By Mark

At the end of July, Randy Dorn announced that the state of Washington has adopted and will begin transitioning to application of the Common Core standards for English Language Arts. I head back to my classroom next week to start unpacking and really getting down to work preparing for the school year, but I'm having a problem seeing how this shift in standards should affect my planning and implementation.

And, based on the emails that have filled my spam folder for my school email address, there are an awful lot of businesses looking to cash in on this standards changeover… so many emails in fact, that the persistent cynic in me wonders whether this change to CCSSO Common Core standards isn't more about supporting textbook and software manufacturers than it is about promoting learning. When I see on the changeover explanation that the "system will include…

• optional formative, or benchmark, exams; and
• a variety of tools, processes and practices that teachers may use in planning and implementing informal, ongoing assessment. This will assist teachers in understanding what students are and are not learning on a daily basis so they can adjust instruction accordingly.

…I hear the cha-ching of cash registers and start thinking about all those emails trying to sell me matierals "perfectly aligned with Common Core Standards to guarantee student success on major assessments."

It probably isn't all about lining the pockets of curriculum mills, but when I look at the standards and the timeline that OSPI posted (more on that below), I do wonder really what is going to change… and I don't mean that in a futile, cynical way. I mean it like this: don't these standards just communicate what we should have been doing anyway under the old standards?

Lest I start portrary a dangerous combination of arrogance and ignorance, I know that my own practice is constantly evolving and improving and that clearly articulated standards can help with that. However, this changeover to the Common Core seems to be just a matter of rewording… becoming a little more concise in some places and a little more open-ended in others. I teach writing: this standards change is merely a revision to improve word choice and clarity, not a scrap-it-and-start-over kind of revision. No big deal.

No big deal unless you look at the "rollout" timeline proposed by OSPI. My worry about these standards was kindled by this little diagram (from the same OSPI site linked above): 

Now, when I read the "old" versus the "new" standards, I do not see dramatic changes. There are not suddenly new skills I'd overlooked that I need to start teaching ASAP. The timeline diagram above is the only troubling thing about this whole changeover. As I apply my visual literacy skills, my critical thinking interprets that such a timeline implies that this changeover will require dramatic paradigm shifts and changes in curriculum statewide. Not only is this a transition of such heft that it will take several years to implement, such a shift shall require extensive retraining and professional development (as per above), not to mention review, adoption and purchase of whole new sets of curriculum materials (also per above). After all, I will need two years to simply become aware–then two years for "classroom transition" (whatever that means).

What do new standards really mean? I guess they are re-writing the state test, and from what I can tell, we're working toward a system with two separate summative tests in a given school year. I'm fine with that.

But, I do not see how what I will be teaching must dramatically change, but I know what comes with anything that is new in education: I fear that these "new standards" will mean many meetings, committees, and a whole factory line built to reinvent the wheel we're already using. I envision paperwork and reports to administration and explanations of what we're doing differently under these new standards. And for some reason this passage from Chapter 10 of George Orwell's Animal Farm sticks in my head:

…the pigs had to expend enormous labours every day upon mysterious things called "files," "reports," "minutes," and "memoranda." These were large sheets of paper which had to be closely covered with writing, and as soon as they were so covered, they were burnt in the furnace. This was of the highest importance for the welfare of the farm, Squealer said.

It feels like we are simply building toward an excuse to make work. I do actually like the "new" wording these standards bring, but this change hardly seems to warrant a major five-year phased rollout. Am I missing something here? Is there a revolution I have slept through or some fine print I've overlooked?