Vanderbilt Political Review Winter 2014 | Page 11

MARCH 2014 DOMESTIC up exceedingly quickly with, according to Bill Evers at Stanford University, an abnormally short investigation process. Now, states are beginning to implement a process that is, as critics like Director of the American Principles Project Emmett McGroarty put it, “reckless in what it’s doing with children.” Such claims are substantiated by the fact that the philosophy behind the Common Core is in many ways contrary to what current child development research suggests is appropriate, according to a joint statement signed by more than 500 early childhood experts. Moreover, authors of the Common Core, eager to implement the program before it became bogged down in politics, left the curriculum untested before its implementation of the national level, says Claudio Sanchez of NPR. Concerns have also been raised about the way in which the rigorous testing that accompanies the Common Core is becoming a part of American classrooms. The Common Core reminds the public of the increased testing under No Child Left Behind, much to many educators’ dismay. As North Carolina Superintendent Dr. Elease Frederic puts it: “You teach, you test. You re-teach, you test.” Performance-based standards have al- ready been implemented in states across the nation, without, according to NPR, giving teachers the training or the time to adapt to new procedures before being evaluated. Worried parents and educators recall the same argument used against No Child Left Behind: national performance assessments give an ineffective picture of achievement, but are still used to rank schools and allocate funding. What’s different about the Common Core, though, is that it expects students and teachers to adopt a completely new curriculum and simultaneously improve performance. Students themselves testify to the difficulty, if not the impossibility, of meeting this expectation. Junior Matthew O’Connell of Commack High School in New York uses the metaphor of a swimming pool: “The Common Core can be likened to raising the water level at a public pool…By raising the level, schools systems already at a high standard…are provided with a way to challenge their students… Unfortunately, this has also raised the water level for schools that metaphorically could not swim before its implementation, leaving both faculty and students to drown.” Perhaps, though, dissatisfaction with the Common Core