Vicki Cobb, a prolific and successful writer of books for children, writes here about the replacement of handcrafted items by machine-made items.

And yet, even with all that is easily available made by machine, more than half of the population, she says, like to make things by hand.

She writes:

Unfortunately the factory mentality has invaded our educational system with the goal of mass producing children to be compliant, conformist, college and career-ready citizens as measured by their performance on standardized tests. It has sucked the passion and joy of learning from classrooms all over the country. This kind of conformity, controlled by fear, runs counter to the “inalienable” right to the “pursuit of happiness” in our Declaration of Independence — our definition of freedom. I would also maintain that this right is behind the United States as a cradle for innovation. Political leaders with an eye to the future say education needs to produce workers who are self-starters, able to independently process enormous amounts of material, sift through it and create new works with added value. In other words, we have to be able to reshuffle what exists, innovate and invent to fill new needs. We must also create people who can adapt to a fast-changing world and to be able to work with people globally, as well as locally. The classroom that can produce such students must allow for diverse interests and abilities, and be a safe place to practice skills and to fail.

I wish I could share her enthusiasm for the Common Core standards. I fear that their purpose and their goal is to mass-produce standardized children. She disagrees. Disagreement is healthy. Let’s keep talking about it.

Although Arne Duncan, Jeb Bush, the New York Times, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and Exxon Mobil have done their best to create an air of inevitability about the Common Core (the train has left the station), parents and teachers continue to object to the imposition of these untested standards written mostly by non-educators.

In this article, which appeared in the Journal News in the Lower Hudson Valley of New York, Melissa Heckler and Nettie Webb–veteran educators– explain their objections to the Common Core.

They insist that what matters most in education is the interaction between teachers and students, not a scripted curriculum or higher standards.

They write:

Through the knowledge of subject content, teaching strategies, and brain research, teachers strive to reach and teach every child. The scripted modules undermine the essential teaching relationship by preventing the individualized exchange between teacher and student, the hallmark of active learning. Student interest should be a salient feature that helps develop and drive curriculum — something not possible with prescribed modules.

Good teachers embrace change but not change for the sake of change:

Veteran teachers recognize what we did yesterday is not necessarily good for today. Teachers embrace processes that produce meaningful, constructive change that moves education forward in our country. However, teachers recognize that Common Core is not research-based and there hasn’t been the opportunity to define and refine the standards in this chaotic collapsed time frame for implementation. Common Core is causing students to suffer. This is why teachers reject this change so vehemently. Stress has caused these reactions: students reporting they hate school, regressive behaviors like toileting mishaps, crying, increased aggression, sleeplessness and stomach upsets before and during the tests. This is what has occurred under Common Core. This is meaningless, destructive change.

Why do teachers resist the mandates of Common Core?

We suggest money spent on the development of these major unresearched and unfunded mandates to implement CCSS be used to alleviate the lack of resources — unequal staffing, support services, and restoration of school libraries, music and art classes, as well as enrichment programs in these schools. Research has shown that this is the way to help even the playing field for the districts in poverty.

Teachers are mind-molders. When they embrace, create and implement meaningful change with their students, they are helping every child reach his or her potential. Teachers embrace constructive, researched change that result in better, meaningful learning. Resistance to the Common Core standards should be understood in this context.

This is a description of the philosophy of the lower school the Obamas chose for their children.

Here is the academic program.

No mention of the Common Core.

Sounds like a wonderful school.

Wouldn’t you want this for your child?

Education Week reports that 68% of districts plan to buy new instructional resources to meet the demands of Common Core.

That is, some 7,600 districts plan to buy new materials.

Most are planning to buy online resources, presumably to prepare for online testing.

I wish some researchers would estimate the shift of resources to pay for the new stuff.

As districts purchase more Common Core aligned materials, hardware and software, what do they spend less on?

Class size? Teachers? The arts? Physical education? Social workers? Guidance counselors? Librarians?