There were two big controversies over curriculum this past year. One got resolved by listening to critics and revising the original language. The other continues to churn and burn because its advocates refuse to concede any mistakes or to make any changes.
Rick Hess writes that this is the difference between the Advanced Placement U.S. history and the Common Core. The College Board listened to critics and revised offending language. The Common Core leaders, however, have insisted that it is perfect, its critics are extremists, and not one word may be changed.
The curious fact is that the same person, David Coleman, was in charge of both. He was “architect” of the Common Core standards, and now he is president of the College Board, which administers AP exams.
Why did he respond to critics in one situation and ignore them in the other? I’m guessing but it may be that his board at the College Board told him that the controversy had to end, and it would end only by listening and responding to critics.
In the case of the Common Core, the design of the whole project left no one in charge once the final draft was published. Instead if listening and revising, advocates dug in their heels and attacked the critics as misinformed, shrill, extremist, ignorant, etc. Even the Secretary of Education ridiculed critics, and advocates for the standards lined up big business to run an advertising campaign defending the standards.
Nothing could be changed in the standards, period. They were perfect!
And this arrogant attitude guarantees that the controversy swirling around the standards and tests will burn on. Because no one will listen.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
I agree with the premise that Coleman should be doing a better job with CC, but I don’t agree that the APUSH framework is better. In my opinion, it’s worse than the 2014 framework.
LikeLike
Threatened Out West,
I have not read the APUSH frameworks, so I have no opinion of either.
LikeLike
Not a big thing, Diane. But, I really liked the 2014 framework, because it REALLY had important discussions, particularly on the topics of race and gender in the U.S. Unfortunately, this new framework rolls a lot that back. Teachers will hopefully continue to teach the ideas that were incorporated into the 2014 framework, but it’s sad that this was basically done to get the rabid ultra-conservatives off the backs of the College Board. Seems like the College Board is politically pandering, but what else is new?
LikeLike
Why the RheeFormers behind the Common Core movement refuse to listen—
One possible answer: “A smart sociopath can avoid prison and find other, less conspicuous ways to satisfy his or her lust for dominating and controlling others, and what better way than through politics and big business?”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-freeman/are-politicians-psychopaths_b_1818648.html
LikeLike
ECE experts have repeatedly voiced concerns about the lack of developmental appropriateness for young children of the Common Core and associated high-stakes testing & are now asking, “Why Are Our CCSS Concerns Ignored?” http://deyproject.org/2015/08/05/why-are-our-ccss-concerns-ignored/
LikeLike
The concerns of experienced and knowledgeable educators of young children are also ignored because people of influence are latching onto supposed critiques of the theories of developmental appropriateness put forth by Piaget and others. Here is the piece I wrote about RI’s new Commissioner of Education, Ken Wagner, and his views on why Piaget is passé. http://www.rifuture.org/dr-wagner-on-developmental-appropriateness.html
LikeLike
Reformers are elitist and are not going to listen to teachers of young children or for that matter most public school teachers. Reformers feel that they are intellectually superior to K-12 teachers. They might deign to listen to AP instructors though, since they probably view them as more their “equals.” This intellectual snobbery is repugnant, but I believe it is a huge component in the power and arrogance inherent in the reform movement. The creators of the common core seem to take delight in making standards and tests that are age inappropriate and purposelessly complex. A high failure rate reinforces their view of themselves as superior to the masses (which include most students and teachers in their opinion).
LikeLike
They are mostly neoliberals and neoconservatives and they do believe, like the Enron grifters, that they are the smartest people in the room and they deserve to make decisions for everyone based upon their superior knowledge. BS personified.
This article gives a bit of their history and outlines their failure, although they remain the wealthiest people in the room:
http://www.monbiot.com/2013/01/14/bang-goes-the-theory/
LikeLike
“Reformers feel that they are intellectually superior to K-12 teachers. They might deign to listen to AP instructors though, since they probably view them as more their “equals.”
Wrong on two counts here: (1) AP instructors ARE K-12 teachers. (2) The objections to the APUSH curriculum did not come from teachers, who were mostly quite please with the 2014 rollout. It came from the political right wing, which didn’t like the lack of American exceptionalist revisionism.
LikeLike
Rick Hess is an official with the American Enterprise Institute. It is a right-wing organization promoting “school choice”. Why his opinion should matter to us is beyond me.
Rick Hess Recants Common Core…or does he?
http://www.defendpubliceducation.net/rick-hess-recants-common-coreo
LikeLike
David Coleman said it best — he was talking about his future self: He ‘doesn’t give a sh*t what you think’.
LikeLike
The CB is a business. Like all businesses, it is more interested in growth than in principles, so it caved to a bunch of uninformed protests and rolled out a slightly worse curriculum that was more appealing to the market.
This happens with consumer products all the time. Fast food is an obvious case in point, but there are many other examples. Let’s please not tout this behavior as virtuous. Just because Rick Hess opposes Common Core and you oppose Common Core, doesn’t mean you need to agree with everything Rick Hess says. I would have expected better from you, Diane.
LikeLike
Dave,
I certainly don’t agree with everything Rick Hess says. My point was that the writers of the Common Core closed the door on ANY revision. Whether you like the AP US history is your choice; I didn’t read the original or the revision, so I was not commenting on the quality of either. My view is that all standards must be open to revision and correction, by qualified experts, not politicians.
LikeLike