Sandra Stotsky has emerged as a leading critic of the Common Core standards, based on her experience in Massachusetts in setting academic standards. Here, she takes issue with David Steiner, the former commissioner of education in New York.
New York State Test Results: Uninterpretable But a Portent of the Future
In the original version of David Steiner’s talk on the meaning of the drop in test scores in New York State (http://roosevelthouse.hunter.cuny.edu/ciep/test-scores-in-nys-its-on-all-of-us/), he says:
“The truth we are now trying to tell, for the first time, is relative to something called college- and career-readiness, roughly equivalent to the ability to enter a community college without the need for remediation.”
That statement is also in the version appearing in his Education Next blog (http://educationnext.org/test-scores-in-nys-it’s-on-all-of-us/).
Something happened to this truth in his op-ed in the New York Post on August 8, 2013. The truth is still relative to something called college-and career-readiness, but that concept is now “roughly equivalent to the ability to enter and succeed in college.” Not “community college.” (http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/painful_but_necessary_process_teQvo0ptYRggOyHymASc4M). Two very different meanings and educational goals.
The “truth” is at the heart of the problem most critics have with Common Core; it tries, unsuccessfully, to straddle both meanings and goals. Steiner believes that “if we are going to reduce the vast gap between high-school graduation standards and college- and career-readiness,…high-school graduation standards will have to rise.” But when grade 11 tests based on Common Core’s standards are given across this country, low scores will not mean that high school graduation standards are rising or that Common Core’s standards are rigorous.
First of all, schools will be using a “college readiness” level that is “minimal” and for “non-selective colleges.” That is the way Common Core’s level was described by Jason Zimba, the lead writer for Common Core’s mathematics standards (http://www.doe.mass.edu/boe/minutes/10/0323reg.pdf). That level is not very different from the level for high school graduation today. What will be different is that students deemed “college ready” will get credit for whatever freshman courses they take in that non-selective college even when they know no more than freshmen today who are placed in remedial coursework. Second, without knowledge of the quality of the test items and the cut scores used in the past decade on high school end-of-course or exit tests, we can’t tell if low student scores on a college readiness test reflect more rigorous standards or the shock of a sudden change to higher cut scores.
We can have a meaningful rise in high school graduation standards only after we separate high school graduation standards from college admission standards. The latter should mean in mathematics that freshmen are capable of taking calculus and majoring in science, finance, economics, and other mathematics-dependent fields if they wish. In fact, a mathematics professor who teaches at the University of Massachusetts/Lowell, Charles Ormsby, has recently proposed trigonometry as the college readiness level for credit-bearing freshman courses (see http://www.deseretnews.com/article/765635383/What-to-expect-of-Common-Core.html). College readiness should also mean that students read at the high school level—the result of an intellectually appropriate secondary English curriculum.
Many will argue that such a level in mathematics and reading is unreasonably high and that a large number of students won’t be able to attend a real college. But maybe students who can’t meet a mathematics or reading standard that means authentic college-readiness should have alternative high schools and high school curricula to choose from, as in Massachusetts with 30 regional career/technical high schools available. This country doesn’t need more college graduates; it needs academically stronger schools from K-12 and choices among different kinds of high schools.

Are there real colleges anymore as mentioned in the article? Maybe college is the new high school.
LikeLike
I was not college ready my freshman year, not because I wasn’t capable. I worked and played sports in high school, which left little time for course work. I admit it was a shock to my system as to how much more demanding the work was at the university level. I learned to adjust, as all students who want to learn will do, as the 1st semester went on. I got better in the craft as the years went on. Today, I would be considered for remedial classes based on the ignorance of ed-reformers. However, I have two masters degrees and I am superintendent certified in Texas. I think I’ve done pretty well for a not ready for prime time student.
College readiness is a political ploy designed not only to show public schools as failures, but to allow a large placement of incoming freshman into remedial classes. It’s no accident either, remedial classes are a big money maker for colleges. It helps pay for outrageous college and university president salaries and benefits we have today. It’s also no accident that college tuition has sky-rocketed in the last decades either. All of this, every bit of it, involves the for profit business objective in K-12 and Higher Education, especially in the last 13-15 years.
College readiness cannot be assessed through a test or some idiotic set of standards. College readiness involves more than just high test scores and a great GPA. Being ready for college involves commitment and the willingness to work hard. Without those two characteristics nothing else matters. Many extremely gifted students never finish college because it’s not worth it to them. We must not judge a book by its cover.
LikeLike
If you go to Education Next would you please leave a comment? I have been writing to them for a year now and they purge my comments. Thanks jeanhaverhill@aol.com
LikeLike
Jean, to whom are you referring?
LikeLike
“This country doesn’t need more college graduates….”
Well said.
LikeLike
Chuck Ormsby: Quote: “The Parasitic Left Says
“FEED ME!”
“There will be no bargain, young Jedi. I shall enjoy watching you die.”
Dr. Charles Ormsby…… Ormsby calls students “ignorant” when they are young (I don’t think he understands a developmental trajectory of a growing, maturing student.) This is a provocative headline he wrote: in local newspaper.
U Mass has an excellent reputation long standing in Science and Math. My friend taught there in Chemistry before she retired. I don’t think the faculty call young people “ignorant” and I don’t think they call people who disagree with them “parasitic”.
Michael Podgursky writes math articles; he also insults and mocks his students in class. Go to the University and see how students rate some of their faculty and you will see some interesting attitudes emerge.
LikeLike
From my doctoral work in literacy studies I began to learn that no on will write well unless it provides meaning in their lives. I finished college, but only began to write with conviction while employed by a financial institution. This is what Paolo Friere learned in Brazil. He taught literacy to the common folk based on their social and work environment.
LikeLike
Ormsby has an opinion on taxes in Massachusetts also. quote: “Chuck Ormsby, North Andover School Committee Member: “End the state income tax. It is your money. But it is being taken from you to line the pockets of special interests.”
—————-
He lives in a moderate /adequate affluent community that has always supported schools with traditional New England values; I live in the city next to his and we are on the low average/to poverty income for families (I will look up the median income). There have been math turf wars ongoing where some of the more affluent communities have been using TERC math; other communities don’t use it or have dropped it because it did not align with the standardized tests in use. This is an ongoing turf war in math. I think they should resolve it by having more choices available not “one-size fits all”. We had concepts taught to us by Boston College in math that were quite adequate with Addison Wesley textbooks; TERC math was seen to be more experimental and some parents compmlained…. Ormsby likes to fight this kind of turf war and then pay teachers according to the achievement of the student tests.
LikeLike
(http://www.doe.mass.edu/boe/minutes/10/0323reg.pdf).
I read through the minutes here. I did not participate on these recent committee hearings (2010). However, I have a definite opinion that Ms. Pimentel who is quoted is insisting on having more informational texts included (with less time spent on literature of Western civilization)… the Pimentel /Coleman duo is pushing the “drop them in the deep end with primary text.” This is not what I would want for a reading comprehension teacher to present the material without background knowledge for the students. Sandra Stotsky has some excellent articles that are current and you can find them on the website for Pioneer Institute in Boston and download at no cost. She goes into detail on uses of technology as well as the ELA common core etc.
LikeLike
The teachers at my school were extremely upset by this “sink or swim” approach to literature as they always taught background information to any assigned book to add depth to understanding. They also questioned some of the literature choices for their grade level proposed by the Common Core.
LikeLike
Charles Ormsby
School: University of Massachusetts-Lowell
Department: Mathematics
Location: Lowell, MA
Uloop
pick Massachusetts
choose University of Massachusetts Lowell
and the alphabetical index appears; click on O for Ormsby
there were several students who gave him 1 star out of 5.
LikeLike
One additional thought. If a “college ready” student needs to be able to do trigonometry that eliminates the majority of students. Why would a student who will not be a math or engineering major need that to be ready for classes in the social studies or English language arts realm. Seems to be a ridiculous assertion on Ormsby’s part.
LikeLike
Are we talking about “right angle” trigonometry or are we talking about “unit circle” trigonometry?
I didn’t know either of them when I was admitted to college, and as a consequence, failed calculus freshman year (the usual lowest math course for graduation credit in college). I couldn’t go on to any further science that I liked (e.g. Physics) without it and consequently had to pick my major from other subjects for which I was, at least, minimally prepared.
Eventually I became half way educated, but I’m still not ready to take Calculus. Am I just not smart enough? Or have I just not worked hard enough to really master the concepts needed for integration and differentiation?
My high school DID prepare me to do well enough on the SAT to get admitted to a good college, but looking back, I wasn’t really “college” ready, except by age.
In fact, I’m about educated enough now to really profit from a first class liberal arts college education, but I’m no longer qualified by age.
I’m not so ready to dismiss Ormsby’s assertion, but I am not ready to dismiss yours either.
Is it feasible to get all college bound students in high school through trig? Is that the point of CCSS?
LikeLike
It’s not feasible. It’s ignorant to even believe what Ormsby is thinking in my experience. As for the point of CCSS, I believe it is another money maker and nothing more. It’s so far off base it’s laughable. This is what happens when non-practitioners attempt to direct learning and assess it. Dysfunctional.
LikeLike
Socrates would want to question you further. I wonder whether Plato required trigonometry as part of the mathematics he is supposed to have said was a prerequisite to entering the Grove of Academe.
Why is it not feasible to expect every high school graduate to have math through Algebra II and Trigonometry?
LikeLike
Harlan…I would love to talk to Socrates–with translator. I doubt Plato required trigonometry, but that’s just my opinion.
I will answer your question about Algebra II and Trigonometry by saying that would be like asking all students to be tall. Not everyone is built physically or mentally the same. I believe Socrates and Plato knew there were many types of intelligence, for some reason those in charge of public education don’t seem to understand that.
Not everyone is good at math, nor would they ever be no matter how much you made them work at it. I would say the same thing about other subjects for that matter. Some students struggle with junior high math or pre-Algebra let alone Algebra I, Geometry, Algebra II, Calculus or Trigonometry. I believe Geometry is a good end point for students in general. Students going to college and not majoring in any subject like engineering, programming, or math degrees in general don’t need ANY additional math. It’s a waste of time when they could be honing their skills in their chosen major area of study, even in high school
There are also students who can do any kind of math asked of them, because it is built into their genetic makeup, but they usually struggle at writing or English language arts and/or social studies.
To answer your question more succinctly, I would say children need to have learning opportunities that reflect their interests and ultimately their careers aspirations. Learning to budget and possibly statistics would better suit those students who will never use of need higher level mathematics for their careers.
LikeLike
I seem to find two heresies in your post, rick. The first is that some students are smarter than others. And second that students should be allowed to choose what they study. Do I misread you?
LikeLike
No sir. You would be correct, Harlan. I probably have my own drone and satellite now. 🙂
LikeLike
Let me clarify the idea of some students are smarter than others. That can be overall or just in certain subject matter. I’m sure you knew what I meant, but just in case others don’t I want to be clear.
LikeLike
What would be your opinion about literacy? Is there a reading level (eight grade perhaps) which would be a good general endpoint for students?
LikeLike
I think an endpoint for anything would be based on what a child is ultimately capable of achieving. There are some students that will never read at the eighth grade level because of their limitations. For some a third or fourth grade level might be their limit. For others they may read well above anything asked of them, even at the collegiate level.
As I said their are many types of intelligence. Do we compare an elephant and monkey’s abilities based on climbing a tree? Not very far to the elephant. However, if we compare both on strength the monkey would seem less capable. All of us are limited in certain academic areas, but excel at others. Do we punish students for their limitations or encourage them to go further in the things they are good at?
LikeLike
I am asking if there is a parallel between literacy and numeracy. If geometry is a good general endpoint for mathematics, what do you think is a good end point in developing literacy for “students in general”?
LikeLike
English 2 or sophomore year.
LikeLike
Alas, my state requires four years of English of every high school graduate and I don’t see any chance that it will change.
LikeLike
It’s basically the same here. But it could change soon with changes in graduation requirements.
LikeLike
Perhaps we could reduce high school to just two years for many students.
LikeLike
Two years and then two more for those going to college. Or two more years of vocational training for those wanting to learn a trade. Or just two years and then off to work if they wish to do neither. One size doesn’t not fit all that’s for sure.
LikeLike
That seems reasonable.
LikeLike
It’s a mixed bag. I attended a rural school district that didn’t start algebra until freshman year, which meant that when we moved to a larger district, I was a year behind most of my peers in the math sequence. Many of them were able to take calculus their senior year. I could have taken pre-calc, but didn’t because I didn’t need it and preferred to take AP music theory, which I did need. Standards have changed a bit, but I’ve never needed calculus. I didn’t need it for my science courses and I didn’t need it for my music major, master’s degree or Ph.D.
Obviously students who are undecided or want to go into the sciences do need it and we should be counseling them so that they go into college prepared to succeed.
But what about the rest of the students? What about the ones who won’t ever need trig of any sort for their careers? What about the ones who have no interest in college and frankly, will be brilliant mechanics and plumbers and other kinds of tradesmen whose skill in fixing my car or my plumbing is of extraordinary value to society? I hate the fact that we’re defining “career-ready” as “college-ready.” It’s misleading and unhelpful. The last thing we need to do is further stratify society, as if we really believe that an accountant with a bachelor’s degree is really more necessary and important than the guy fixing my plumbing or car. These are all important jobs and we need an education system that is sensitive to the needs of these varied careers and prepares students accordingly.
More importantly, we need to show students why attaining a certain level of achievement is important rather than assuming that a vague idea of “career and college ready,” whatever that might mean to a 14- or 18-year-old, is reason enough. This is especially important considering the number of highly-successful people who didn’t need trig. Telling a kid “well, times have changed” isn’t good enough, nor is the vague notion that someday far in the future they may want to know this because they already know how much we adults have forgotten from our school days. No one takes trig in high school so they can take calculus 20 or 30 years down the road (but everyone knows that people who change careers in midlife often go back to school and have to take some of those remedial classes because they simply haven’t done anything involving that subject for a couple of decades).
LikeLike
The Utah Math CC (which is somewhat different because we adopted the “International Core, whatever that means) has several aspects of calculus in the basic freshman classes. Absolutely ridiculous. Most of these kids will never use those formulas.
LikeLike
I found calculus in college to be very difficult, and it was black and white for me. If I went for the tutoring offered by the college, I’d do very well. If not, I’d flunk.
I chose the former, and I ended up with an A-. . . . I went on to my physics class and did fine (I was an architecture major at a private college).
Hard work and determination, something disappearing from too many youths, is a big factor. However, in all fairness, as the CCSS are not always developmentally appropriate or complete, kids will be more and more incentivized to persist less. What I had to face was difficult; what these kids have to face goes far beyond that.
LikeLike
I worked at a gifted and talented high school and the principal’s philosophy was that even gifted students were not gifted in all subject areas. The Trigonometry/Advanced Algebra Regents in NYS is one of the toughest exams, so it was decided to only offer this class to students who showed aptitude or were highly motivated. The rest took a modified version without a final. There were opportunities to excell in other subject areas, with plenty of AP options.
Unless you are majoring in the math or science fields, you don’t need to take calculus in college.
LikeLike
@Harlen,
My university offers seven math classes below the level of calculus for credit and a large section of remedial math that does not count for credit. Times seemed to have changed since your college days.
LikeLike
Thank you Rick for this & the above post, a breath of fresh air to hear some common sense. As a Cornell U Romance Lit major 40 yrs ago I did not need to take a single math course in college, & a Regents diploma (for which algebra & geometry were sufficient) established my college-readiness. At my interview with the Dean of Arts& Sciences– having just learned that I’d failed the Regents in advanced chemistry (tho I’d passed the course)– I asked whether I’d be req’d to take chem again. His response: “You want to be a French major, right? You don’t need to take chemistry.”
The Cornell BA, which enabled me to become not only fluent in French but an able literary critic in the language, and an able teacher in Spanish, and an adequate communicator in German– as well as rounding out my education with child development, psychology, art history & comp lit– has stood me in good stead. I was able to flex into wildly divergent fields thanks to terrific background in persuasive writing, & remain gainfully employed past the usual retiremrnt age.
Zooming forward to the present, it has been my observation that my children were educated even better thsn I was in public schools of the ’90’s and 2000’s. They were different from me: they had unusual musical abilities; they did not test as well; they had peculiar math abilities which enabled them to conceive very advanced concepts while not being able to parse/test well. With the aid of Special Ed and alternative programs in ms & hs, they all reached college-readines.
I know that my children, like me, were blessed to be schooled in high-quality public institutions, & that there are many– due to funding public school with property taxes– whose schools fall short. To right this wrong– to extend the gift of quality education to all– is a noble goal.
The current ‘ed reform’ craze in all its respects– including such inanities as requiring trig. for ‘college-readiness’– must be recognized for what it is, pure politics, aimed solely at creating public frenzy at a supposedly failed system– which in fact does very well in well-heeled districts, & fails poor districts– as a clever way of distracting public attention from the social possibilities inherent in equalizing educational funding for all. Let us not explain away the reformers goals as well-intended, just needing some tweaking. Their intent is a Race To The Bottom– to extract the onerous overhead of education from the public purse so we can compete better globally.
LikeLike
Thank you S & F, I appreciate the compliment. I think you it the nail on the head when saying this is all politically motivated, as well as financially fruitful for ed-reformers. We are stymieing our children’s creativity, something they will need to compete in today’s global market.
LikeLike
A college-ready student needs to be able to write and read at a much higher level than students are today, and does not need to be able to do math at the level demanded (though it would be nice if they all WERE able to do it at that level). But reading and writing have been cast out of schools almost entirely.
LikeLike
How right you are! Our NJ local public school district places particular importance on writing, & for 20 yrs has had a coordinated ms/hs writing curriculum; they are known for this in the region. My kids all went to mid-level colleges inthe metro area, & each commented to me that their writing skills were far superior to colleagues.
LikeLike
I’m in CA and it’s shocking how poor the reading and writing skills are. Kids are asked to read, in many cases, one full book per year. They lack the essentials and the ability to use other people’s experiences to shape their perceptions of their own. And they have no clue what they’re missing. This comes from someone who took Multi-Variable Calculus as a junior in high school and tutors math primarily–so it should get extra note because i’m not an English teacher.
Hence the Great Books program I’m starting. I’m doing it online, so it’s available anywhere 😀
LikeLike
Sent from my iPad
LikeLike
Advanced math in the early years transforms the mind into a positivistic world view which is ideal for those in science end engineering, which may be their theory of college and career readiness.
On the other hand, from JT Gatto, “… a huge portion of experience is conceptualized in language. Without mastery of language and metaphor we are condemned to mystification.
LikeLike
That first sentence is such nonsense…where could you possibly get such a thing? Jesus Christ. Math is important because it’s about logic and intellectual discipline, and not skipping steps–but this is only really true as you get to trigonometry and calculus. But that’s neither here nor there.
LikeLike
Knowledge is not just the surface experience of the senses as would appear in schooling. You seem to be an admirer of Jesus Christ, this was his message also, very revolutionary, an early terrorist to the empire.
LikeLike
Analytical and logic skills don’t always follow the mathematical line. Someone can have great analytical and logic skills, but not be very good at Algebra or higher level math.
LikeLike
Worcester Telegram and Gazette (Worcester MA)
quote: “Deep immersion in classic fiction, poetry and drama was the source of the Bay State’s success on every reading test imaginable (NAEP 2005-2011).
Fatefully, the Obama administration and Washington, D.C.-based education trade organizations, largely funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, are pushing inferior quality K-12 national standards called Common Core, which will cut the classic fiction Massachusetts students will read by 60 percent. Now, America’s 3 million annual high school dropouts won’t be the only ones missing out on timeless literature.”
And, it’s thanks to Sandra Stotsky that the curriculum frameworks have this strength in ELA…..
LikeLike
Diane– Why trig? Read Hacker’s new book.
What evidence is there that being “college-ready” relates to being good at anything–including being a great citizen? Do we know that taking advanced music isn’t just as important?
Also, read Nicholson Baker’s The Wrong Answer: The case against Algebra II (in Harpers Magazine, September 2013).
Deb
LikeLike