taking action: We need to speak up and say when we see an imbalance, when there is an obvious hyperfocus on a particular standard. Here's a example of something I recently had to say, "Hey, we are talking a lot about close reading of complex text, but the standards also call for reading a large variety of grade-level texts, which we know can greatly improve reading skills. How are students being provided with this? We need an instructional balance here."
Pitfall #2: The Delusion
Ah, the curriculum race. (I've got to cover all these puppies by June!) We've seen it, we've done it, and no one gains a thing from it. In fact, I can cover every standard the state or government asks me to but if my students hate reading and writing more when they leave my English class then I've failed at my job. (Re-read the quote from the Long Island principal.)
Taking action: Coverage is surface-learning, at best, and what students don't get a chance to apply, they will soon forget. Dig deep. Real learning happens when we choose depth over breadth. This will mean we don't "cover" every single standard in a school year. And that's okay. Start conversations about the reality of not having time to go deep with every standard (these are guidelines not a checklist). To get conversations about deeper learning started, begin re-introducing the language of whole-child education, such as "relevance," "curiosity" and "love of learning." Propose more fieldtrips and hands-on projects with the rational that experiential learning is the kind of learning that sticks.
Pitfall #3: The Misfit
Pre-packaged, teacher-proof curricula can do a huge disservice to students. Who is telling us what the standards should look like in the classroom? This is an important question. Is it educational consultants, publishers, workshop contractors? How and why did they choose this focus, this standard, this text? Does it speak directly to the lives and academic needs of our students at our specific school site? One-size-fits-all, packaged materials will not serve all students at all schools. Period.
Taking action: It's fundamental that teacher and student voice guide in the development of standards-inspired curriculum. Advocate for plenty of planning time so teachers at your school site can create lessons and units together -- starting first with the needs and assets of the students they serve, then using the standards as a guideline to plan relevant and engaging content and activities. When ample time and space is given for teaching planning, there's no place for packaged curricula.
Pitfall #4: The Distortion
This is when an assessment or standardized test at a school becomes The Thing. One sign of this: academic intervention or remedial courses have taken the place of theater, art, and music classes. Also, if I sit in regularly at school meetings and begin to hear, "testing," assessment," "teachers," "accountability," and "standards" more than I hear "students, "learning," "relevance," and "engaging," I know this distortion has taken hold.
Taking action: The politics are dancing and we need to call attention to this (be brave!) Begin by encouraging your school team to create a definition together on what it really means to learn and the true purpose of having an education. This hopefully will begin to guide the discussion back to what matters most: the students. We need to comprehensively evaluate students: what they say, do, create, and write in a school year, not just one time and in one sitting. Advocate for all assessments to be used and valued, such as performance and formative (not just summative). Schools can also fall prey to pre-packaged assessments, just like curricula. Discourage this and strongly encourage they be designed to the specific learning taking place.
Yes, We Can
With these new standards, we will have to have courage. Some of the boilerplate curricula I was handed and instructed to implement while in the classroom I should have flatly refused to use or I should have at least advocated for its modification; it was so alienating of my students -- a true disservice to them (I wish I could go back in time). That was a mistake by me, by a number of us with the state standards. So now we have an opportunity to be the voice of reason when we are given not-so-great curricula and when we see a hyper or distorted focus on a particular standard or with a particular test.
Don't get me wrong. I'm fine with standards. I like the guidance and the specificity. But this time around, we need to insist that trust be given to teachers to do their jobs.
Let's get students excited about learning again.
When it comes to CCSS implementation at your school, what's working? What's not? Please share with us in the comments section below.