Common core conundrum

Megan Poczos, Staff Reporter

There is a new method of teaching out there for students and teachers alike: The Common Core Learning System. This system is a federally organized education system that basically creates a universal outline of what students will learn and when. The idea behind this system is to have every school and every student be on exactly the same page at exactly the same time. Because of this “universal” outlook, programs such as Advanced Placement and Special Education will be removed from all publically funded schools from around the country. There is much debate on whether or not this will be helpful for students or not.

Here are the pros to the Common Core program: it provides national continuity between schools and will increase the education nationally. This is a great theory on paper, but when applied, I fear that the results will be catastrophic.

The cons are as such: Students who learn at a pace different from the national standard, whether that be faster or slower, will be left out and become frustrated with their learning environment. While the theory behind this method is to make sure no one is left behind, it is actually going to be creating an even larger gap for students whose needs are not being met. Another con is that every state will be learning exactly the same history lesson when in some cases, one area’s history may be particularly more important than other. For example, it makes sense that students living in New Orleans would learn extensively about the social, political, and economic tragedy that was Hurricane Katrina, while it might not make sense for them to be learning about what Native American tribes generally used to inhabit most of Minnesota. With the Common Core, important regional history is lost on students, and may become irrelevant all together.

There is one subject that debaters are having a tough time with: math. Within the Common Core program, basic math is going to start being taught in a vastly different way than it has previously been taught. For example, instead of teaching lengthy multiplication in a vertical formation, students will now be taught multiplication through a “boxes” system. This could be beneficial for students in some instances. It will make learning multiplication easier and more structured. However, there are reasons that this could be a huge drawback for students as well. Parents would not be able to help their children understand this system because they themselves will not have learned it. Also, when it comes time for a higher-level application of multiplication, among other mathematic processes, how will students be able to use these new and inverted ways for, let’s say, calculus? It may be helpful to students in the short term, but in the long run, it may end up hindering their mathematic abilities.

While those who support the Common Core claim it has been tested and applied in the field, many who oppose the system argue that the supporters have chosen to ignore the negative reviews and affects the program has clearly laid out. So, will this new system be just what the American education system needs? Or will it end in complete failure?