Common National Curriculum

One of the biggest problems in the American public education system is the lack of a common standard for what students should be learning, and when they should learn it. In other words, the inequality of curriculums across the nation is affecting the preparedness of students when they venture out beyond the public school system, for the worst. The way to fix this problem, according to many teachers, administrators, and politicians, is by implementing a common curriculum across the nation that will ensure that the quality of a student’s education is not determined by where they happen to live.

This article, written in 2014, titled, Common Core Switch Could Be Costly, gives the reader an overview of what Common Core really could do to American taxpayers. A taxpayer is someone who, “pays a tax or is subject to taxation,” (dictionary.com). The cost relates to how times have changed because a lot more money is spent on trying to give children a bigger and better education. When people think about how school was 100 years ago, and then think about where life has gone to today, there is a vast difference. Technology is one thing, but the way children were taught and how many children did not even go to school is quite another. But many differ from the point of view that it was better way back when, just as Kimberly Kennedy does in her article Common Core Is Working, Don’t Break It in which she states, “We must prepare our kids for a future where technology reigns and more jobs will require college degrees,” (Kennedy). Technology is an argument in itself, but it does play a certain role in Common Core, but that will come further along. Nevertheless this article argues the fact that Common Core is helping Kentucky with scoring higher grades on tests and becoming a smarter

The educational system in the United States was originally developed using concepts from around the world, created using ingenuitive ideas from countries such as China, Japan, and Korea. However, as the United States quickly moved into position as the leading country for state-directed educational standards, America looked less and less to the systems of other nations and more into how we could improve what was locally and currently being applied in education. Consequently, an improved type of education instruction was officially launched in 2010. These new state standards, practically titled Common Core, were declared to focus on developing a child’s skills in reasoning, problem solving, communication, and competition (Conrad, et al. 52). While the standards are professed to be an extremely practical and beneficial method of teaching today, there are issues which have recently surfaced and raised some concerns. The Common Core State Standards are emerging as the subjects of a provocative controversy in society today as they prompt discussion on global economic efficiency, nationwide academic standards, and the ultimate well-being of school-age children.

The goal of the Common Core State Standards is to prepare students for college and work expectations and help them compete and succeed in a global economy and society. Furthermore, this policy has shaped current educational thinking by providing established learning standards with rigorous content and application of higher knowledge through higher order thinking skills.

“When we can predict how well students will do in school by looking at their zip code, we know we have a serious systemic problem” (Gloria Ladson-Billings 20). When we are able to forecast how a child will perform by where the child resides, then how can we say that every child is receiving quality education. The unsuccessful educational system infused into the United States is affecting the majority of minorities. In the United States students due to their race and social class, suffer from underfunded public schools, inexperienced teachers, and housing segregation, which in turn inhibit their opportunity to succeed through education. These difficulties plaque students from the very beginning of their public school experience and follow them throughout their academic life. There are a few solutions to these issues but they have to be implemented and enforced with a slow integration.

There are many approaches that can be taken in order to develop a school’s curriculum, or the material that the students will learn. If there were no federal regulation of curriculum, then it would not be possible to compare student achievement across districts or even states. The federal program, Common Core State Standards, assists in equaling education across the nation. The Common Core has reinvented the perception of student learning which, in turn, has caused American education to become a corporate institution. As a result, there has been a threat to states’ rights for education as more rigorous content has been implemented into classrooms by the government, which ultimately changes the role of the teacher.

Although the statistics are more than 10 years out of date, the reality of America school segregation has not changed. The barely functional buildings, lack of up to date text books (or in many cases any text books), overcrowded classes, non-existent lab and computer equipment, and low paid teachers create a situation of despair that leads to a drop out rate of more than 50% in many districts. And even those who graduate are

According to the National Education Association (2017) The common core state standards benefit all students because it provides equal access to the same curriculum as other students across the nation. The standards focus specifically on English Language Arts and Mathematics. The Common Core is designed to encompass a clear set of broad standards to prepare students for post-secondary opportunities. The standards were meant to be more challenging than current set of standards in each state and to provide clarity and consistency about what was expected of students at each grade level.

A study conducted in 2003 by Ofsted that involved England, Denmark and Finland, showed England’s national curriculum compared to the other two countries was:

Common Core State Standards is being heard throughout the education world. Many cringe when the words are spoken and many fight to support what the words stand for. Common Core was introduced in 2009 by state leaders. Common Core State Standards were developed to prepare children for the business world or the reality after grade school. “The Common Core is a set of high-quality academic standards in mathematics and English language arts/literacy, also known as ELA” (About the Standards, n.d.). The goals for the standards outline what students should know before leaving his or her current grade level. “The standards were created to ensure that all students graduate from high school with the skills and knowledge necessary to succeed in college, career, and life, regardless of where they live” (About the Standards, n.d.). This is an ambitious goal, but with much support can be accomplished. According to Common Core State Standards Initiative (n.d.) The Common Core has been adopted by forty-two states already and is accompanied by District of Columbia and Department of Defense Education Activity. Common Core was developed to improve the academics in society’s schools. Academics in the past years have not been successful and the United States has fallen behind international education. “One root cause has been an uneven patchwork of academic standards that vary from state to state and do not agree on what students should know and be able to do at each

If students are taught similar things in school, they will have to take fewer classes in college. When students go to college and have a different type of education, they may have to take remedial classes through the college to catch up with the more advanced students that took Common Core classes. These remedial classes can be expensive and are easily prevented with common core material. Even if the students that took common core classes are asked to take remedial classes, they may have the option to test out of them because of their broader knowledge of a specific subject due to having more time with a teacher thanks to common core.

Having one curriculum would hopefully allow the United States to compete with other nations. The United States is outperformed on international assessments by countries that have high standards (“The Facts on Common Core State Standards”). Dan Domeneon, from the American Association of School Administration, stated “It is going to be very difficult for us to be globally competitive if we continue to have 50 sets of standards when we go off against countries that have only one” (Boulard). This makes perfect sense; how is the United States expected to compete against nations that have one curriculum when the U.S. has 50 different curriculums? But, people have been questioning if changing the curriculum to one national curriculum will improve the United States overall education ranking in the

Challenge in the education system today raise concern as to the effectiveness and fairness associated with diverse cultures that compose our school systems today than 30 years ago. Students in our education system are from affluent families and those from below poverty line with limited resources, and those whom are non-English speaking to families whom are of native speaking decedents. Further, in this dilemma some areas have a level of favoritism or zabernism to student performance of personal acquaintances of family members. The percentage of graduates that continue on to college is low in rural communities. Some of these education systems are close to being taken over by the state

The argument about whether there should be a same curriculum nation wide, for all students until they enter college has been a long standing one. I strongly believe that same national curriculum for all students would be detrimental to their education, to say the least. This step would not only inhibit creativity at a national scale and create the same kind of adult populace but to decide upon a collective curriculum would be almost impossible for any nation.

An energetic and experienced lifelong learning education practitioner with excellent management skills, enthusiasm and dedication, who is able to develop and fostering the appropriate skills and social abilities to enable the optimum development of learners according to age, ability and aptitude.