A poll of common core participants reveals that many teachers anticipate positive results, but fear the lack of money for implementation.

A report written by Nancy Kober and Diane Stark Rentner of the Center on Education Policy, Common Core Standards: Progress and Challenges in School Districts’ Implementation, asks participating educators about their reactions to working with the common core state standards (CCSS). By August 2011, there were 44 states and the District of Columbia that had signed up to start utilizing the CCSS. The standards are available for both mathematics and English language arts. This project is being supervised primarily by the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers.

There were six key findings derived from the responses to the poll:

1.       Almost three-fifths of the districts in states that have adopted the CCSS viewed these standards as more rigorous than the ones they are replacing and expected the CCSS to improve student learning.

2.       Two-thirds of the districts in CCSS-adopting states have begun to develop a comprehensive plan and timeline for implementing the standards or intend to do so in school year 2011-12. Sixty-one percent of the districts are developing and/or purchasing curriculum materials.

3.       Adequate funding is a major challenge.

4.       About two-thirds of the districts in adopting states cited inadequate or unclear state guidance on the CCSS as a major challenge.

5.       Districts appear to face relatively little resistance to implementing the CCSS from parents, community members, or educators.

6.       District or school-level staff participated in various states, regional, or district activities in school year 2010-11 to become informed about the common score state standards.

The information in the report is based on responses from the 315 districts in the nationally representative sample of districts that a) were located in one of the 43 states and D.C. that had adopted the standards at the time the data were analyzed; b) correctly reported their state had adopted the CCSS, and c) responded to at least some of the survey questions about the CCSS. Below are details from some of the questions in the poll:

The percentage of districts in CCSS-adopting states that agreed, disagreed, or were not sure that the CCSS are more rigorous than the previous state standards in mathematics and English language arts (ELA).

Percentage of districts in CCSS-adopting states that agreed, disagreed, or were not sure that implementation of the CCSS will improve skills among students in the district

Percentage of districts in CCSS-adopting states that agreed, disagreed, or were not sure that the implementation of the CCSS will require new or substantially revised curriculum materials.

Percentage of districts in CCSS-adopting states that greed, disagreed, or were not sure that the CCSS will require fundamental changes in instruction.

 

Conclusion

The common core state standards hold great promise to improve consistency, and increased rigor to important parts of education across the nation, but the funding problems at all levels could lessen the promise and delivery of the benefits.

Source: Common Core State Standards: Progress and Challenges in School Districts’ Implementation