Information technology's déjà vu all once more.

Peter Schrag

Peter Schrag

Virtually 20 years ago, after the Clinton administration proposed a program of voluntary national student testing, Chester Finn, then a senior fellow at the conservative Hudson Institute, warned that if information technology failed it would exist because "liberals hate the word 'testing' and conservatives detest the word 'national.'" He was correct.

The growing national backlash this spring against the Common Core State Standards and the testing programs linked to them – in California, the testing program has the impuissant name of Smarter Balanced – fits not only Checker Finn's diagnosis but belongs in a longer national history of controversies and uncertainties about what and how to teach our children, and who should decide.

In the decades earlier and right after World War II, the battles centered largely on progressive education, which in the eyes of some on the right during the Common cold State of war was a communist plot.

In 1962 our own Max Rafferty was elected state superintendent of public instruction with his attacks on progressivism and his call for a return to "the fundamentals." His recipe was phonics, memorization, drill and patriotism.

At nearly the same fourth dimension schools around the land were buffeted by battles over the "new math," the "new physics" and the "new biological science," school curricula that were themselves responses to the launching of Sputnik in 1957 and the resulting national panic that the Russians were about to beat our technological brains out.

The new curricula brought their ain backfire, some from conservatives, some from parents who couldn't understand what their kids were beingness asked to do. All that fancy new stuff, but my kid can't spell (tin can't add, doesn't know who Lincoln was). Let'southward get dorsum to the nuts.

For a variety of reasons California so far has been largely allowed to the Common Core backlash. Indiana this spring became the first of the 44 states that embraced Mutual Core standards 3 years ago to formally abandon them – now there will be fights well-nigh the replacement, "written by Hoosiers for Hoosiers."

Simply Wisconsin, Louisiana, Georgia, Oklahoma and a number of other Republican-dominated states may exist heading in the same direction. In New York, meanwhile, the teachers unions have been battling, with some success, to forbid any attempt to link Common Core assessments to teacher evaluations.

The fact that Common Core was created under the custodianship of the nation'due south governors and country school superintendents for voluntary adoption by the states hasn't kept conservatives from describing information technology as nevertheless another endeavor past the administration to expand federal control. In some circles, it's now become "Obamacore."

California has escaped nearly of that considering, in the words of Stanford Education Prof. Linda Darling-Hammond, "California has done it better, with care and focus, in a logical club and without punitive stakes."  Which is to say that since examination scores take no bearing on teacher evaluations hither, the teachers unions have been neutralized.

California Deputy Land Superintendent of Public Education Deb Sigman, California'due south testing honcho and co-chair of the Smarter Counterbalanced Testing Consortium, also credits the transparency of the adoption process. In the past few months, virtually 2 million California students have been part of the Smarter Balanced test field-testing regimen – testing the test – which, Sigman said, has "gone incredibly well."

Combine that with the weakness of the country Republican Party and the strong back up here for the Obama administration and in that location may not be much political gilt to be mined in this vein. CUACC, Californians United Against Common Cadre, the most visible organization opposing the new standards in this state, is a rickety drove of Tea Political party, Eagle Forum and local Republican groups.

No doubt Common Core, with its emphasis on trouble solving and its de-accent of rote learning and chimera tests, seems like a refreshing step in education.

Only for the meliorate part of a century, Americans have swung betwixt extremes in education; they've been offered one promising program after another, and so rejected it. David Tyack and Larry Cuban, both now retired from Stanford University, chosen it "Tinkering Toward Utopia." If history is any guide, the Mutual Cadre honeymoon may not last forever, fifty-fifty in California.

Anyone who's watched America's school fights since Sputnik – battles virtually how to teach reading and math, well-nigh homework, about social promotion, virtually evolution and creationism, about "secular humanism," about vocational ed and tracking, even near the use of calculators – may have uneasy recollections of all the great new programs that came to zippo and all the great ideas that crashed.

Some fell of their own weight; some were shot downward in some great ideological boxing, now long forgotten. There was fifty-fifty a time in the late 1960s when some liberal educators and school critics, wanting to get out of the "lock-step" of traditional schooling, supported vouchers. I was ane of them.

Peradventure Mutual Core and Smarted Balanced volition do amend. Sigman thinks fifty-fifty poor and minority students will exercise ameliorate with Common Core. Simply volition kids who come from socially disadvantaged backgrounds accept what Due east. D. Hirsch chosen the "cultural literacy" to master the college-order skills that Mutual Cadre presumably requires? Will they fifty-fifty have the computer experience that the tests require?

What of teachers? Some will thrive on information technology. Possibly Common Cadre will also draw better people into a profession that'due south always drawn disproportionately from the everyman-scoring college graduates. Merely what virtually those who've long relied on all the one-time means? Can they suit?

In that location's lots of potential out there for notwithstanding another flameout. Our schools, like our politics and much else, have e'er been plagued by our historic anti-intellectualism. Can Common Core live through all that?

…

Peter Schrag is the former editorial folio editor and columnist of the Sacramento Bee. He is the writer of "Paradise Lost: California's Experience, America'south Future," and  "California: America's High Stakes Experiment." His latest book is "Not Fit for Our Society: Clearing and Nativism in America" (University of California Press).

EdSource welcomes commentaries representing diverse points of view. The opinions expressed in this commentary represent those of the author. If y'all would similar to submit a commentary for EdSource Today, please contact us.

To get more reports like this one, click here to sign upwardly for EdSource'southward no-cost daily email on latest developments in educational activity.