But, there are problems

The Kentucky Department of Education (KDE) recently held a press conference to announce the plan of attack related to the new Senate Bill 1’s requirements to review and revise the state’s academic education standards. There is going to be a lot of action in this area over the next few years for subjects like science and social studies, but the process of review for the state’s English language arts (ELA) and math standards has already started. The first step involves a public comment period that will run until September 15.However, there may be some challenges with getting this public comment period right.

In fact, it appears things might be getting stacked to preserve the status quo as much as possible. That might not be in the best interests of our kids.

Once again, as it did with a 2015 public review of the state’s standards in math and ELA, the department is using an online Survey Monkey system to gather feedback.

The ELA standards review is found at this link and the math review is at this link.

Unfortunately, the Survey Monkeys use existing, Common Core based standards for a framework for gathering comments. That format makes it difficult to suggest really significant changes that might work better for Kentucky. Essentially, this sets things up to perpetuate the status quo.

In fact, the few changes that are presently being proposed come from the earlier, 2015 Survey Monkey program, which also was run by the department. With one exception, the addition of calculus to the math standards, these proposed changes are largely cosmetic. Most just clarify the meanings of existing standards. The meat of the standards won’t change very much if these proposals are the only changes made. There is no way the proposals could be rationally be considered a repeal of the Common Core in Kentucky.

By the way, since Common Core allows states to add up to 15% of additional material to the standards, the addition of calculus is not a real change from Common Core, either.

One glaring problem with the Common Core is that fluency in the standard addition and subtraction algorithms isn’t required until the fourth grade. That is WAY behind leading international standards such as those found in Singapore, where fluency in these basic math operations is expected in the second grade. [Added Comments, May 31, 2017] This is also two years behind the recommendation of the National Council for Teachers of Mathematics, which also says fluency in the addition and subtraction algorithm should come in Grade 2.

(See Page 8 in the NCTM's "Addition and Subtraction: The Big Ideas and Essential Understandings").

Math experts are also concerned that Common Core delays algebra until high school. It needs to be covered earlier for any student wanting to go on to more advanced education, especially science and technology careers.

However, the information in the standards review Survey Monkeys from the KDE indicates no grade-to-grade changes in standards are being contemplated. That is a serious error.

The Survey Monkey approach certainly doesn’t offer an efficient way to suggest a major, overall change such as totally shifting to an alternative, proven, top-quality pre-Common Core set of standards such as existed in the past in Massachusetts. Using those previous standards, Massachusetts’ public education system bubbled to the top on National Assessment of Educational Progress tests year after year.

Thus, it looks like most of our criticisms of the 2015 effort, such as discussed here and here still apply to this new standards review.

By the way, a major problem with the 2015 review is that it prohibited making calls to completely replace Common Core. That made the results from the previous survey completely useless as a valid indication of what Kentuckians really want to see in their public education system.

Returning to the present, we have a puzzling situation, because Kentucky Commissioner of Education Stephen Pruitt said in the recent news conference that:

"We’re going to listen to the public and see what needs to be rewritten. If it calls for a massive rewrite, we do it.”

OK, but how can the public efficiently make suggestions with the shoehorned Survey Monkeys if “massive” change is being suggested? Does the public have to say “replace this standard completely” for every single Survey Monkey element? That would take a very long time to do.

On the other hand, if the changes are not “massive,” will Kentucky really have repealed Common Core, which is the stated legislative intent of Senate Bill 1?So, I have concerns that the Survey Monkey format, which shoe horns comments into the existing standards’ tight jacket, remains biased towards maintaining the status quo. Right now, the only alternative seems to be to write a letter to the Kentucky Commissioner of Education and the state board. I have no idea if that will get much consideration in the formal review process, however.

One last point: real, high quality academic standards don’t just describe the skills and abilities students are expected to learn, but those standards also provide solid information about how good a performance is good enough.

For example, you can learn in the Survey Monkey that the contentious, Kentucky Common Core based Grade 4 math standard reads:

4.NBT.B.4 Fluently add and subtract multi-digit whole numbers using the standard algorithm.

Aside from the fact that many experts believe this comes too late in a student’s school experience, how does a student demonstrate “fluency?” This important “Performance Standard” information is missing; but, it is essential information for curriculum writers, teachers and test developers. Absent providing performance standards, Kentucky could be left, yet again, with a test-driven education system, something virtually no one wants. But, changing Common Core into real standards isn’t going to be easy, and the Survey Monkey approach isn’t likely to get that job done for Kentucky’s children, either.

[Updated May 31, 2017 to add information about NCTM's grade recommendation for fluency in standard math addition and subtraction algorithms]