The Standards Blitz: Some Background
Day 1
Writing standards for public education is somewhat akin to writing a constitution. The standards are, themselves, little more than words on a page. But the power of academic standards to create a vision, establish expectations for all parties to a system of education, and to coalesce society’s expectations for skills and knowledge are incredibly powerful.
Academic standards bring something to the party for all students, adults, and schools. For those students not well served by existing schools, standards reset the bar; they serve as a civil rights barometer; they identify the academic program all students must be afforded. Standards can identify a pathway through the K-12 system for college and career readiness. For adults, standards become the foundation of their work. For schools, standards are the basis for accountability systems.
California has gone through this experience once, in the late 1990s, and this week embarks on another try. This time, it’s as a member of an effort organized by the National Governor’s Association (NGA) and Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). Collectively, 48 states and the District of Columbia engaged in the development of Common Core Standards (Common Core).
This blog is going to report on, analyze, and reflect on California’s work over the next several weeks in considering the Common Core.
As brief background, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed SBX5 1 in January 2010. He also signed two Race to the Top applications (in January and June 2010). Each of these commitments led California to the work that begins with the Academic Standards Commission’s consideration of the Common Core. The task in front of the Academic Standards Commission is:
d) The commission shall develop academic content standards in language arts and mathematics. The standards shall be internationally benchmarked and build toward college and career readiness by the time of high school graduation. Unless otherwise allowed by the Secretary of the United States Department of Education, at least 85 percent of these standards shall be the common core academic standards developed by the consortium or interstate collaboration set
forth in Section 60605.7.
(e) Pursuant to the Bagley-Keene Act, Article 9 (commencing with Sec. 11120) of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code, all meetings and hearings of the commission shall be open and available to the public.
(f) On or before July 15, 2010, the commission shall present its recommended academic content standards to the state board.
(g) On or before August 2, 2010, the state board shall do either of the following:
(1) Adopt the academic content standards as proposed by the commission.
(2) Reject the academic content standards as proposed by the commission. If the state board rejects the standards it shall provide a specific written explanation to the Superintendent, the Governor, and the Legislature of the reasons why the proposed standards were rejected.
While this seems like a straightforward assignment, it is likely to be highly complex. Issues—ranging from state’s rights, the superiority of California’s current standards, cost, and implementation—will affect the overall development and design of the standards the commission submits to the State Board of Education by July 15.
Standards Watch is intended to be a reflection on the standards, their development, their potential, and, ultimately, the decision by the State Board of Education.
