The Solano County Superintendent of Schools on Sunday published a column promoting the acceptance of the new education concept for elementary and high schools.
His opening statement, “Ensuring that our students are both career and college ready is an important and sensible goal,” is deceptive. Conjunction word “or” instead of “and” would have been correct. Not all students desire or need a career requiring college training and the waste of students achieving expensive degrees in nonproductive fields is well known.
He was disingenuous in crediting Common Core for introducing critical thinking as a new approach. Not mentioned was the discomfort of Common Core personal data collection (think NSA). His closing rhetorical question, “Isn’t that what we all want for our children?” is nondebatable, but the path to that objective is the debate.
The remainder of the superintendent’s column was nonspecific platitudes promising nice objectives, but not explaining how that will happen. Perhaps this is why both Solano County and California superintendents refused to participate in the Vacaville town hall meeting two months ago to debate Common Core.
Considerable effort was committed to insure a balanced pro and con debate and eventually the two sides were well represented. An issue cited in the recent column was also presented by the proponents in the town hall – that Common Core will teach how to process information rather than rote memory, e.g. 3 +3 = 6.
Unfortunately, the proponents could not explain what that meant even though citizens asked three times for explanation.
This nation developed for 175 years on the principle that the federal government would only engage problems that required a federal solution – that the states should be sovereign individual laboratories for all else.
Remember the concept of “new math” that swept the nation in early 1970s? Parents with children exposed to that nonsense have not forgotten. Luckily that failure was quickly placed in the trash can, but now we are going to revamp the entire system? New York started early – why not wait for their results and lessons learned? Perhaps because the New York results are not totally favorable.
Parents and taxpayers, study both sides of this issue carefully.