The New York Regents have embraced the Common Core standards and testing with the fervor of zealots.
They brook no opposition, and they only pretend to listen to critics.
Only two Regents, Kathleen Cashin and Betty Rosa, both of whom are experienced educators, have consistently and publicly dissented from the Regents’ failed agenda.
The Regents are appointed by the New York Legislature, which in practice means the State Assembly, which is controlled by the Democratic Party.
Theoretically, the Regents each serve a five-year term, but in practice the members get reappointed if they wish to be reappointed.
The terms of four Regents are expiring this year, and the Assembly has the opportunity to appoint four new members, four people who have not been insulated from public opinion, four people who have some sense of what parents and the public are thinking, four people who recognize that public schools belong to the public, not to the Regents nor to Pearson nor the U.S. Department of Education.
The question: Will the Assembly have the wisdom to appoint new Regents or will it stick with the failed status quo?
Will the Assembly have the wisdom to add parents and citizens who are prepared to think anew about the needs of the children and public schools of New York State?
The implementation of the Common Core standards and testing was a disaster, as everyone acknowledges, including Governor Cuomo (who is also a fervent supporter of the Common Core) and the leaders of the Legislature, who threatened to take action if the Regents did not.
The Regents assembled a committee, which made cosmetic recommendations but did nothing to assuage the concerns of the public. It did nothing to reduce the high-stakes testing or to review the standards themselves. The committee recommended that the CC standards be reviewed by the original authors– the National Governors Association, the Council of Chief State School Officers, Achieve, and David Coleman’s Student Achievement Partners. Of course, the original writing group no longer exists, and there is no process in place to review the standards, not in D.C. nor anywhere else.
And that is the problem with the standards. They were handed down from Mount Olympus, as though the gods had written them in stone and they could not be changed by mere mortals. Not field-tested; no early childhood education experts; no one knowledgeable about the needs of children with disabilities. And the crowning insult: the “national standards” were copyrighted by the NGA and CCSSO. Have you ever heard of national standards that were copyrighted? I have not.
The standards will fail utterly if the Regents stick to their present course because the Regents cannot indefinitely ignore public opinion.
At every public meeting (except for one in Brooklyn that was packed by supporters of Michelle Rhee’s StudentsFirst), thousands of parents expressed outrage about the standards and the testing.
What is needed now is clear:
First, the standards should be carefully reviewed by New York teachers who have been nominated by their superintendents as experts in teaching and learning, including teachers of the early grades and teachers of students with disabilities, as well as teachers of ELA and mathematics. They should be encouraged to revise wherever it is necessary.
Second, the standards should be decoupled from state testing. The state should offer standardized testing in fourth and eighth grades, as it did for many years, to gauge student progress.
Third, teacher evaluation should be tied to peer assistance and review, by peers and supervisors, with help for those teachers who need help.
But to make such significant changes, the Regents themselves must change. They cannot cling blindly to a failed status quo. By their actions and by their inaction, they are fomenting a parent rebellion.
And if the Legislature does not take heed and change the composition of the Regents, bringing in four new members dedicated to children and not to the current agenda, the people will remember in November.

Is anyone listening?
Anyone????
LikeLike
All well said.
I like your parenthetical on Cuomo. Don’t let him get a pass on this! The press depicts him as anti-Regents…and thus anti-Common Core. Isn’t he every bit as responsible as the Regents?
LikeLike
Cuomo demanded that testing play an even larger role in teacher evaluation than the original deal negotiated under Race to the Top. He frequently bashes teachers as a special interest group who don’t care about children; he says he is the lobbyist for the students, even though the 2% tax cap he enacted is crushing budgets across the state and hurting students. He is just as devoted to Common Core as the Regents because he knows that is what DFER and Wall Street and corporations want. I wish he would take the 8th grade math test and publish his scores.
LikeLike
Cuomo has called the APPR teacher evaluation plan one of his chief legislative success stories. He flipped when the BOR wanted to simply allow a “rushed implementation” defense for teachers rated ineffective, forcing them to delay this change until his cherry picked panel reports back in April.
The only problem with having Cuomo take the tests is that he would blame his 8th grade math teacher for his failure and publically out her as “ineffective”. He is a worm and a weasel of the highest magnitude. Calling himself a “lobbyist for the children” is like Joseph Stalin calling himself the “the Johnny Appleseed of the Ukraine wheat crop.”
LikeLike
Typical media coverage of Cuomo in this article: “Cuomo Says He Feels Parents’ Common Core Pain”:
http://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/vote-up/2014/02/21/cuomo-says-he-feels-parents-common-core-pain/5702039/
LikeLike
Diane,
Betty Rosa will be attending our event at Stony Brook on March 13th. We invited the entire Board of Regents. I hope others join us as well.
David
LikeLike
So, will Governor Cuomo hold accountable any of these arrogant incompetents?
No, I didn’t think so. Accountability is like taxes: it’s only for the little people.
That said, despite Cuomo’s and the Regents’ attempt to quell with delays the valiant resistance of parents and teachers to CCSS, this is a war of attrition, one that can be won by real reformers if they persist. The longer the Commonplace Corporate Standards are delayed, the more time for the truth about them to come out, the more time for resistance to grow.
We have been fortunate that Tisch/King’s incompetence has exceeded their avarice – quite a feat – for as bad as things are, they’d be far worse if this had been “successfully” rolled out.
Uh, Ms. Tisch, what was that again about those “rock star” – your term, not mine – Regents Fellows who are secretly developing pro-privatization/ union busting policies, who are busy making you look like a fool, and whom you squandered a million dollars (chump change for you, I realize) of your own money on?
Call me petty and vulgar, but I get a mordant kick out of seeing some the Best and Brightest of so-called education reform execute perfect triple somersaults into a deep pile of dog excrement. I’d call it schadenfreude, but it’s not a guilty pleasure at all: we should all get satisfaction out of seeing these nasty posers finally exposed for what they really are.
LikeLike
This is an election year. If those four Regents are reappointed, then Assembly people and Legislators in Albany must lose re-election. Period. We need to send a message!
LikeLike
“Not field-tested; no early childhood education experts; no one knowledgeable about the needs of children with disabilities. And the crowning insult: the “national standards” were copyrighted by the NGA and CCSSO. Have you ever heard of national standards that were copyrighted? I have not.”
Re “field testing” and the purported absence of early childhood experts, see http://mathedck.wordpress.com/2014/02/13/comments-on-ravitchs-mla-speech/.
Re copyrighted standards: I suggest that you look at some standards documents. For example, Principles and Standards for School Mathematics is copyrighted by the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. California’s 1999 standards are copyrighted by the California Department of Education. Singapore’s standards are copyrighted by the Ministry of Education, Singapore. You might check the collection of national standards documents posted here: http://hrd.apec.org/index.php/Mathematics_Standards_in_APEC_Economies.
LikeLike
Cathy Kessel,
I stand by my statement. The writing committee for CCSS had no member with any experience in early childhood education or special education. Nearly half the members represented testing companies, not teachers. Yes, it would have been a good idea to find out whether what they wrote on paper works in the classroom. It would have been a good idea to determine whether the expectations were developmentally appropriate. If the standards ask fifth graders to do eighth grade level work, the writers should find that out before they impose their grand plans on the nation. Don’t you think? Wouldn’t they want to determine if their standards actually widen the achievement gaps among racial and ethnic groups? In New York, only 5% of kids with disabilities passed the tests. Fewer than 20% of black and Hispanic kids “passed.” Only 3% of ELLs. Is that what the CCSS writers expected? Or they just assuming that the scores will go up and up and up? Why? You are awfully callous about the lives of other people’s children. As for the copyright, what does that mean? Nothing, apparently. But why bother to persuade you. The CCSS will be history, for the reasons I have given. And what fun historians will have figuring out what went wrong.
LikeLike
New York: I think you’re missing the importance of implementation. Standards don’t implement themselves. Not all states have made the same implementation choices as New York. You accuse me of callousness, but I have been concerned about the way testing was done in the US since at least 1999. See slightly revised article from 1999 here: http://math.arizona.edu/~ime/2007-08/1013_testing.Kessel.pdf. And I’ve been concerned about mathematics education even longer, since I started teaching.
Field testing: What “eighth grade level work” is depends on what you’ve learned in seventh grade, which in turn depends on what you’ve learned in sixth grade, and so on. I’ve discussed this further on my blog and am happy to take responses there. You are welcome to reblog my post. And you are welcome to respond to the points that I make on your blog.
Writing group: Note that you may have the confusion that Bill McCallum (lead writer for mathematics standards) discusses here: http://mathbabe.org/2014/02/11/interview-with-bill-mccallum-lead-writer-of-math-common-core/.
Bill said in that interview: “There were actually two separate documents and two separate processes, and people often get confused between them. The first part happened in the summer of 2009 and produced a document called “College and Career Readiness Standards“. It didn’t go grade by grade but rather described what a high school student leaving and ready for college and career looks like.”
Are you referring to that first part?
Members of the development group for the grade by grade standards are listed here: http://www.nga.org/files/live/sites/NGA/files/pdf/2010COMMONCOREK12TEAM.PDF
I discuss the development group for the grade by grade standards on my blog in more detail. Note that three members had served on the National Research Council’s Mathematics Learning in Early Childhood: Paths Toward Excellence and Equity.
You may also be interested in Bill’s exchange with Anthony Cody in the comments section here: http://mathbabe.org/2014/02/06/researching-the-common-core/?relatedposts_exclude=8268
LikeLike
CC math standards, activities, and looming PARCC/SBAC/Pearson assessments will prove to be a pedagogical disaster on a scale never before imagined. The CC approach to math instruction is destined to ruin a generation of students, nationwide.
LikeLike
Diane
Thanks for your excellent site. The Assembly needs to put a shot across the bow by dumping the incumbents on the Regents to get them to pay attention. 75% on Long Island want the entire CC “scrapped”. All other conversations of adjustments go in the wrong direction. We need to honor our States rights and return to the States curriculum.
Thank you,
Joseph
LikeLike
Thank you for making such sensible proposals, Diane. I have just published a blog on the Huffington Post on the Regents’ plan to reform the implementation of the Common Core.
As you noted, most of the changes are cosmetic. But one of them strikes me as bullying pure and simple. Teachers who are fired for low student test scores may appeal on the grounds that the district did not provide sufficient Common Core training. In other words, fired teachers may appeal if they say that the Common Core is worthy of respect and increased funding. “I may not fire you if you publicly declare how great that I am.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nicholas-tampio/the-regents-arent-listening_b_4824723.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000020&ir=Education
LikeLike