Improving America's Education System

The Common Core education standards were developed by the U.S. Department of Education in 2009, with intentions of creating a more rigorous, concerted program to improve student’s math and literacy skills. Due to poor execution, teachers were left unprepared and lacking resources to teach the new curriculum to their unique students. Emphasis on standardized tests rather than learning necessary tools for the adult world leaves students unprepared for college. By interfering with developmentally appropriate curriculums set by classroom professionals, national education standards fail to reflect every students’ needs and, therefore, should not be determined by the federal government.

Standardized tests are largely unnecessary, ineffective, and overused. Despite the enormous monetary resources and hours that companies pour into the making of standardized tests, the unholistic pen and pencil approach of these tests tends to assess students' test-taking ability rather than their actual intelligence. All this new testing leaves less time for classroom learning than generations past. This time may seem negligible at first; however, it adds up considering the number of ACTs, SATs, graduation and annual state tests students take over their academic career. What little time left is sacrificed for busy work and teaching for the tests. Nevertheless, who can blame teachers when the results of standardized tests determine their job performance? The tests were mainly designed to showcase the efforts of teachers and schools to the state, and a reduction of standardized tests is integral to fixing our educational

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

Anyone would be hard-pressed to find a politician in recent years who has been elected to a national office without promising to improve education and focus their efforts on the betterment of their constituents’ children. Many of these politicians have succeeded at passing legislation to do so, but the latest of these, the Common Core standards initiative, is facing a very important query right now: does it work in America? Although Common Core is very well intentioned and in selective ways could be considered a success, there are many failures to consider as well. When dealing with such education, a vital issue, these failures must be dealt with. In order to ensure not only an equal education but also one of higher quality which the citizenry

Rethinking the common core standards. The common core is hailed as “the next big thing” in school reform, but is it “the next big thing? The reform was implemented to resurrect a failing school system, brought on by “No Child Left Behind” once the reform was put into action it was supposed to make some extensive improvements; however, this change brought about some unsuspected

Voices across the country are raising concerns about the new Common Core State Standards. But if you listen carefully to the conversations, the main concern is not about the standards, themselves, but about the consequences of high-stakes tests attached to the standards. And those concerns are well-founded. Trying to implement goals for deeper learning through an outdated testing model tied to a long list of punishments for children, educators, and schools is like pouring new wine into old bottles. It will certainly turn sour. The Common Core, for those of you unaware, is a set of “standards”, skills and requirements children need to understand by the end of the school year. Here 's the thing, The Common Core standards do not specify the

Common Core State Standards Initiative caught parents and teachers off guard alike. Not many truly understand that concerns, consequences, and underlying issues that surround Common Core. It wasn’t until children were venting their concerns, teachers were frustrated with the statistics undermining their duties, and parents questioning Common Core’s teaching practices – that Common Core was put under the spotlight. An educational reconstruction sponsored by the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers sought out to establish a unified education standard that would detail what K-12 students were to know in English and Math alike. Common Core’s mission is to

Although the United States is one of the most highly industrialized nations in the world, students in many other industrialized nations are outperforming U.S. students in various academic areas. As a result, the U.S. has implemented standard-based reform, and its educational costs have soared. No longer are American graduates competing with each other for jobs, in the present global economy, they also are competing with graduates from other industrialized nations, many of whom are preforming at higher academic levels in reading, math, science, and problem solving as measured by their performance on the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) (“FactSheet”1-2). The PISA is an assessment that is administered every three years to fifteen year old students in OECD (Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development) countries. The OECD consists of the world’s highly industrialized nations that comprise more than 85% of the world’s economy. (West 2) The PISA was first administered in 2000, and it has been administered every three years since that time. This assessment measures student performance in the areas of reading, mathematics and science. The 2003 and 2012 administrations of the PISA also measured students’ problem solving. On the 2009 administration of the PISA, U.S. students preformed below average in the academic areas of math and science compared to students in other OECD countries (West 2). In math, the U.S. trailed seventeen OECD countries and

America has fallen behind many other countries academically. To fix this, the national educational standards of Common Core were put into place. It created a system of academic benchmarks for reading and math, which will equalize test scores across all states while simultaneously raising national scores. However, this system has not yet achieved what it set out to do. Common Core has not had a significant positive impact on students' learning.

There has been detailed documentation on the growth in Black student educational attainment in response to significant legislative and judicial decisions which have impacted equity in education across racial groups. However, there has continued to be a steady achievement gap and many other inequities in education between minority students and white students in the United States. The current extent of racial inequality in the national education system shows a state of severe inequity. Racial minorities on average have differential suspension rates and punishments, less achievement in math and science, lower graduation rates, and are taught buy less experienced and lower paid teachers than white students.

Nearly every state in the U.S. has adopted a set of educational standards known as Common Core State Standards, or C.C.S.S. (Shanahan, 2015), put into place in hopes of improving America 's educational system. We have finally recognized the need for our educational system to evolve with our economy and how vital it is to promote college and career readiness in school-aged children; but, are we going about it all wrong? Uniform "Standards" are not what our educational system needs to evolve, and have shown no evidence in improving education in America; in fact, we may be struggling more now than we ever were before. The C.C.S.S has promoted excellence and advancement in common core classes but has also proven to fall short on their

The Common Core is simply another attempt to transform education into a “politicized business model” (Hood, 2014). Education should have a balance between both student-centered and teacher-centered instruction. The Common Core destroys both means of instruction, leaving federal regulators with all control. Dennis Van Roekel, the president of the National Education Association, writes in a letter that the “Common Core implementation has been completely botched” (Van Roekel, 2014). His letter addresses the association’s over three million followers, in hopes to dismantle the Common Core. Van Roekel discusses how “the standards seemed like a good idea on the surface, but when put into play, the standards are not customized to the students’ specific needs” (Van Roekel, 2014). The standards simply propose goals students need to meet, however they provide no help in achieving those

“Nearly a century ago, Andrew Carnegie said that educated citizens were the strength of American democracy. While that fact still remains true today, our competitive twenty-first century world requires innovative education strategies that will enable students to succeed in a global economy.” (qtd. Vartan Gregorian). This is one of many quotes made by Americans today all surrounding the topic of common core state standard initiative. So many opinions have been formulated from the new reform that has been set forth to improve the American education system. Looking at both sides of the fence of the common core regimen, it looks like both sides display an array of reasons why it is good and why it is corrupt. The Common Core State Standards have drawn both support and adverse criticism from politicians, analysts, and commentators (e.g. nga.org). The Common Core State Standard Initiative has now been adopted by forty-two states, the District of Columbia, four territories, and the Department of Defense Education Activity (e.g. corestandards.org). Common core is now a common talk in America by many different demographics. The Common Core should be understood as the culmination of a movement that is changing a society (Mcdonnell 492).

Common Core is slowly destroying our educational system for an expensive cost. Since the launch of Common Core students willingness to learn has gone down, along with their test grades. Since the launch of Common Core taxes have gone up, school budgets have been cut, and citizens have become unhappy. Common Core is simply not working for America, it is a waste of taxpayers’ dollars and students’

The condition and availability of resources at a school can play a major factor. A number of studies have shown that many school systems, particularly those in urban and high-poverty areas, are plagued by decaying buildings that threaten the health, safety, and learning opportunities of students. Good facilities appear to be an important precondition for student learning, provided that other conditions are present that support a strong academic program in the school. A growing body of research has linked student achievement and behavior to the physical building conditions and overcrowding. Working conditions in urban schools conclude that “physical conditions have direct positive and negative effects on teacher morale, sense of personal safety, feelings of effectiveness in the classroom, and on the general learning environment” (Taylor 2012). Building renovations in one district led teachers to feel “a renewed sense of hope, of commitment, a belief that the district cared about what went on that building.” (Corcoran et al) old buildings in another district, the atmosphere was punctuated more by despair and frustration, with teachers reporting that leaking roofs, burned out lights, and broken toilets were the typical backdrop for teaching and learning. If a high school had a combination of old historical buildings and new buildings, it can be inspiring and motivating when students are learning in funded classrooms. The buildings can give the students,