For once, a not too lengthy post from me, something never thought possible. Maybe.
Farkbot. My state has adopted the Common Core Standards. I like the idea of national standards in that when you compare states, you have something to compare. However, I am against it as it is Federalism; less state control. And certain supporters (want a list? http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/common-core-endorsing-partners ) are those with something to gain through...
"accountability" (ahem...testing...new tests = more $) being: Achieve, ACT, The College Board (they invented the SAT), Datametrics, Datawise, (Good old) ETS, Intel Assess, Iowa Testing Program, Scantron.
and curriculum; (to re-publish books with new standards it costs $$!) American Reading Company with a board member who was the Sr. V.P. of Mc Graw Hill (major textbooks), Cambium Learning (President and VP both used to be a high-end managers at Houghton Mifflin), Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, Mc Graw Hill, Pearson, Scholastic/
And the creepies,
Alliance for Excellent Education's President yearns for pseudo-social efficiency with him "ensure that all students graduate from high school prepared for college, careers, and to be contributing members of society."
If we have common core standards, and the textbook and testing companies designed them, did they design them with true learning in mind, or just textbook regurgitation and rote-learning testing in mind?