Today's Paper Latest stories 🏈 High school scoreboard Obits Traffic Newsletters Weather Puzzles + games
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

THE LATEST bugaboo of the ring-tailed roarers on both the far right and left of American education has a name: Common Core.

This story is only available from the Arkansas Online archives. Stories can be purchased individually for $2.95. Click here to search for this story in the archives.

Editorial, Pages 18 on 04/26/2014

Print Headline: How to erode standards

Sponsor Content

Comments

You must be signed in to post comments
  • jondeanross
    April 26, 2014 at 9:04 a.m.

    While this column correctly repudiates the common core detractors that oppose uniform basic standards, it does a disservice and injustice to the debate by failing to recognize that what ignites the most passion and ardor among most detractors is that the standards it advances are misplaced and poorly created. If you just spend five minutes researching the "new math" or "fuzzy math" problems that kids must answer on Common Core standardized tests, then you would quickly be added to the voices of those who are disturbed that children are being held "accountable" to these new "standards".

    I normally find the feature opinion published by this paper to be based on the common sense of the reasonably, prudent person. But by equating those who decry the senselessness of the "common core" standards to those who decry any standards at all is a huge cheapshot. Perhaps next time you author an opinion on "Common Core" detractors, you can take the time to really understand that the basis of the opposition is that parents don't want their children taught and then assessed by standards that are one step forward, one hundred backwards.

  • JakeTidmore
    April 26, 2014 at 4:29 p.m.

    The editorial also misrepresents the teacher union views on Common Core standards. NEA members polled 75% in favor of CC standards and what major differences with the program have to do with issues concerning teachers not the standards themselves.
    The NEA website even has a page giving facts on CC in a very positive light. And, yes, they do outline the main concerns that opponents have and which of them they agree with or believe might have potential risks associated with them.
    The article fails to mention that one of the strongest voices against CC comes from the Republican Tea Party branch -- a not so strange omission when you figure that they'd rather tar the quite minimal teacher union resistance than to make mention that a large contingent of Republicans dislike CC.
    A paper with very poor editorial standards supports CC school standards. How ironic.
    jdross -- we may not see eye to eye on this topic, but you are correct in pointing out how poorly researched this piece was. Too often, this is the type of editorials one gets on education from their pseudo-expert and his unenlightened opinions. I get angry with such lazy journalism.

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT