Common Core critics, what are you for?

We can’t return to old, failed system

For almost two decades, the U.S. has been working to improve its public schools by holding them accountable for results on standardized tests. And there’s been some success, with America’s lowestperforming students showing marked gains.

Unfortunately, similar progress hasn’t been made for students in the middle or at the top. That shouldn’t be surprising, since the standards and tests that most states put into place — including in New York — were set at ridiculously low levels.

Now we see the result of these policies: Many young people have been taking and passing these tests and then emerging from high school unready for college-level work or decent-paying jobs.

As a result, many graduates were forced to get remedial education — which meant taxpayers paid twice to educate them. According to a recent study, New Yorkers could have saved roughly a quarter-billion dollars in 2007-08 if the state hadn’t needed to provide just such remediation.

Back then, the Thomas B. Fordham Institute — the think tank where we examine policy issues and promote reforms in K-12 education — reviewed New York’s standards, and graded them a C in English and a B in mathematics.

In 2010, however, New York woke up — and adopted the Common Core State Standards, the product of a multiyear, state-led effort aimed at aligning school expectations for students with the demands of the real world. We rated these new standards a B+ in English-language arts and an A- in math.

We have long advocated for higher, clearer, big-picture standards. For those unfamiliar, standards aren’t the curriculum that’s taught in classrooms; they’re broad benchmarks that define which essential skills and knowledge are needed at various grades.

The new Common Core standards don’t change the fact that complex education decisions about how to implement standards still belong with states, communities, teachers and parents.

In recent months, we have been puzzled by the small but vocal minority of conservatives who have joined forces with some on the far left to oppose the Common Core. It’s appropriate to worry about threats like federal intervention into schools, ideological indoctrination of students and poor-quality instruction.

But the Common Core doesn’t promote any of those things. Instead, it pushes schools, teachers and students to higher levels of achievement and deeper levels of skill-and-content knowledge than most have accomplished in the past — and far more than New York’s old standards ever aspired to.

Leaders in New York should now stand up to misguided and illinformed political attacks and demand answers from both liberal and conservative critics of the Common Core.

Would those on the left really remove testing and other measures that ensure that parents and teachers know whether students are learning all that they should — and enable them to help those who aren’t?

Would those on the right really have New Yorkers send their children to schools that are forced to scrap these higher standards?

We welcome debate over the Common Core, but the facts are clear: New York, to its credit, has opted to set a higher bar for student learning. Opponents have an obligation to say what they would do instead. Settle for yesterday’s weak standards and today’s lackluster performance?

If someone offers a better option, we will support it. If states choose to use flexibility built into the Common Core to improve their standards even more, we will support that, too.

In the meantime, however, something very promising is on the table. Attention and energy should go into devising the best way to put it into practice in New York. New York made a choice for the better when it adopted the Common Core. It must not turn back now, especially under pressure from a few loud opponents without a better plan.