Last month, I blogged on The Shanker Institute’s manifesto, A Call for Common Content. This manifesto, available at http://www.ashankerinst.org/curriculum.html, urges the creation of curricular materials that support the Common Core Standards and bridge the gap between the standards and the new assessments being developed. These curricular materials would be voluntarily adopted.
Last week, a counter-manifesto, Closing the Door on Innovation: Why One National Curriculum is Bad for America, was released. This counter-manifesto is available at http://www.k12innovation.com/Manifesto/_V2_Home.html
The controversy is heating up. But is it much ado about nothing? A careful read of the Shanker manifesto reveals that it does not call for a national curriculum, but rather a bank of curricular resources aligned with the Common Core. The counter-manifesto misunderstands this point, railing against a national curriculum.
Neither document calls for a national curriculum, and indeed, one would be hard-pressed to find a serious educator who thinks this would be a good idea given the great variety in schools and communities across our country.
I suggest we spend less time arguing about topics on which we actually agree and more time designing interventions to bridge the gap between the current state of education and the high standards set by the Common Core.
For the Fordham Institute’s response to the counter-manifesto, see http://www.educationgadfly.net/flypaper/2011/05/fordham-responds-to-the-common-core-counter-manifesto/ It’s a good read.
