The Onion

 

The Center for American Progress Education makes Common Core sound like it will enable more girls to take AP Physics course which will help them in the STEM job market. Who is responsible for this tweet?  Center for American Progress:

 

CAP

 

I kind of chuckle when I read CAP ‘challenges the media to cover the issues that truly matter’ when I think about the almost non-existent MSM coverage given to the CCSS adoption in 2010 and the circumvention of the political process by the non-governmental organizations such as CCSSO, NGA and Achieve.  Speaking of NGOs, who is supporting CAP and its vision of solving the 21st challenges in energy, national security, education, etc?  The list is long (58 Corporate Sponsors in 2013), but includes the usual names supporting the CCSS Initiative:

  • Apple Inc.
  • AT&T
  • DeVry Education Group
  • Discovery
  • Facebook
  • GE
  • Goldman Sachs
  • Google*
  • Microsoft Corporation
  • MyWireless.Org
  • Northrop Grumman
  • Pearson
  • PepsiCo
  • PG&E Corporation
  • Time Warner Inc.
  • Walmart

Who knew that such a progressive group received so much support from the 1%?

 

The report listed on the tweet is from their own organization.  It doesn’t specifically address the STEM jobs CCSS is readying students to enter.  Here’s a report on STEM jobs projected for 2018 from My College Options and STEM Connector:

 

stem jobs

When most parents think about STEM jobs for their children, they are probably thinking their child will be preparing to be a doctor, engineer or researcher.  With over 2/3 of STEM jobs in the computing field, maybe parents at the parent/teacher conferences need to have the teacher and/or principal define exactly what is meant by readying children for STEM jobs.  Is it for a computer programmer or data entry clerk?  Maybe it’s to fill those unfilled manufacturing jobs?  Maybe it’s to be an ‘app designer’?  It’s imperative to understand exactly what is meant by readying children for STEM and understanding exactly what the proponents are saying.

Reviewing the statistics, do the majority of the expected 2018 STEM jobs require little higher math?  Is that why CCSS doesn’t go beyond Algebra II?  It makes sense that Jason Zimba (architect of the Math standards) stated that CCSS won’t make students ready for most of the colleges parents aspire their children to attend:

 

 

 

Proponents are saying Zimba’s words are not really what you just heard and he didn’t really mean what he said.  Here is a 10 page document addressing the  proponents’ claims of the architect of the math standards didn’t mean what he said:

 

Why this paper – Stanford University

ftp://math.stanford.edu/pub/papers/…/ZimbaMilgramStotskyFinal.pdf

This paper began as a response to the attempt by Professor Jason Zimba, a lead writer … We are responding to Zimba’s two attempts to “clarify” what he had said three years earlier … STEM pipeline.4 Zimba’s explanation of college readiness together with the …. into a community college or a non-selective four-year college.

 

The CCSS proponents get caught in what they say or what they don’t say.  To expand the close reading of the above tweet, it is important to look deeper and use critical thinking skills to determine exactly what the tweet is stating, who is funding it, and if the claims made hold up to research.   The Center for American Progress:

 

  • is sponsored by the 1%
  • insinuates that more girls will be able to take higher level exams that the boys do because of common core even as the math in CCSS won’t prepare them for those exams
  • needs to define exactly what STEM jobs they are referring to

 

It’s important not to take tweets and talking points at face value.  Research and determine who is behind the message, find the research/data behind the claims/theories, and the exact definition of STEM/college ready and equity.   Then you can decide if the claims of the Common Core proponents actually make common sense or if it is an massive PR campaign to support the privatization of education by the 1% who have become the choice architects for the American people.  Regardless of what those architects think of you, you are not ‘too stupid to understand’.

The devil is in the details:

The idiom the devil is in the details means that mistakes are usually made in the small details of a project. Usually it is a caution to pay attention to avoid failure.

 

Published November 20, 2014

 

Gretchen Logue