The shift toward a nationalized agenda within the educational sector has long been in the works. ‘Common core’ curriculum or otherwise known to reformists, parents, students, and administrators as the potential death of public education has become the standardized scapegoat within the educational spectrum. Article after article has demonstrated that this push to a nationalized educational structure is promoting a rush towards socialism and is diminishing the rights of the states to deal with education. Despite some flaws within common core (like most other enacted legislation), the concept and design of ‘the core’ is actually quite intriguing; especially to a future educator.
The difficulty in grasping the positives of common core are often led by teachers who ‘don’t want to be told how to teach,’ or parents who don’t want the government to tell teachers what and how to teach.’ However, in all actuality, common core does neither. Ultimately, the teacher is the one presenting information to students and they are able to do so however they would like. There are ‘guidelines‘ not necessarily standards that common core presents, but in order to promote both equity and equality within education shouldn’t there be some sort of basis or foundation to allow teachers to build off of? Most teachers are going to use common core or any generalized curriculum as a foundation in which they can utilize as a starting point, bring outside sources or varying teaching methods to the table, and educate students to the fullest of their abilities. Common core or any generalized curriculum allow teachers to have a basis to work with, but then add to the basis through allowing the teacher to add in supplemental material. However, there will be other teachers (typically considered ‘bad’ teachers) that will manipulate the system and use the curriculum to their advantage by simply negating any additional teaching materials and techniques and blaming common core on inadequately education students. This (like in any system) is quite inevitable.
The ‘core’ also promotes unification among schools to demonstrate some sort of proportional knowledge being displayed across the states. With an increasing number of migrant workers moving around the country, common core promotes the ability for a student to have a less difficult time transitioning from one school to another. In turn, this promotes a more equal opportunity to students that are constantly moving and switching schools.
Today, there are still issues with the common core curriculum. The mathematics curriculum sometimes seems overly complicated when dealing with simple math. In addition, the ‘core’ also hinges on statistical methods of analysis (a child is not a statistic) However, despite curriculum and evaluation issues, there are positives to take away from the overall aesthetic of common core. The system is far from perfect, but once states begin to use common core as a set of guidelines (not standards), public education might be headed on the right path.