If There Is No Change, There Is No Change . . .

For months, I have sat on the sidelines and heard the Common Core debate, shaking my head in amazement and bewilderment about what has gradually evolved into a political issue. From my seat, I have heard and read others persistently saying that "Obama did this" and "it's just another example of politicians ruining things." To understand my confusion, please read as I offer an insight that few others can share.

Let me begin by stating this point: For years, I have listened while others have criticized today's education, students, and teachers. What I have heard is that kids do not know much, that they cannot do much math, and that their writing skills are terrible. In short, frequently, I hear how education is bad today and the reasons usually are pointed in the teachers' direction. So, attempting to use a bit of logical reasoning, if employers and other adults are saying the current educational system does not work, perhaps we should advocate for a change. Given that logic, readers might agree that establishing a common set of basic standards that all kids are to be taught may be a beginning point for improving students' learning: a "common core."

Another overlooked point is this: What has been taught across the country certainly has varied from state to state, district to district, school to school, and even building to building. As a result, in my high school teaching years, it was not unusual for kids to transfer in from other school districts (perhaps due to parental moves, open enrollment, or expulsion from other schools) who even though they had been enrolled in similar classes were considerably behind (or occasionally ahead of) what we were doing not only in my class but in various ones across the curriculum. In short, no commonality existed. Today's Common Core standards in English and math are an attempt to address that.

To further solidify my claim, I must also share a vital piece of information. Approximately six years ago, I was invited to attend a meeting (along with approximately twenty other English teachers from throughout the state) that was held at the Ohio School of the Deaf in Columbus. The meeting's purpose was to begin discussing the establishment of a "common" set of standards to improve our students' learning. At that meeting, we were clearly informed that this was a directive of the Ohio Department of Education (the department that was conducting this particular meeting) and that it was not a political issue. I paid attention during that meeting, so trust me when I say that the issues discussed had nothing to do with outside political influence. Thus, when I read of various legislators attempting to convince Ohio citizens that this is political onslaught, when I read the literature of opponents (who amusingly had a misspelled word in their literature that they distributed!), and when I read letters to the editor or blogs that criticize the core, I realize how powerful the loudest voice in the room can be. Again, I repeat: I was at the first meeting regarding the core--it had nothing to do with political agendas. It was and continues to be an attempt to improve education!

Without a doubt, a few readers may stop reading right this instant and say something negative about me, the writer, because they do not agree with me. Ok, I get that, but let's again talk about logic, not emotion. Many who complain about education today, I am afraid, are under the fantasy belief that they were great students taught by great teachers so they received great educations. I am not directing any disrespect toward the teaching, but I am pointing out that perhaps we all were not all as effective students as we like to remember ourselves being, a point I have addressed in other blog entries. We have all heard the oft-repeated cry of "it's a changing world" to the point where we tire of hearing it. Additionally, many will say that "we ought to go back to when schools taught only the basics." My friends, somewhere in there the basics have been misguided, for what reasons I can only speculate. Again, my point: The Common Core is an attempt to equalize education for students in English and math--what is the problem with addressing a weakness? If math and English are not currently considered weaknesses for graduates, then why do complaints from employers and other adults continue? Should we address the issue, or should we bury our heads and act like we should continue doing what we "have always done"? Again, please consider my logic--throw the emotion out the door and think about solutions . . . anybody can complain, but what is the best way to improve our kids' learning? Any legitimate suggestions jump to your minds?

 I entitled this entry "If there is no change, there is no change" as a thought-provoker. I could tell you that I created those words from the top of my head, but I confess to stealing them from a poem I read long ago, one with simple words and striking power. The "core" reflects this logic: like practically everything (including the Browns, Cavs, and Indians), we all want improvement--education is in the same boat. If we are going to continue progressing as a society, we need to identify problem areas, assess them, and provide solutions. Of course, not everyone is going to agree with the solutions-- human nature at its finest--but, at the least, solutions are being advanced. Simply retreating to the "way we used to do them" is not a feasible option in most situations. In this case, I do not see retreating as productive. I do believe in the Common Core because I understand its roots. Obviously, change is not easy and usually it is not immediately productive, but in the long term change is sorely needed. My hope is that in addition to softening the emotion, we allow the new standards to become implemented, to be taught, to be allowed to prosper. I have to believe we are intelligent enough to understand that logic.