Parsing the Common Core Reform Spin
The Common Core proponents in their PR campaigns have been very clever. They use language and questions based on presuppositions. The assumption is that private non-governmental organizations have the authority to set standards and mandates for public schools with no public accountability. If you don’t challenge that primary assumption of the elites herding the masses, you can find yourself responding to pro CCSS arguments such as:
- Show me a standard you don’t like
- Don’t you want higher standards?
- We need to produce globally competitive students
- You aren’t an expert so your opinion is not valid
- We need to do something
Cut through the noise and don’t waste your energy on these circular arguments. All of them are based on the power they elites believe they are entitled to have. Remember, they are making the assumption that private non-governmental organizations have the authority to set standards and mandates for public schools with no public accountability. It’s a technique that is insulting to those who are compelled to pay for the system and provide their children who are part of this untested initiative. It’s the circumvention of the political process and allows private companies to use federal money for their plans with no accountability.
When you come across these pro reformer arguments in print or school board meetings, challenge the language and the presupposition the elites have the authority to direct public education. Here’s an example:
You don’t really need to ask those questions if you read the link provided. It’s Melinda Gates touting how her foundation needed to take action….so they did. The ‘we’ phrase has been bolded by MEW:
Gates attributes this to different education standards from state to state. She said it was time for something “different.” That different standard was the Common Core, which has now been adopted fully by 45 states.
“We saw the difference they could make in kids lives and we also saw that it brought flexibility to the way you were teaching and that teachers could start to collaborate with one another on lesson plans,” Gates said. “We can help come up with tools that help teachers teach the Common Core. If a teacher wants to teach ‘The Scarlet Letter’ or ‘Beloved’ or ‘The Secret Life of Bees,’ we can have tools there that then help them teach and then scaffold those lessons appropriately to meet the needs of their students.”
But Common Core has been criticized by teachers unions and parent groups, and at least three states have dropped the program this year.
“Where it got tricky was in the implementation,” Gates said. “Let’s be honest. The implementation of this is going to take some time. It has to be done carefully, it has to be done with teachers on board and they need to get some time before they can actually teach appropriately in the classroom. So you’ve got to make sure that the assessments and the consequences for teachers and students don’t happen immediately at the same time. And I think we got those two pieces overlapped and that’s why you got so much controversy.”
Well, well, well. The assumption is clear. The Foundation believes it has authority to make these plans and there is the acknowledgement that far from being state led, the two pieces of teachers learning ‘how’ to teach common core and assessing this new teaching was in fact, orchestrated by the ‘we‘.
I probably won’t receive an answer to my tweet. In fact, I believe my response was deleted by @MBAENews . I don’t see that nifty ‘view summary’ on the tweet. You might want to ask this question yourself to the elites who have made plans for you:
Where are my questions? What have the ‘we’ decided to do with those who ask questions? Just hit the ‘delete’ button? I don’t think that’s a great PR move but it’s easy to do when you don’t want to answer or believe you don’t have a duty to answer to the people who are paying for your reform.