Peter Greene notes that the two polls released this week were preceded by a Rasmussen poll in June, which showed Common Core losing support. Parents of school children were polled.
“Once again, we can see the result of a year’s worth of direct exposure. In November of 2013, the Core was supported by an unimpressive 52% and specifically opposed by 32%. By the following June, the numbers had shifted. Among parents of school-age children, support dropped to 34%, while actual opposition to the Core (which the survey referred to as the Common Core national standards) had grown to 47%…..”
“This poll is not news, but back in June, we couldn’t see so clearly that it was the harbinger of a trend. This is the opposite of a grass roots movement, the reverse of going viral. This is like the movie that opens strong on Thursday and plays to empty theaters on Friday.”
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Rasmussen has many interesting related polls. Here is one that might disappoint folks here: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/lifestyle/education/education , but opinions can certainly change.
LikeLike
The results, frankly, are to be expected. Public education has been denigrated for the last 20 years. In most of these surveys, parents highly support the schools where their children go to school. Parents know that, in general, their own schools are very good, but think that public schools in general are bad because of the horrible press.
Or do you mean the choice part? This is the thing–even before charter schools, parents have had a great deal of choice. They can choose any school in their district, and many times out of their district. They can choose private education. It’s not necessary to give another layer of bureaucracy, particularly when that bureaucracy has absolutely no accountability to taxpayers, even though it takes taxpayer money.
I’m sure you have some kind of reply that doesn’t answer the question, but I don’t care.
LikeLike
Threatened,
I think perhaps you are generalizing the practices in your own district when it comes to choice. My district, for example, allows no transfers between high school. I will have to see how many students are allowed to transfer into schools like PS321 or districts like New Trier.
LikeLike
It’s not my district, it’s my entire state, that allows it. And I’ll bet a lot of other states do this as well.
LikeLike
Threatened,
No doubt some states and districts have open enrollment in the state or district, some states and districts do not have open enrollment.
LikeLike
Off topic, but worth a look:http://www.progressive.org/news/2014/08/187821/fbi-tracks-charter-schools
LikeLike
Thanks. I wondered how many public schools had closed since 2008.
“There are now more than 6,000 publicly funded charter schools in the United States — a more than 50 percent increase since 2008.
Over that same period, “nearly 4,000 traditional public schools have closed,” writes Stan Karp, an editor of Rethinking Schools. “This represents a huge transfer of resources and students from our public education system to the publicly funded but privately managed charter sector.”
I’m always interested in the system change. It’s baffling to me how this is never addressed. It’s as if one school system has no effect on the other.
I’d love to see a mapped representation of the property transfer – the real estate. In charter-heavy cities, how much real estate (formerly publicly-owned assets) were converted from public ownership to private ownership? I started thinking about that looking at the Detroit bankruptcy proceedings. We’re told it doesn’t matter, that we’re simply individuals purchasing a contract service, but the wealthy people who are bankrolling this would never accept that status re: one of their own investments.
LikeLike
Mapping would be very helpful in knowing why schools closed. The Walton Rural Center charter school replaced a rural school that was going to close due to low enrollment, but was able to increase enrollment because it offered specialized education. My district closed an under enrolled semi-rural school because, in part, the town had grown closer to the school and in town elementary schools were able to serve the students.
LikeLike
Is that the tiny little kansas school you are touting again TE?
LikeLike
Betsy,
It is an example of a situation that one should be aware of when interpreting statistics about school closure. I like to use actual examples rather than simply speculating about possible cases. I think it adds credibility to my points.
LikeLike
“Toto, We’re not in Kansas anymore!”
Contrary to his bloated ego, talking about the same rural charter school over and over and over again does not give credibility to TE’s “points.” This is the kind of “teacher” he sounds like to many of us:
LikeLike
Cosmic,
There is a simple way to make my posts referring to either Walton Rural life Center or the Community Roots Charter School ineffective: just use the word “some”. For example, make the empirical claim the some charter schools are run in the best interests of the managers or owners, or advocate a policy that some charter schools be closed. Counter examples only have power against statements made about all charter schools.
LikeLike
NO
LikeLike
Great article Howie:)
LikeLike
Had they polled parents of school age children in New York State only, those poll numbers would be even worse, by a big margin. Common Core is such a toxic brand here in NY that the Republican candidate for governor has a STOP COMMON CORE ballot line approved for November!
LikeLike
Had they polled the parents of school age children in New York State only, those poll numbers would be significantly lower. Common Core is such a toxic brand here in NY that Republican candidate for governor, Rob Astorino, has a STOP COMMON CORE ballot line approved for the November election!
LikeLike
On my way home today from working in my classroom, my husband and I saw 3 signs which said, “No more Common Core!” These signs, along with Diane’s wonderful blog, continue to give me hope. I am an Ohio teacher. Our governor, John Kasich, despises teachers and the Ohio public schools.
LikeLike
You have to ask yourself why Ohioans are either ignorant of or indifferent to the governor’s actions. Your state legislature, if your follow their voting records, is no bargain either . . .
LikeLike
My 2 cents – teachers had no choice. They went along with this. Some tried to embrace it. There may be some outliers who even like it. Putting the issues/problems with the actual curriculum aside, then factoring in VAM and mandatory/corresponding testing tied to purposely failing students, grading-so-they-could-be-fired teachers, and grading/failing schools so they could be “turned around” and given over to charters, usually for profit charters, teachers had no choice but to become vocal against the common core, even at risk of retribution.
What an unusual world we live in where good money could be put to good purpose, but instead is tied to evil hearts and desires.
LikeLike
More on Home Rule in Dallas: great article!!!
http://inthesetimes.com/article/continued/17110/dallas_home_rule_push_could_open_the_charter_floodgates
LikeLike
“Empty Core”
The Common Core
Is chic no more
With half opposing
The Gates are closing
The costly wears
Are Billyan errs
Aire-ily padded
Devalue added
LikeLike
As usual SDP, TAGO!
LikeLike
There is a grassroots movement growing. It is a movement against the common core. The people who created the common core disregarded democracy totally and completely. Fake grassroots movements orchestrated from the top down never succeed in the long run. Organizational theory tells us that change can only work when everyone buys into it. In any organization, only if all the parties involved feel they participated in creating change will it be successful. Not only were us teachers left out, but also we were demeaned by the creators of this mutated curriculum. When changed is forced upon people against their will in any organization, informal leaders always arise who sabotage the change. What did the oligarchy that created this mess think was going to happen when you make your enemy the very people who have to teach your new curriculum? They do not understand that most teachers are not mindless robots but people who can think, can react, and fight back. Gates, Broad, Duncan,Rhee and the rest of the deformers better wake up to the fact that we still live in a democracy. They have poked too many sticks into a sleeping bear. Now the bear is awake and they will not have to face the consequences of their action.
LikeLike
“Organizational theory tells us that change can only work when everyone buys into it.”
Please tell that to my administration. And that one can’t force that buying into.
Our admin is forcing the B-PISS, oops I mean PBIS, model on our high school after we had rejected it as a faculty, it didn’t even make it out of the committee, two years ago. And forcing the ol “you have to post the objectives crap” and you must count tests and quizzes for 70% of the semester grade nonsense. Good organizational theory practice being shown, eh!
LikeLike
Have they set policy on high and low failures?
LikeLike
The polls must be getting to Arne.
From today’s NYT:
Secretary of Education Arne Duncan announced on Thursday that states could delay the use of test results in teacher-performance ratings by another year, an acknowledgment, in effect, of the enormous pressures mounting on the nation’s teachers because of new academic standards and more rigorous standardized testing.
Using language that evoked some of his fiercest critics, Mr. Duncan wrote in a blog post, “I believe testing issues today are sucking the oxygen out of the room in a lot of schools,” and he added that teachers needed time to adapt to new standards and tests that emphasize more than simply filling in bubbled answers to multiple-choice questions.
Over the past four years, close to 40 states have adopted laws that tie teacher evaluations in part to the performance of their students on standardized tests. Many districts have said they will use these performance reviews to decide how teachers are granted tenure, promoted or fired. These laws were adopted in response to conditions set by the Education Department in the waivers it granted from the No Child Left Behind law, which governs what states must do to receive federal education dollars. The test-based teacher evaluations were also included as conditions of Race to the Top grants that have been given to states by the Obama administration.
Many teachers and parents say these laws force educators to narrow their curriculums and spend too much time on test preparation. At the same time, schools have been scrambling to change their curriculums to match the Common Core, the new academic guidelines for what children should learn in math and reading from kindergarten through high school graduation. These standards were adopted by more than 40 states but have been the subject of increasing controversy.
Critics of Mr. Duncan welcomed his shift in tone on Thursday, but they also called on him to go further than a simple one-year delay.
“They should stop requiring the use of test scores in teacher evaluation altogether,” said Anthony Cody, a former teacher and a founder of the Network for Public Education, a political action group. He added that the federal government should have less say in how teachers and schools operate. “Local school districts should have autonomy to figure out how best to evaluate their schools, their school districts and their teachers,” he said.
Objections to test-based teacher evaluations have been building. In 2012, Chicago teachers went on strike in part to protest the inclusion of standardized test scores in their performance ratings. Even those who originally pushed for the adoption of teacher ratings based on test scores have advocated a slower timetable. In June, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, one of the country’s largest donors to education causes, called for a two-year moratorium on states or districts making any personnel decisions based on tests aligned to the Common Core.
Last year Mr. Duncan said states could delay using test-based teacher evaluations to make high-stakes personnel decisions. His announcement on Thursday allows states to delay using test results at all in performance reviews.
In his blog post, Mr. Duncan wrote that “too much testing can rob school buildings of joy, and cause unnecessary stress.” He also accepted responsibility for the federal department’s role in pushing states and districts too quickly toward new standards and tests.
Supporters of the Obama administration’s policies said Mr. Duncan remained committed to using test results to hold schools and teachers accountable for improving students’ academic performance.
Some states will continue to use test results in teacher evaluations. In Tennessee, for example, Kevin Huffman, the commissioner of education, said the scores would remain a part of performance reviews. In an email, he added that he hoped states would make decisions on whether to use the evaluations “based on the best interests of kids rather than political expediency for adults.”
In Vermont, by contrast, the state board of education recently adopted a resolution saying formulas based on test scores would not be included in teacher evaluations.
LikeLike
“that teachers needed time to adapt to new standards and tests that emphasize more than simply filling in bubbled answers to multiple-choice questions.”
What kind of Orwellian doublespeak is that statement? One can have many interpretations of that one.
LikeLike
It looks like the polls might be getting to Arne.
From today’s NYT:
Secretary of Education Arne Duncan announced on Thursday that states could delay the use of test results in teacher-performance ratings by another year, an acknowledgment, in effect, of the enormous pressures mounting on the nation’s teachers because of new academic standards and more rigorous standardized testing.
Using language that evoked some of his fiercest critics, Mr. Duncan wrote in a blog post, “I believe testing issues today are sucking the oxygen out of the room in a lot of schools,” and he added that teachers needed time to adapt to new standards and tests that emphasize more than simply filling in bubbled answers to multiple-choice questions.
Over the past four years, close to 40 states have adopted laws that tie teacher evaluations in part to the performance of their students on standardized tests. Many districts have said they will use these performance reviews to decide how teachers are granted tenure, promoted or fired. These laws were adopted in response to conditions set by the Education Department in the waivers it granted from the No Child Left Behind law, which governs what states must do to receive federal education dollars. The test-based teacher evaluations were also included as conditions of Race to the Top grants that have been given to states by the Obama administration.
Many teachers and parents say these laws force educators to narrow their curriculums and spend too much time on test preparation. At the same time, schools have been scrambling to change their curriculums to match the Common Core, the new academic guidelines for what children should learn in math and reading from kindergarten through high school graduation. These standards were adopted by more than 40 states but have been the subject of increasing controversy.
Critics of Mr. Duncan welcomed his shift in tone on Thursday, but they also called on him to go further than a simple one-year delay.
“They should stop requiring the use of test scores in teacher evaluation altogether,” said Anthony Cody, a former teacher and a founder of the Network for Public Education, a political action group. He added that the federal government should have less say in how teachers and schools operate. “Local school districts should have autonomy to figure out how best to evaluate their schools, their school districts and their teachers,” he said.
Objections to test-based teacher evaluations have been building. In 2012, Chicago teachers went on strike in part to protest the inclusion of standardized test scores in their performance ratings. Even those who originally pushed for the adoption of teacher ratings based on test scores have advocated a slower timetable. In June, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, one of the country’s largest donors to education causes, called for a two-year moratorium on states or districts making any personnel decisions based on tests aligned to the Common Core.
Last year Mr. Duncan said states could delay using test-based teacher evaluations to make high-stakes personnel decisions. His announcement on Thursday allows states to delay using test results at all in performance reviews.
In his blog post, Mr. Duncan wrote that “too much testing can rob school buildings of joy, and cause unnecessary stress.” He also accepted responsibility for the federal department’s role in pushing states and districts too quickly toward new standards and tests.
Supporters of the Obama administration’s policies said Mr. Duncan remained committed to using test results to hold schools and teachers accountable for improving students’ academic performance.
Some states will continue to use test results in teacher evaluations. In Tennessee, for example, Kevin Huffman, the commissioner of education, said the scores would remain a part of performance reviews. In an email, he added that he hoped states would make decisions on whether to use the evaluations “based on the best interests of kids rather than political expediency for adults.”
In Vermont, by contrast, the state board of education recently adopted a resolution saying formulas based on test scores would not be included in teacher evaluations.
LikeLike
Good to see a change in direction. Could be that the Stop Common Core ballot line in NY (initiated by a Republican), that needed only 15,000 signatures to be accepted and got over 60,000, shows that voters are fed up. I wonder how much back tracking there will be before the elections. I’d like all promises in writing.
LikeLike
We must defeat common core and one powerful action we can take is to vote for Adrian Wyllie for Florida Governor and put a stop to this once in for all.
LikeLike