Meredith Lampe

Purpose: Illustrate a complex issue in education to be used for the final group project, and convince the
team that a project based on this issue would be a strong one.

Context: Audience is a group of passionate, young university students who have been studying
educational systems for the last 4 weeks. Many feel no hesitation in contributing to group discussion, but
some prefer having more time to formulate responses. All want to succeed and are personally invested in
the outcome of the current project, and must be convinced that the chosen topic will be fertile for deep
investigation and analysis.

Materials Needed: Whiteboard marker, broad-sweeps information about Common Core, printouts of
Common Cores Key Design Considerations (as pulled from the Common Core State Standards for
English Language Arts & Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects), discussion
questions, highlighters.

Method:

First, draw upon what we already know to be true about education from the readings weve done
so far. What consistencies have we seen (remembering Freire, Tough, Ripley and in-class discussions) in
successful educational systems? Make a list on the board of the qualities of thriving school systems--
reference in-class debate between Poland, U.S., Finland, and South Korea.

Read summary of Common Core. What do we like/dislike about this right off of the bat? (begin
pro/con list, using table below as reference to stimulate discussion). For further discussion, handout Key
Design Considerations sheet, having highlighted chosen paragraphs under CCR and grade-specific
standards and A focus on results rather than means. Prompt one group member to read the former
aloud, and ask that other group members circle aspects that they like/dont like. This paragraph was
chosen specifically to challenge group members to consider whether annual checkpoints are necessary
(in comparison to one big end-of-high-school checkpoint seen in some other successful countries). Ask
another group member to read the latter paragraph, again requesting that group members note positives/
negatives. Here, draw attention to the autonomy given to teachers through the Common Cores results-
focused approach.

Conclude by noting how, even in only a 15 minute discussion, the group was able to pull out
significant controversies surrounding the Common Core. Use this as evidence to the fact that this topic is
multi-dimensional and would be a stimulating final group project topic.

From Common Core Website:

Building on the best of existing state standards, the Common Core State Standards provide clear and
consistent learning goals to help prepare students for college, career, and life. The standards clearly
demonstrate what students are expected to learn at each grade level, so that every parent and teacher
can understand and support their learning.

The standards are:

1. Research and evidence based

2. Clear, understandable, and consistent

3. Aligned with college and career expectations

4. Based on rigorous content and the application of knowledge through higher-order thinking skills

5. Built upon the strengths and lessons of current state standards

6. Informed by other top-performing countries to prepare all students for success in our global
economy and society

According to the best available evidence, the mastery of each standard is essential for success in college,
career, and life in todays global economy.

PROS CONS
Focus on the results rather than the means gives Veiled attempt at a federal takeover of local
teachers more autonomy education

Standards raise expectations of students Standards are one-size-fits-all

Consistency between schools Less local control, less flexibility

Whats the alternative? (State standards that often Fear that it gives federal government too much
duplicate common core principles) control over curriculum, content, etc.

Results:

Works Cited:

Read the Standards (2015). Common Core State Standards Initiative. Retrieved 11 February 2015.

Common Core - Questions and Answers (2014). ProCon.org. Retrieved 11 February 2015.