The Common Core is becoming increasingly controversial, but for many people the whole issue remains murky and poorly understood, so I was thankful to see Dr. Ravitch lay out the context, rationale, and criticisms of the Common Core in clear language, and I encourage you to download her entire speech here.

For those who don’t want to read the whole thing, here are some parts I found most insightful.

On how the standards were written:

“The Common Core standards were written in 2009 under the aegis of several D.C.-based organizations: the National Governors Association, the Council of Chief State School Officers, and Achieve. The development process was led behind closed doors by a small organization called Student Achievement Partners, headed by David Coleman. The writing group of 27 contained few educators, but a significant number of representatives of the testing industry. From the outset, the Common Core standards were marked by the absence of public participation, transparency, or educator participation. In a democracy, transparency is crucial, because transparency and openness builds trust. Those crucial ingredients were lacking.”

On why they were written:

“The advocates of the standards saw them as a way to raise test scores by making sure that students everywhere in every grade were taught using the same standards. They believed that common standards would automatically guarantee equity. Some spoke of the Common Core as a civil rights issue. They emphasized that the Common Core standards would be far more rigorous than most state standards and they predicted that students would improve their academic performance in response to raising the bar…What the advocates ignored is that test scores are heavily influenced by socioeconomic status. Standardized tests are normed on a bell curve. The upper half of the curve has an abundance of those who grew up in favorable circumstances, with educated parents, books in the home, regular medical care, and well-resourced schools. Those who dominate the bottom half of the bell curve are the kids who lack those advantages, whose parents lack basic economic security, whose schools are overcrowded and under-resourced. To expect tougher standards and a renewed emphasis on standardized testing to reduce poverty and inequality is to expect what never was and never will be.”

On who supports Common Core:

“Who supported the standards? Secretary Duncan has been their loudest cheerleader. Governor Jeb Bush of Florida and former DC Chancellor Michelle Rhee urged their rapid adoption. Joel Klein and Condoleeza Rice chaired a commission for the Council on Foreign Relations, which concluded that the Common Core standards were needed to protect national security. Major corporations purchased full-page ads in the New York Times and other newspapers to promote the Common Core. ExxonMobil is especially vociferous in advocating for Common Core, taking out advertisements on television and other news media saying that the standards are needed to prepare our workforce for global competition. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce endorsed the standards, saying they were necessary to prepare workers for the global marketplace. The Business Roundtable stated that its #1 priority is the full adoption and implementation of the Common Core standards. All of this excitement was generated despite the fact that no one knows whether the Common Core will fulfill any of these promises. It will take 12 years whether we know what its effects are.”

On the testing component of Common Core:

“The Obama administration awarded $350 million to two groups to create tests for the Common Core standards. The testing consortia jointly decided to use a very high passing mark, which is known as a ‘cut score.’ The Common Core testing consortia decided that the passing mark on their tests would be aligned with the proficient level on the federal tests called NAEP. This is a level typically reached by about 35-40% of students. Massachusetts is the only state in which as many as 50% ever reached the NAEP proficient level. The testing consortia set the bar so high that most students were sure to fail, and they did.

In New York state, which gave the Common Core tests last spring, only 30% of students across the state passed the tests. Only 3% of English language learners passed. Only 5% of students with disabilities passed. Fewer than 20% of African American and Hispanic students passed. By the time the results were reported in August, the students did not have the same teachers; the teachers saw the scores, but did not get any item analysis. They could not use the test results for diagnostic purposes, to help students. Their only value was to rank students.”

On the financial cost of Common Core:

“The financial cost of implementing Common Core has barely been mentioned in the national debates. All Common Core testing will be done online. This is a bonanza for the tech industry and other vendors. Every school district must buy new computers, new teaching materials, and new bandwidth for the testing. At a time when school budgets have been cut in most states and many thousands of teachers have been laid off, school districts across the nation will spend billions to pay for Common Core testing. Los Angeles alone committed to spend $1 billion on iPads for the tests; the money is being taken from a bond issue approved by voters for construction and repair of school facilities. Meanwhile, the district has cut teachers of the arts, class size has increased, and necessary repairs are deferred because the money will be spent on iPads. The iPads will be obsolete in a year or two, and the Pearson content loaded onto the iPads has only a three-year license. The cost of implementing the Common Core and the new tests is likely to run into the billions at a time of deep budget cuts.”

On the standards themselves:

“Early childhood educators are nearly unanimous in saying that no one who wrote the standards had any expertise in the education of very young children. More than 500 early childhood educators signed a joint statement complaining that the standards were developmentally inappropriate for children in the early grades. The standards, they said, emphasize academic skills and leave inadequate time for imaginative play. They also objected to the likelihood that young children would be subjected to standardized testing. And yet proponents of the Common Core insist that children as young as 5 or 6 or 7 should be on track to be college-and-career ready, even though children this age are not likely to think about college, and most think of careers as cowboys, astronauts, or firefighters.”

On the lack of process for revising the standards:

“Another problem presented by the Common Core standards is that there is no one in charge of fixing them. If teachers find legitimate problems and seek remedies, there is no one to turn to. If the demands for students in kindergarten and first grade are developmentally inappropriate, no one can make changes. The original writing committee no longer exists. No organization or agency has the authority to revise the standards. The Common Core standards might as well be written in stone. This makes no sense. They were not handed down on Mount Sinai, they are not an infallible Papal encyclical, why is there no process for improving and revising them?”

So there is some of what Diane Ravitch has to say on the Common Core standards. If you’re interested in reading more, one of my favorite pieces I’ve read is from my friend at EdWeek, Nancy Flanagan, who wrote this gem of common sense in which she warns that “disaggregating the good reasons [to oppose Common Core] from the outright baloney is important. When we join the crazies, we reinforce their craziness and further muddy the discourse.”

In my personal opinion, I think that Common Core – divorced from high-stakes testing – is just another problematic, primarily profit-driven “reform” scheme that won’t do much to improve public education. The main problem – and therefore the main target of our opposition – should be the high-stakes testing that actually represents a danger to the quality of our public schools, the ability of our teachers to engage their students, and the opportunities our students have to develop the love of learning they deserve.

Last week we reported that education activists plan to attend Thursday’s Board of Regents meeting to protest new graduation requirements tied to high stakes testing. Today, the Providence Journal reports that “If those rules were already in place, 44 percent of this year’s seniors would be in jeopardy of not receiving a diploma, based on their poor math performance last year on the [NECAPs].”

Proponents of the change say it will help raise the level of education in the Ocean State, while opponents, according to ProJo education writer Jennifer Jordan “say education officials are forcing students to bear the consequences of a failed education system — with disastrous consequences. Without a diploma, young people cannot join the Army, participate in programs such as City Year, or apply to college.”

Speaking of high stakes testing, the Journal also runs this AP story about the El Paso, Texas school district that “was trying to push out hundreds of low-performing sophomores to prevent them from taking accountability tests.”

More WPRI poll results: Gov. Chafee is still unpopular but his approval rating is improving, while Angel Taveras and Gina Raimondo are deadlocked each with 58 percent approval ratings … it’s gonna be an interesting gubernatorial campaign in 2014!!

Did you know conservative pundit Ann Coulter uses Rhode Island as an example when she advocates for voter ID laws. According to Politifact, she told “The View” on Thursday, “One of the first states in the union to pass voter-ID bills was Rhode Island, 85 percent Democratic legislature,” she said. “And who pushed it? A black Democrat in the House, a black Democrat in the Senate. That’s a fact.” It’s true our voter ID law was supported by minority legislators in both chambers but it’s not true that our law was among the first in the country.

Even the gas is better in Massachusetts, or at least cheaper.

I mentioned Patch in yesterday’s Progress Report and it attracted some interesting comments. It’s true that Patch is slashing editorial budgets while increasing the workload on the local editors. It’s also true that many of the local editors don’t place a high value on hard news. One Patch editor told me they don’t even cover their local school committee!! Cranston Patch, on the other hand, does a great job doing real journalism on the community it covers.

Best correction of the day: “The tortoise won its race with the hare in Aesop’s fable about those animals. A clue in Sunday’s crossword puzzle inaccurately described the race’s outcome.”

The first presidential debate is tonight … here’s how the candidates will try to dodge the tough questions.

Today in 1967, the legendary Woodie Guthrie died.