Research calls this statement into question:
●
It has been established CCSS were crafted by the
Council of Chief State School Officers and the National Governor's Association,
both private organizations, funded by federal stimulus money.
●
CCSS could be adopted by states via a Federal waiver
given by Arne Duncan to escape from the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) requirements.
● Memorandums of Understanding (MOU's) were signed by Missouri to Smarter Balanced
Assessment Consortia to send individual student, teacher, principal data to the
consortia....and SBAC consequently signed a MOU with the USDOEd to send data to
this federal agency for dissemination and research.
The federal
government's fingerprints all over Common Core State standards. Look at this report from McGraw-Hill in
2011. From education_brief:
pg. 4:
What role
will the U.S. DOE play?
Although the U.S. DOE supports the Common Core Initiative, they
have had no role in the development of the Common Core State Standards. Their
involvment moving forward will depend heavily on future elections and overall
changes to the role of the Federal Government in education. If the Fed
continues to be a driving force in setting the education agenda with a
reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act then they could
play a big role in linking competitive grant funding to the adoption and
successful implementation of the Common Core Standards and new requirements for
College and Career ready students. (MEW note: would the Federal Government
support development of standards that it didn't agree with?)
How will
states assess the Common Core?
Two consortia have been awarded competitive grant funds for
the development of tests to assess the Common Core Standards. SMARTER Balanced
Assessment Consortium (SBAC) was awarded
a four-year$176 million Race to the Top assessment grant by the U.S. Department
of Education to develop a student assessment system aligned to a Common Core of
academic standards. Partnership for the Assessment of Readiness for College
and Careers (PARCC or Partnership) PARCC RttT Assessment Consortium was awarded
$170 of the $330 million. Assessments are expected for 2014 and are expected to
include results from performance-based tasks through testing and traditional
end-of-year assessments. Both plan to include end of year assessments offered
online.
pg. 7:
The Common
Core Standards and Race to the Top
“While states voluntarily agreed to participate in the
process, the effort gained a great deal of momentum when the Obama
Administration included participation in the Common Core as an eligibility
criterion for many of the programs created out of the $110 billion stimulus
funds. Programs such as Race to the Top rewarded states that not only
participated in developing the Common Core, but also adopted them.”
(From
Education Insider: Common Core Standards and Assessment Coalitions: Whiteboard
Advisors)
Assessing the Common Core Standards
A significant piece of the CCSSI is the adoption of a common
(or comparable) assessment system across the participating states. Supported
through $330 million in funding from the ARRA, the Administration held a number
of hearings to develop a competition to fund next generation assessment systems
aligned to the standards. This competition resulted in two assessment consortia
who would lead development efforts for a common assessment of the Common Core
Standards.
pg. 8:
SMARTER
Balanced Consortium (SBAC)
“A second consortium, The SMARTER Balanced Assessment
Consortium (SBAC), is a collection of 30 states that have been working
collaboratively since December 2009 to develop a student assessment system
aligned to a Common Core of academic content standards. The SBAC was awarded a
four-year $176 million Race to the Top assessment grant by the US Department of
Education (USED) to develop a student assessment system aligned to a Common
Core of academic standards.”
pg. 12...what happens when this Federal money runs out?
State and District Implementation Plans
States and districts are unsure what the true cost of
implementing Common Core will be and worry that the money needed will not be
available in state or federal budgets. The recession and widespread budget cuts
can adversely affect efforts to implement. States adopting these standards must
be prepared to implement strategies and support as these will soon become the
basis on which students are judged. (MEW note: Where will this
"support" come from? This will
be an unpleasant surprise to state legislators when they are left to pick up
the bill for the implementation that bypassed them.)
State and District Implementation Plans
States and districts are unsure what the true cost of
implementing Common Core will be and worry that the money needed will not be
available in state or federal budgets. The recession and widespread budget cuts
can adversely affect efforts to implement. States adopting these standards must
be prepared to implement strategies and support as these will soon become the
basis on which students are judged. (MEW
note: if there is no federal involvement, why should states worry there will be
no money available from the Federal government?)
(From
Educator Insider: Whiteboard Advisor)
The Role of Federal Government in the Common Core
While the federal government has
had no role in the development of the Common Core state standards, according to
the CCSSI, the federal government may have the opportunity to support states as
they begin adopting the standards.
For
example, the federal government may:
• Support this effort through a
range of tiered incentives, such as
providing states with greater flexibility in the use
of existing
federal funds, supporting a revised state accountability structure, and
offering financial support for states to implement the standards.
• Provide long-term financial
support for the development and implementation of common assessments, teacher
and principal professional development, and research to help continually improve the Common Core state
standards over time.
• Revise and align existing
federal education laws with the lessons learned from the best of what works in other nations and from
research.
Just because Arne Duncan's signature is not on the state MOUs
agreeing to adopt Common Core, do proponents really believe citizens accept the
talking point the "the federal government has had no role in the
development of the Common Core state standards?" This is a false assertion as the initiative
was funded by stimulus money, the Federal government is establishing guidelines
the states have to follow, state assessment systems were funded by federal
dollars, states will be rewarded (or not) for implementation, and federal laws
will be realigned that the states must follow.
You gotta love their logic. Let's see, we don't have to get legislative
approval for CC because it is stimulus money, but the federal gov isn't
paying for CC.
It is imperative to support SB210 to require DESE to address this type of disconnect present in the talking points of CCSS.