Michelle Malkin Common Core Essay Prompts

Archive for the ‘Michelle Malkin’ Tag

Video: Michelle Malkin Roasts Common Core-Based GOP at CPAC Speech   5 comments

Watch this!

At minute 2:30, Malkin starts in on Common Core.

“It’s not people outside the party that have thrown the conservative, grassroots base under the bus.  It’s the people who have paid lip service to limited government while gorging on it.  It wasn’t any outside candidate that is not a part of our movement… it was not outsiders, who are not familiar with our movement, who conspired with the establishment on Common Core.  That was Republicans– who threw us under the bus.  That was Republicans who are con men.  And it was the heart and soul of conservative, grassroots activists, mostly everyday, ordinary moms, who shamed the Republican Party elites into backing away.

“And now what are they doing?  The same thing that they always do when grassroots conservatives call them out:  they smear the people who fought against them and who call them out.  They sneer at them as hysterical.  They sneer at them as just “fringe movements” on the Internet.  And then they go and campaign on our side, knowing that they’ve stabbed us.  My job is not to tell people what they want to hear, but what they need to hear.

“We just had Governor John Kasich, a nice guy, by all means, who last night, during the debate, pretended that he was on the side of local control.  Ohio grassroots activists and moms know better.  This is a man who smeared home schoolers and teachers for their opposition to Common Core.  I am telling you the truth.  I am asking you to do your homework.  I am asking you to follow the money.  I know it isn’t what you want to hear.  But do you want to hear the same Republicans promise you, as they have been, since 1981, that they’re going to abolish the Federal Department of Education?  It’s an empty talking point. And those empty talking points need to be punctured like helium balloons.”

“There are three reasons why Jeb Bush failed:  his last name, his support for Amnesty, and his cheerleading and cashing in on Common Core.”



Thank you for speaking the truth, Michelle Malkin.


Like this:


Michelle Malkin’s #STOPESEA VIDEO   6 comments


Michelle Malkin’s #STOPESEA video is available on her public Facebook page; click here to view.  It was posted 18 hours ago and already has over 120,000 views.  I hope each viewer called D.C. (202-224-3121) or tweeted to Congress @repjohnkline @SpeakerRyan or will do so now.

Michelle Malkin said in the video that even though many have not heard of the hashtag #STOPESEA, it is one of the most important issues on the table in Washington D.C. today.

She called out the media for not covering “bread and butter” education issues like this one and praised “firebreathing moms and dads” from across the political spectrum who “have been ever vigilant on all of the issues involving federal encroachment into education”.

Minute 3:

She noted that “so much of this process is taking place behind closed doors out of view of the public with back door and back room negotiations and no sunlight and no input from the people who are most affected.  That’s you and your kids and your grandkids.”

Minute 4:15

“You’ve got a vote coming up in just a couple of days  on this massive piece of legislation which isn’t accessible to the public yet [wasn’t as of last night; link just added] that many of these politicians on Capitol Hill will, of course, never read, and will have two days for their staffs to digest before they cast votes on it.  It is supposed to be released November 30 with the first vote on December 2nd….Same-o Same-o, business as usual in Washington, D.C., don’t you think?”

Minute 5:

“What good is it to elect new GOP leaders who promise transparency and pay lip service –the same way that Barack Obama did– and then sabotage that very process?  So much for Constitutional Conservatives.”

Not only does the process stink, but as many of these vigilant parents have been warning about, it’s the actual policy itself that stinks, too.”

” One of the few heroes out there who’s been warming about this Senator Mike Lee from Utah, who during a floor speech on November 18th warned that voting for this ESEA/NCLB reauthorization will be tantamount to doubling down or tripling down on all of the awful Common Core concepts that have taken so long for so many so-called Constitutional Conservatives on Capitol Hill to finally acknowledge.  It’s the expansion of the federal role in education and the meddling in the classroom; the cementing of grant money to all sorts of crony educational special interests; along with that of course is the continued federalization of curriculum, the cementing again of contracts and special arrangements between the federal government and a lot of tech companies in the business of leveraging the power and the money that they’re making on these boondoggles on everything from textbooks to testing to technology.  And that data mining aspect, of course, is something that people across the political and ideological spectrum should be objecting to and warning other parents about, and opposing.”

Minute 7:00

Of course, it’s hard to digest all that’s in these hundreds and hundreds of still unseen pages in just a matter of days.  It’s an absolute disgrace. So Monday morning, tomorrow morning, I hope those of you who have been active in any manner in opposing Common Core will see the connection here…call your congress people:  202-224-3121. 

She emphasizes that (see minute 8:47) for those in every type of schooling system, those in “public schools, private schools, private schools, charter schools, home schools, Christian schools, secular schoolsthere is no safe space from fed ed. That’s one of the most important messages I want to get across tonight.”

She adds, “There are all of these strategists in Washington, D.C., who are always puzzling and pulling their chins on, ‘how do they reach out to nontraditional consitituencies” and you have to watch out because when they start talking out loud you have to watch out… that they are about to pander, pander, pander, pander, pander and move to the left on everything… how do we reach out to nontraditional constituencies?  What it really means is throwing all their conservative principles and conservative constituencies under the bus in some desperate attempt to cow-tow to nontraditional constituencies. What they should be doing is looking at issues where they can find agreement with people across the political spectrum, without compromising their principles …  and yes, that includes Common Core and this massive expansion of the testing racket that has usurped so much of the already limited time that there is in the classroom?  Guess what? It’s not just us right-wing, fire-breathing Mammas and Pappas who care about that.”

Minute 25:

“…Issues include all of the money that is being poured into overtly political organizations that are using our kids as political and ideological and pedagogical guinea pigs.  And I can’t tell you how many parents and educators who span the political spectrum who I’ve talked to over the years since I’ve started learning about this, who tell me, “I don’t agree with practically anything else you say, but you are right on this.”

“It’s finding those issues and actually listening to the people who are affected, that is going to have the most promise for Republicans who are looking to win over people who otherwise wouldn’t vote for them.  Education is one of those issues.”

Thank you, Michelle Malkin!

Note to readers: today, the full ESEA bill was released. It’s well over 1,000 pages long.  The Congressional vote is set for the day after tomorrow.  MAKE SOME NOISE.


Like this:


Michelle Malkin: Parents, Refuse Common Core Tests   14 comments

By Michelle Malkin

Posted with permission from Michelle Malkin; also published at National Review Online. 



Bureaucrats and big business can’t make you let your kids take their exams.

This is National School Choice Week, but I want to talk about parents’ school choice.  Moms and Dads, you have the inherent right and responsibility to protect your children. You can choose to refuse the top-down Common Core racket of costly standardized tests of dubious academic value, reliability and validity.

Don’t let anyone tell you otherwise.

I’m reminding you of your right to choose because the spring season of testing tyranny is about to hit the fan. Do you object to the time being taken away from your kids’ classroom learning? Are you alarmed by the intrusive data-sharing and data-mining enabled by assessment-driven special interests? Are you opposed to the usurpation of local control by corporate testing giants and federal lobbyists?

You are not alone, although the testing racketeers are doing everything they can to marginalize you. In Maryland, a mom of a nine-year-old special-needs student is suing her Frederick County school district to assert her parental prerogative. Cindy Rose writes that her school district “says the law requires our children be tested, but could not point to a specific law or regulation” forcing her child to take Common Core–tied tests. Rose’s pre-trial conference is scheduled for February 4.

The vigilant mom warns parents nationwide: “While we are being treated like serfs of the State, Pearson publishing is raking in billions off our children.” And she is not going to just lie down and surrender because some bloviating suits told her “it’s the law.”

Pearson, as I’ve reported extensively, is the multibillion-dollar educational-publishing and educational-testing conglomerate — not to mention a chief corporate sponsor of Jeb Bush’s Fed Ed ventures — that snagged $23 million in contracts to design the first wave of so-called “PARCC” tests.

The Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers raked in $186 million through the federal Race to the Top program to develop the nationalized tests “aligned” to the Common Core standards developed in Beltway backrooms.

As more families, administrators, and teachers realized the classroom and cost burdens that the guinea-pig field-testing scheme would impose, they pressured their states to withdraw. Between 2011 and 2014, the number of states actively signed up for PARCC dropped from 24 (plus the District of Columbia) to ten (plus D.C.). Education researcher Mercedes Schneider reports that the remaining ten are Arkansas, Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Mississippi, New Jersey, New Mexico, Ohio, and Rhode Island.

State legislators and state education boards in Utah, Kansas, Alaska, Iowa, South Carolina, and Alabama have withdrawn from the other federally funded testing consortium, the $180 million tax-subsidized Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium, which administered field tests last spring to 3 million students in 23 states.

In New Jersey, the parental opt-out movement is “exploding,” according to activist Jean McTavish. Many superintendents have conceded that “they can’t force a student to take a test,” NJ.com reports.

Last week, Missouri withdrew from PARCC, while parents, administrators, and the school board of the Chicago public schools spurned PARCC in the majority of their 600 schools.

In California, the Pacific Justice Institute offers a privacy-protection opt-out form for parents to submit to school districts at pacificjustice.org. PJI head Brad Dacus advises families to send the notices as certified letters if they get ignored. Then, be prepared to go to court. PJI will help. The Thomas More Law Center in Michigan also offers a student-privacy opt-out form at thomasmore.org.

Don’t let the bureaucratic smokescreens fool you. A federal No Child Left Behind mandate on states to administer assessments is not a mandate on you and your kids to submit to the testing diktats. And the absence of an opt-out law or regulation is not a prohibition on your choice to refuse.

Here in Colorado, the state board of education voted this month to allow districts to opt out of PARCC testing. Parents and activists continue to pressure a state task force — packed with Gates Foundation and edu-tech special-interest-conflicted members — to reduce the testing burden statewide. For those who don’t live in PARCC-waivered districts, it’s important to know your rights and know the spin.

In Colorado Springs, where I have a high-schooler whose district will sacrifice a total of six full academic days for PARCC testing this spring, parents are calling the testing drones’ bluff about losing their accreditation and funding.

“The Colorado Department of Education is threatening schools to ensure that 95 percent of students take these tests,” an El Paso County parents’ watch group reports.

Be assured that MANY parents across Colorado — FAR ABOVE 5 percent in many schools — are refusing the tests, and not one school yet is facing the loss of accreditation, funding, etc. As long as schools can show that they gave a “good faith attempt to get 95 percent to test, they can appeal a loss of accreditation” due to parental refusals to test.

You also have the power to exercise a parental nuclear option: If edu-bullies play hardball and oppose your right to refuse, tell them you’ll have your kid take the test and intentionally answer every question wrong — and that you’ll advise every parent you know to tell their kids to do the same. How’s that for accountability?

Be prepared to push back against threats and ostracism. Find strength in numbers. And always remember: You are your kids’ primary educational provider.



Thank you, Michelle Malkin.

Utah parents:  SAGE testing is Common Core testing.  End of the year SAGE/A.I.R. tests must (by state mandate) be given by schools, but there’s no law that says students or parents have to sit for them.  In fact, by several laws, parents hold the legal authority and freedom to opt out of these tests and anything that the parent does not feel good about.  I advise us to consider opting out of all SAGE related testing and data collections: mid-year (interim) and the SAGE formative tests that Common Core/SAGE “offers” schools.  Opt out of all of it.  Politely, kindly, firmly.

It is time to take a stand against the cartels and politicians who are using our tax dollars and our legislators to make our children their unpaid and disrespected guinea pigs.  It is time to say, politely, “no way” to these secretive, centrally-managed, unviewable, unpiloted  tests that are pushing experimental and controversial academic standards.

Just say no.  Here’s an opt out form.   Or write your own.  You are the parent.  You are the legal authority.  Remember, the  state recognizes that:

(i) a parent has the right, obligation, responsibility, and authority to raise, manage, train, educate, provide for, and reasonably discipline the parent’s children; and

(ii) the state’s role is secondary and supportive to the primary role of a parent.

Like this:


We Will Not Conform Event: A Report   8 comments

At the Provo mall theater  Tuesday night, people were being turned away because every seat was purchased for the Glenn Beck “We Will Not Conform” event.  The theater was overflowing with parents, teachers and grandparents wanting to know how to reclaim locally controlled education and a feeling of empowerment.  I  don’t know about the other 700 or so movie theaters, but at this one in Provo, people were energized.  After the event, audience members had to  be asked to leave because many stayed to talk long after the event. Those post-event conversations moved me more than anything I saw on the screen, even though the event itself was excellent.  I’ll explain further along, down this post.

The filming took place in Dallas live, and  included a powerful group of panelists.  Audience members nationwide participated via twitter, taking surveys and being asked to answer questions. On July 29th, there will be a rebroadcast of the event.  If you didn’t attend last Tuesday, or  can’t attend on the 29th, here are a few highlights:

  • Michelle Malkin  – Malkin, that vibrant firecracker of an analyst, called Common Core “educational malpractice” and said that no one has a right to experiment upon, and track, our children as if they were guinea pigs.  Malkin said that parents need the intellectual ammunition to fight the regurgitated talking points of the pro-Common Core groups.  She said that parents should verify and re-verify the claims and assumptions being spoken by the pro-Common Core side.
  • Kathleen Jasper – Jasper, a former teacher and vice principal, said that there is a giant machine of common core and high-stakes testing that can only be stopped by cutting off the fuel supply, which is the testing;  she said parents and teachers must stand up and boycott the common core aligned assessments.  She said parents need to know that media centers and computer centers in schools are being shut down to accomodate the high-stakes tests; all the money that classrooms need is being redirected to pay for the testing machine.
  • Emmett McGroarty- McGroarty, of American Principles Project, said that Common Core’s highly defined standards/curriculum/testing program ushers in an unconstitutional system that parents can stop.  He said that legislators must be held accountable by voters; if they’re not fighting it, they are going along with it.  Tolerance of common core is a litmus test for legislators.
  • Jenni White – White, a mom who was instrumental in getting Common Core repealed from Oklahoma, said that one of their greatest challenges was the Chamber of Commerce, since it was paid by Bill Gates to push Common Core.  She said that persistence (and matching, eye-popping T-shirts) were key.
  • Glenn Beck – Beck said that the kinds of teachers who can make the complex simple and the mundane exciting are worth their weight in gold, but these teachers are being systematically wiped out because of the enforcement of Common Core by the tests that make everyone and everything conform.
  • David Barton – Barton, a historian, make the point that some people think Common Core is “not that bad,” but it is like a tiger cub, cute and manageable at first, but given time, will destroy.
  • Terrence Moore – Moore, a professor and principal, said that because Common Core uses public money, the public has the right to ask, “what is education?” and not have it re-defined for us.  He said, “We have to get those stories back,” referring to the classic literature and the great American stories that Common Core marginalizes due to an emphasis on informational text and progressive ideology.
  • Heather Crossin – Crossin, an Indiana mom, made the point that we have the truth on our side; once people begin to look at Common Core they realize that the talking points aren’t true.
  • Brian Glicklich – Glicklich, a marketing specialist, said that when we work to repeal the Common Core agenda, we have to remember that rarely can we be both angry and effective; we should make our best points, but don’t try to make all of our points at once.

When the event ended, some friends and I passed out fliers inviting people to attend the Utah State School Board meeting on August 8th, and to take the time to make public comment there (two minutes per person are allowed.)  At that event, the state board will vote on whether or not to cowtow to the federal government by renewing the ESEA/NCLB waiver, which Utah received in exchange for the agreement to do Common Core (as option a; we also could have chosen option b, which was to create local standards using higher ed as a sounding board). After the event, I listened with mouth agape as to two teachers  spoke about their distress about Common Core in the theater lobby. One said that her first graders are being truly cheated and manipulated by the new Common Core math.  She said that when she attempted to speak out in staff meetings, she had her job threatened by her administrator.  She got scared.  She feels that teachers being forced to “collaborate” by PLCs (Professional Learning Communities) — having to sign off, promising to not veer from the common core as defined by the PLC, feels extremely restrictive.   She said that healthy debate does not exist; it’s not allowed to exist in the professional educator community.  She said that if teachers don’t agree, they have to be silent or they are labeled  “not a team player”  or “insubordinate.” The teacher also told me that she received a letter from her district, informing her that although parents have the right to opt students out of the tests, teachers do not have the right to inform parents of that right.  The letter said that teachers must administer the tests, and any teacher found telling students or parents that they have the legal right to not take these tests, would be in trouble. I spoke with a mother of twelve who has been learning about and fighting against Common Core for three years.   She said that many of her neighbors and friends who work in the school system have told her that they feel their hands are tied, and that they cannot do anything about Common Core even though they see its damages.  She opts all children out of the tests. In Utah, at least, we are fortunate because we have the law on our side; schools are not allowed to penalize a student’s grade if that student refuses to take the test. Opt out!

Like this:


Event Ticket Giveaway Today: Beck’s We Will Not Conform   3 comments

If you are interested in attending the Glenn Beck “We Will Not Conform” event which will play live on the big screen at the Provo, Utah Cinemark 16 on 1200 Towne Center Boulevard, today’s a lucky day. I’ve been given four special event passes by a Glenn Beck producer to give away and they need your name on them.

Just send an email to consecutiveintegers@yahoo.com with one reason that you would like two free tickets to this show.  Give me your mailing address and I’ll send out the four tickets,  two tickets per winner, today.  If you don’t win the free tickets, you may buy tickets at FathomEvents.com

About the event:

This Tuesday, July 22nd,  liberty goes up against the Common Core.  A live, interactive event will take place at about 700  local movie theaters across the nation simultaneously.  It will be filmed at the Glenn Beck studios in Dallas, Texas, where a handful of Utah friends will join others in Dallas as part of Glenn Beck’s participant panel.

Michelle Malkin, Glenn Beck, Jenni White, David Barton and many other Common Core fighters will interact with the nationwide audience, via social media, in a meeting of the minds to use “the brainpower, experience and passion of thousands of people from around the country…captured in a comprehensive, unified plan of action”.

You don’t want to miss this.

Another, non-interactive repeat showing of the evening will be rebroadcast in theaters on the evening of July 29th.

Like this:


Video: Heritage Foundation Conference Panel About Common Core   2 comments

Heritage Foundation hosted a multi-day conference recently in Orlando.  Below is a video which is available at Heritage Foundation’s website and on YouTube, taken from  a panel at that conference, which was followed by Q & A about Common Core.

Conference Keynote speaker Michelle Malkin, recipient of the 2013 Breitbart Award for Excellence in Journalism  was an attendee at the panel that discussed the Common Core.

Panelists included Lindsey Burke of Heritage Foundation, Jim Stergios of Pioneer Institute, Ted Rebarber of Accountability Works, Heather Crossin of Hoosiers Against Common Core, and me.

Like this:


Mothers Cry Out   4 comments


When   Melissa Harris-Perry of MSNBC said  “we” need to “break through” the notion of children belonging with parents, there was a huge public outcry.

No one cried out louder than the indomitable Michelle Malkin, who was interviewed by Sean Hannity soon after (must see: 3:55  http://youtu.be/5patiNN3R8g).  Malkin derided the progressive idea of collective ownership:  “Hands off my kids!   My kids are not your guinea pigs. My kids are not your cash cows. My kids’ minds are not for you to propagandize, and my kids’ futures are not for you to raid in the name of social justice!”

Parent activist Yvonne Gasparino said it this way:  “My children, my own flesh and blood, these beautiful little souls that I carried for nine months with nothing but unconditional love from the time the stick read “positive” –are being ripped out of my loving and protective hands virtually and kidnapped by the government for their future use. I will not and cannot let that happen and will fight with every moral fiber of my soul that God has bestowed upon me.”

Like this:


The factual accuracy of parts of this article (those related to map) may be compromised due to out-of-date information. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information.(November 2016)

The Common Core State Standards Initiative is an educational initiative that details what K–12 students throughout the United States should know in English language arts and mathematics at the conclusion of each grade. The initiative is sponsored by the National Governors Association (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) and seeks to establish consistent educational standards across the states as well as ensure that students graduating from high school are prepared to enter credit-bearing courses at two- or four-year college programs or to enter the workforce.[1]


In the 1990s, the "Standards & Accountability Movement" began in the U.S. as states began writing standards (a) outlining what students were expected to know and to be able to do at each grade level, and (b) implementing assessments designed to measure whether students were meeting the standards.[2] As part of this education reform movement, the nation's governors and corporate leaders founded Achieve, Inc. in 1996 as a bipartisan organization to raise academic standards and graduation requirements, improve assessments, and strengthen accountability in all 50 states.[3] The initial motivation for the development of the Common Core State Standards was part of the American Diploma Project (ADP).[4]

A 2004 report, titled Ready or Not: Creating a High School Diploma That Counts, found that employers and colleges are demanding more of high school graduates than in the past. According to Achieve, Inc., "current high-school exit expectations fall well short of employer and college demands." The report explained that the major problem currently facing the American school system is that high school graduates were not provided with the skills and knowledge they needed to succeed in college and careers. Furthermore, "While students and their parents may still believe that the diploma reflects adequate preparation for the intellectual demands of adult life, in reality it falls far short of this common-sense goal." The report also stated that the high school diploma itself lost its value because graduates could not compete successfully beyond high school, and that the solution to this problem is a common set of rigorous standards.[5]


In 2009, the NGA convened a group of people to work on developing the standards. This team included David Coleman, William McCallum of the University of Arizona, Phil Daro, and Student Achievement Partners founders Jason Zimba[6] and Susan Pimentel to write standards in the areas of English and language arts.[7] Announced on June 1, 2009,[8] the initiative's stated purpose is to "provide a consistent, clear understanding of what students are expected to learn, so teachers and parents know what they need to do to help them."[9] Additionally, "The standards are designed to be robust and relevant to the real world, reflecting the knowledge and skills that our young people need for success in college and careers," which should place American students in a position in which they can compete in a global economy.[9]

The standards are copyrighted by NGA Center for Best Practices (NGA Center) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO), which controls use of and licenses the standards.[10] The NGA Center and CCSSO do this by offering a public license which is used by State Departments of Education.[11] The license states that use of the standards must be "in support" of the Common Core State Standards Initiative. It also requires attribution and a copyright notice, except when a state or territory has adopted the standards "in whole."

When the CCSS was originally published, there was no intention to publish a common set of ELPD standards. Instead, it was indicated that the English language proficiency development (ELPD) standards would be left to individual states.[12] However, the need for more guidance quickly became apparent, and led to the creation of several initiatives to provide resources to states and educators, including:

Furthermore, the U.S. Department of Education has since funded two grants to develop the next generation of ELPD assessments, which must measure students’ proficiency against a set of common ELPD standards, which in turn correspond to the college/career-ready standards in English language arts and mathematics[12].  The new assessment system must also:

  • Be based on a common definition of English language learner adopted by all consortium states.
  • Include diagnostic (e.g., screener, placement) and summative assessments.
  • Assess English language proficiency across the four language domains (reading, writing, speaking, and listening) for each grade level from kindergarten through grade 12.
  • Produce results that indicate whether individual students have attained a level and complexity of English language proficiency that is necessary to fully participate in academic instruction in English.
  • Be accessible to all ELLs, except those who are eligible for alternate assessments based on alternate academic standards.
  • Use technology to the maximum extent appropriate to develop, administer, and score assessments.[12]


Forty-two of the fifty U.S. states and the District of Columbia are members of the Common Core State Standards Initiative, with the states of Oklahoma, Texas, Virginia, Alaska, Nebraska, Indiana, and South Carolina not adopting the initiative at a state level.[14]Minnesota adopted the English Language Arts standards but not the Mathematics standards.[15] Although a fast trend the curriculum lost momentum and found at least 12 states introducing legislation to prohibit implementation.[16] Three states that initially adopted Common Core have since decided to repeal or replace it, namely Indiana, Oklahoma, and South Carolina.[17]

Standards were released for mathematics and English language arts on June 2, 2010, with a majority of states adopting the standards in the subsequent months. (See map for current status.) States were given an incentive to adopt the Common Core Standards through the possibility of competitive federal Race to the Top grants. U.S. President Barack Obama and U.S. Secretary of EducationArne Duncan announced the Race to the Top competitive grants on July 24, 2009, as a motivator for education reform. To be eligible, states had to adopt "internationally benchmarked standards and assessments that prepare students for success in college and the work place."[18] Though states could adopt other college- and career-ready standards and still be eligible, they were awarded extra points in their Race to the Top applications if they adopted the Common Core standards by August 2, 2010. Forty-one states made the promise in their application.[19][20]Virginia and Texas were two states that chose to write their own college and career-ready standards, and were subsequently eligible for Race to the Top. Development of the Common Core Standards was funded by the governors and state schools chiefs, with additional support from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Pearson Publishing Company, the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, and others.[21]

Until the Every Student Succeeds Act was passed in December 2015, the US Department of Education had encouraged states to adopt the Common Core Standards by tying the grant of waivers from the No Child Left Behind Act to adoption of the Standards. However, the Every Student Succeeds Act not only replaced the No Child Left Behind Act, it also expressly prohibits the Department of Education from attempting to "influence, incentivize, or coerce State adoption of the Common Core State Standards ... or any other academic standards common to a significant number of States."[22]

Though the Common Core State Standards do not cover science and social studies content standards, the Next Generation Science Standards were released in April 2012 and have been adopted by many states. They are not directly related to the Common Core, but their content can be cross-connected to the mathematical and English Language Arts standards within the Common Core.[23][24]

English Language Arts standards[edit]

The stated goal of the English Language Arts and Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects standards[25] is to ensure that students are college and career ready in literacy no later than the end of high school. There are five key components to the standards for English and Language Arts: Reading, Writing, Speaking and Listening, Language, and Media and Technology.[26] The essential components and breakdown of each of these key points within the standards are as follows:

  • As students advance through each grade, there is an increased level of complexity to what students are expected to read and there is also a progressive development of reading comprehension so that students can gain more from what they read.[26]
  • Teachers, school districts, and states are expected to decide on the appropriate curriculum, but sample texts are included to help teachers, students, and parents prepare for the year ahead.[26] Molly Walsh of Burlington Free Press notes an appendix (of state standards for reading material) that lists "exemplar texts" from works by noted authors such as Ovid, Voltaire, William Shakespeare, Ivan Turgenev, Edgar Allan Poe, Robert Frost, W. B. Yeats, Nathaniel Hawthorne, and the more contemporary including Amy Tan, Atul Gawande and Julia Alvarez.[27]
  • There is some critical content for all students – classic myths and stories from around the world, foundational U.S. documents, seminal works of American literature, and the writings of Shakespeare – but the rest is left up to the states and the districts.[26]
  • The driving force of the writing standards is logical arguments based on claims, solid reasoning, and relevant evidence. The writing also includes opinion writing even within the K–5 standards.[26]
  • Short, focused research projects, similar to the kind of projects students will face in their careers, as well as long-term, in-depth research is another piece of the writing standards. This is because written analysis and the presentation of significant findings are critical to career and college readiness.[26]
  • The standards also include annotated samples of student writing to help determine performance levels in writing arguments, explanatory texts, and narratives across the grades.[26]
Speaking and listening
  • Although reading and writing are the expected components of an English language arts curriculum, standards are written so that students gain, evaluate, and present complex information, ideas, and evidence specifically through listening and speaking.[26]
  • There is also an emphasis on academic discussion in one-on-one, small-group, and whole-class settings, which can take place as formal presentations or informal discussions during student collaboration.[26]
  • Vocabulary instruction in the standards takes place through a mix of conversations, direct instruction, and reading so that students can determine word meanings and can expand their use of words and phrases.[26]
  • The standards expect students to use formal English in their writing and speaking, but also recognize that colleges and 21st-century careers will require students to make wise, skilled decisions about how to express themselves through language in a variety of contexts.[26]
  • Vocabulary and conventions are their own strand because these skills extend across reading, writing, speaking, and listening.[26]
Media and technology
  • Since media and technology are intertwined with every student's life and in school in the 21st century, skills related to media use, which includes the analysis and production of various forms of media, are also included in these standards.[26]
  • The standards include instruction in keyboarding,[28] but do not mandate the teaching of cursive handwriting. As of late 2013, seven states had elected to maintain teaching of cursive: California, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Massachusetts, North Carolina and Utah.[29]

Mathematics standards[edit]

The stated goal of the mathematics standards is to achieve greater focus and coherence in the curriculum.[30] This is largely in response to the criticism that American mathematics curricula are "a mile wide and an inch deep".[31]

The mathematics standards include Standards for Mathematical Practice and Standards for Mathematical Content.

Mathematical practice[edit]

The Standards mandate that eight principles of mathematical practice be taught:[32]

  1. Make sense of problems and persevere in solving them.
  2. Reason abstractly and quantitatively.
  3. Construct viable arguments and critique the reasoning of others.
  4. Model with mathematics.
  5. Use appropriate tools strategically.
  6. Attend to precision.
  7. Look for and make use of structure.
  8. Look for and express regularity in repeated reasoning.

The practices are adapted from the five process standards of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics and the five strands of proficiency in the U.S. National Research Council's Adding It Up report.[33] These practices are to be taught in every grade from kindergarten to twelfth grade. Details of how these practices are to be connected to each grade level's mathematics content are left to local implementation of the Standards.

As an example of mathematical practice, here is the full description of the sixth practice:[34]

Attend to precision
Mathematically proficient students try to communicate precisely to others. They try to use clear definitions in discussion with others and in their own reasoning. They state the meaning of the symbols they choose, including using the equal sign consistently and appropriately. They are careful about specifying units of measure, and labeling axes to clarify the correspondence with quantities in a problem. They calculate accurately and efficiently, express numerical answers with a degree of precision appropriate for the problem context. In the elementary grades, students give carefully formulated explanations to each other. By the time they reach high school they have learned to examine claims and make explicit use of definitions.

Mathematical content[edit]

The standards lay out the mathematics content that should be learned at each grade level from kindergarten to Grade 8 (age 13–14), as well as the mathematics to be learned in high school. The standards do not dictate any particular pedagogy or what order topics should be taught within a particular grade level. Mathematical content is organized in a number of domains. At each grade level there are several standards for each domain, organized into clusters of related standards. (See examples below.)

DomainKindergartenGrade 1Grade 2Grade 3Grade 4Grade 5Grade 6Grade 7Grade 8
Counting and CardinalityX        
Operations and Algebraic ThinkingXXXXXX   
Number and Operations in Base 10XXXXXX   
Measurement and DataXXXXXX   
Number and Operations—Fractions   XXX   
Ratios and Proportional Relationships      XX 
The Number System      XXX
Expressions and Equations      XXX
Statistics and Probability      XXX
Functions        X

In addition to detailed standards (of which there are 21 to 28 for each grade from kindergarten to eighth grade), the standards present an overview of "critical areas" for each grade. (See examples below.)

In high school (Grades 9 to 12), the standards do not specify which content is to be taught at each grade level, nor does the Common Core prescribe how a particular standard should be taught. Up to Grade 8, the curriculum is integrated; students study four or five different mathematical domains every year. The standards do not dictate whether the curriculum should continue to be integrated in high school with study of several domains each year (as is done in other countries), or whether the curriculum should be separated out into separate year-long algebra and geometry courses (as has been the tradition in most U.S. states). An appendix[35] to the standards describes four possible pathways for covering high school content (two traditional and two integrated), but states are free to organize the content any way they want.

There are six conceptual categories of content to be covered at the high school level:

Some topics in each category are indicated only for students intending to take more advanced, optional courses such as calculus, advanced statistics, or discrete mathematics. Even if the traditional sequence is adopted, functions and modeling are to be integrated across the curriculum, not taught as separate courses. Mathematical Modeling is a Standard for Mathematical Practice (see above), and is meant to be integrated across the entire curriculum beginning in kindergarten. The modeling category does not have its own standards; instead, high school standards in other categories which are intended to be considered part of the modeling category are indicated in the standards with a star symbol.

Each of the six high school categories includes a number of domains. For example, the "number and quantity" category contains four domains: the real number system; quantities; the complex number system; and vector and matrix quantities. The "vector and matrix quantities" domain is reserved for advanced students, as are some of the standards in "the complex number system".

Examples of mathematical content[edit]

Second grade example: In the second grade there are 26 standards in four domains. The four critical areas of focus for second grade are (1) extending understanding of base-ten notation; (2) building fluency with addition and subtraction; (3) using standard units of measure; and (4) describing and analyzing shapes. Below are the second grade standards for the domain of "operations and algebraic thinking" (Domain 2.OA). This second grade domain contains four standards, organized into three clusters:[36]

Represent and solve problems involving addition and subtraction.
1. Use addition and subtraction within 100 to solve one- and two-step word problems involving situations of adding to, taking from, putting together, taking apart, and comparing, with unknowns in all positions, e.g., by using drawings and equations with a symbol for the unknown number to represent the problem.
Add and subtract within 20.
2. Fluently add and subtract within 20 using mental strategies. By end of Grade 2, know from memory all sums of two one-digit numbers.
Work with equal groups of objects to gain foundations for multiplication.
3. Determine whether a group of objects (up to 20) has an odd or even number of members, e.g., by pairing objects or counting them by 2s; write an equation to express an even number as a sum of two equal addends.
4. Use addition to find the total number of objects arranged in rectangular arrays with up to 5 rows and up to 5 columns; write an equation to express the total as a sum of equal addends.

Domain example: As an example of the development of a domain across several grades, here are the clusters for learning fractions (Domain NF, which stands for "Number and Operations—Fractions") in Grades 3 through 6. Each cluster contains several standards (not listed here):[37]

Grade 3:
  • Develop an understanding of fractions as numbers.
Grade 4:
  • Extend understanding of fraction equivalence and ordering.
  • Build fractions from unit fractions by applying and extending previous understandings of operations on whole numbers.
  • Understand decimal notation for fractions, and compare decimal fractions.
Grade 5:
  • Use equivalent fractions as a strategy to add and subtract fractions.
  • Apply and extend previous understandings of multiplication and division to multiply and divide fractions.
In Grade 6, there is no longer a "number and operations—fractions" domain, but students learn to divide fractions by fractions in the number system domain.

High school example: As an example of a high school category, here are the domains and clusters for algebra. There are four algebra domains (in bold below), each of which is broken down into as many as four clusters (bullet points below). Each cluster contains one to five detailed standards (not listed here). Starred standards, such as the Creating Equations domain (A-CED), are also intended to be part of the modeling category.[38]

Seeing Structure in Expressions (A-SSE)
  • Interpret the structure of expressions
  • Write expressions in equivalent forms to solve problems
Arithmetic with Polynomials and Rational Functions (A-APR)
  • Perform arithmetic operations on polynomials
  • Understand the relationship between zeros and factors of polynomials
  • Use polynomial identities to solve problems
  • Rewrite rational expressions
Creating Equations.★ (A-CED)
  • Create equations that describe numbers or relationships
Reasoning with Equations and Inequalities (A-REI)
  • Understand solving equations as a process of reasoning and explain the reasoning
  • Solve equations and inequalities in one variable
  • Solve systems of equations
  • Represent and solve equations and inequalities graphically

As an example of detailed high school standards, the first cluster above is broken down into two standards as follows:

Interpret the structure of expressions
1. Interpret expressions that represent a quantity in terms of its context.★
a. Interpret parts of an expression, such as terms, factors, and coefficients.
b. Interpret complicated expressions by viewing one or more of their parts as a single entity. For example, interpretP(1+r)nas the product of P and a factor not depending on P.
2. Use the structure of an expression to identify ways to rewrite it. For example, seex4y4as(x2)2 – (y2)2, thus recognizing it as a difference of squares that can be factored as(x2y2)(x2 + y2).


This section needs to be updated. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information.(September 2016)

According to the Common Core State Standards Initiative website, formal assessment is expected to take place in the 2014–2015 school year, which coincides with the projected implementation year for most states.[39] The assessment is being created by two consortia with different approaches.[40] The final decision of which assessment to use will be determined by individual state education agencies. Both of these leading consortiums are proposing computer-based exams that include fewer selected and constructed response test items, unlike the Standardized Test that has been more common.

  • The PARCC RttT Assessment Consortium comprises the 19 jurisdictions of Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, District of Columbia, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Mississippi, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Tennessee. Their approach focuses on computer-based "through-course assessments" in each grade together with streamlined end-of-year tests. (PARCC refers to "Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers" and RttT refers to the Race to the Top.)[40]
  • The second consortium, called the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium, comprised 31 states and territories (as of January 2014) focusing on creating "adaptive online exams". Member states include Alaska, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, U.S. Virgin Islands, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.[40][41]

As of October 2015, SBAC membership was reduced to 20 members: California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa, Maine, Michigan, Montana, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, U.S. Virgin Islands, The Bureau of Indian Education, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia, Wyoming.[42]

While some states are working together to create a common, universal assessment based on the Common Core State Standards, other states are choosing to work independently or through these two consortiums to develop the assessment.[43]Florida GovernorRick Scott directed his state education board to withdraw from PARCC.[44] Georgia withdrew from the consortium test in July 2013 in order to develop its own.[45] Michigan decided not to participate in Smarter Balanced testing.[46] Oklahoma tentatively withdrew from the consortium test in July 2013 due to the technical challenges of online assessment.[47] And Utah withdrew from the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium in August 2012.[48]

Reception and criticism[edit]

The Common Core State Standards have drawn both support and criticism from politicians, analysts, and commentators. Teams of academics and educators from around the United States led the development of the standards, and additional validation teams approved the final standards. The teams drew on public feedback that was solicited throughout the process and that feedback was incorporated into the standards.[49] The Common Core initiative only specifies what students should know at each grade level and describes the skills that they must acquire in order to achieve college or career readiness. Individual school districts are responsible for choosing curricula based on the standards.[49] Textbooks bearing a Common Core label are not verified by any agency and may or may not represent the intent of the Common Core Standards. Some critics believe most current textbooks are not actually aligned to the Common Core, while others disagree.[50]

The mathematicians Edward Frenkel and Hung-Hsi Wu wrote in 2013 that the mathematical education in the United States is in "deep crisis" caused by the way math is currently taught in schools. Both agree that math textbooks, which are widely adopted across the states, already create "mediocre de facto national standards". The texts, they say, "are often incomprehensible and irrelevant". The Common Core State Standards address these issues and "level the playing field" for students. They point out that adoption of the Common Core State Standards and how best to test students are two separate issues.[51]

In 2012, Tom Loveless of the Brookings Institution called into question whether the standards will have any effect, and said that they "have done little to equalize academic achievement within states".[52] In response to the standards, the libertarian Cato Institute claimed that "it is not the least bit paranoid to say the federal government wants a national curriculum."[52] Some conservatives have assailed the program as a federal "top-down" takeover of state and local education systems.[53][54]South Carolina GovernorNikki Haley said her state should not "relinquish control of education to the federal government, neither should we cede it to the consensus of other states."[53]

Educational analysts from the Thomas B. Fordham Institute determined that the Common Core standards, "are clearly superior to those currently in use in 39 states in math and 37 states in English. For 33 states, the Common Core is superior in both math and reading."[53][55] According to the National Education Association, the Common Core State Standards are supported by 76% of its teacher members.[56]

A spokesman from ExxonMobil said of Common Core: "It sets very important milestones and standards for educational achievement while at the same time providing those most invested in the outcome – local teachers and administrators – with the flexibility they need to best achieve those results".[57]

The Heritage Foundation argued in 2010 that the Common Core's focus on national standards would do little to fix deeply ingrained problems and incentive structures within the education system.[58]

Marion Brady, a teacher, and Patrick Murray, an elected member of the school governing board in Bradford, Maine, wrote that Common Core drains initiative from teachers and enforces a "one-size-fits-all" curriculum that ignores cultural differences among classrooms and students.[59][60]Diane Ravitch, former U.S. Assistant Secretary of Education and education historian, wrote in her book Reign of Error that the Common Core standards have never been field-tested and that no one knows whether they will improve education.[61] Nicholas Tampio, Assistant Professor of Political Science at Fordham University, said that the standards emphasize rote learning and uniformity over creativity, and fail to recognize differences in learning styles.[62]

Michigan State University's Distinguished Professor William Schmidt wrote:

In my view, the Common Core State Standards in Mathematics (CCSSM) unquestionably represent a major change in the way U.S. schools teach mathematics. Rather than a fragmented system in which content is "a mile wide and an inch deep," the new common standards offer the kind of mathematics instruction we see in the top-achieving nations, where students learn to master a few topics each year before moving on to more advanced mathematics. It is my opinion that [a state] will best position its students for success by remaining committed to the Common Core State Standards and focusing their efforts on the implementation of the standards and aligned assessments.[63]

The standards require certain critical content for all students, including: classic myths and stories from around the world, America's Founding Documents, foundational American literature, and Shakespeare.[64] In May 2013, the National Catholic Educational Association noted that the standards are a "set of high-quality academic expectations that all students should master by the end of each grade level" and are "not a national curriculum".[65]

Advancing one Catholic perspective, over one hundred college-level scholars signed a public letter criticizing the Common Core for diminishing the humanities in the educational curriculum: The "Common Core adopts a bottom-line, pragmatic approach to education and the heart of its philosophy is, as far as we can see, that it is a waste of resources to 'over-educate' people,"[66] though the Common Core set only minimum—not maximum—standards. Mark Naison, Fordham University Professor, and co-founder of the Badass Teachers Association, raised a similar objection: "The liberal critique of Common Core is that this is a huge profit-making enterprise that costs school districts a tremendous amount of money, and pushes out the things kids love about school, like art and music".[67]

As Common Core is implemented in New York, the new tests have been criticized. Some parents have said that the new assessments are too difficult and are causing too much stress, leading to an "opt-out movement" in which parents refuse to let their children take the tests.[68]

Former governor Jeb Bush has said of opponents of the standards that while "criticisms and conspiracy theories are easy attention grabbers", he instead wanted to hear their solutions to the problems in American education.[69] In 2014, Bobby Jindal wrote that "It has become fashionable in the news media to believe there is a right-wing conspiracy against Common Core."[70]

Diane Ravitch has also stated:

The financial cost of implementing Common Core has barely been mentioned in the national debates. All Common Core testing will be done online. This is a bonanza for the tech industry and other vendors. Every school district must buy new computers, new teaching materials, and new bandwidth for the testing. At a time when school budgets have been cut in most states and many thousands of teachers have been laid off, school districts across the nation will spend billions to pay for Common Core testing. Los Angeles alone committed to spend $1 billion on iPads for the tests; the money is being taken from a bond issue approved by voters for construction and repair of school facilities. Meanwhile, the district has cut teachers of the arts, class size has increased, and necessary repairs are deferred because the money will be spent on iPads. The iPads will be obsolete in a year or two, and the Pearson content loaded onto the iPads has only a three-year license.[71]

Writer Jonathan Kozol uses the metaphor "cognitive decapitation" to describe the unfulfilling educational experience students are going through due to the subjects that have been excluded in their curriculum as a result of the Common Core.[72] He notes cognitive decapitation is often experienced in urban schools of color, while white children have the privilege to continue engaging in a creative curriculum that involves the arts.[72]

In 2016, ACT, Inc., administrators of the ACT college readiness assessment, reported that there is a disconnect between what is emphasized in the Common Core and what is deemed important for college readiness by some college instructors.[73] ACT has been a proponent of the Common Core Standards, and Chief Executive Officer Martin Roorda stated that "ACT's findings should not be interpreted as a rebuke of the Common Core."[73]

Early results[edit]

Kentucky was the first to implement the Common Core State Standards, and local school districts began offering new math and English curricula based on the standard in August 2010. In 2013, Time magazine reported that the high school graduation rate had increased from 80 percent in 2010 to 86 percent in 2013, test scores went up 2 percentage points in the second year of using the Common Core test, and the percentage of students considered to be ready for college or a career, based on a battery of assessments, went up from 34 percent in 2010 to 54 percent in 2013.[74] According to Sarah Butrymowicz from The Atlantic,

Kentucky's experience over the past three school years suggests it will be a slow and potentially frustrating road ahead for the other states that are using the Common Core. Test scores are still dismal, and state officials have expressed concern that the pace of improvement is not fast enough. Districts have also seen varying success in changing how teachers teach, something that was supposed to change under the new standards.[75]

The Common Core State Standards are considered to be more rigorous than the standards they replaced in Kentucky. Kentucky's old standards received a "D" in an analysis by the Thomas B. Fordham Institute. School officials in Kentucky believe it will take several more years to adjust to the new standards, which received an A- in math and a B+ in English from the Fordham Institute.[75][76]

Adoption and implementation by states[edit]

Main article: Common Core implementation by state

The chart below contains the adoption status of the Common Core State Standards as of May 12, 2015.[77] Among the territories of the United States (not listed in the chart below), the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the American Samoa Islands have adopted the standards while Puerto Rico has not adopted the standards. [78] As of May 12, 2015, three states have repealed Common Core.[77] Nine additional member states have legislation in some stage of the process that would repeal Common Core participation.[78]

StateAdoption stanceNotes
AlabamaFormally adoptedState school board voted to rescind the agreement that commits the state to adoption. However, state standards are still aligned with Common Core State Standards.[79]
ArizonaRepealedThe Arizona State Board of Education voted to reject Common Core on October 26, 2015. The vote was 6–2 in favor of repeal.[80]
ArkansasFormally adopted
CaliforniaFormally adopted
ColoradoFormally adopted
ConnecticutFormally adopted
DelawareFormally adopted
District of ColumbiaFormally adopted
FloridaNon-MemberDropped in favor of "Florida State Standards", which are based on Common Core standards.[81]
GeorgiaFormally adopted
HawaiiFormally adopted
IdahoFormally adopted
IllinoisFormally adopted
IndianaRepealedImplementation paused by law for one year in May 2013 and under public review;[82] formally withdrew in March 2014, but retained many of the standards.[83]
IowaFormally adopted
KansasFormally adoptedDefunding legislation passed Senate, narrowly failed in House in July 2013.[84]
KentuckyFormally adopted
LouisianaFormally adoptedGovernor signed executive order to withdraw state from PARCC assessment program. (June 2014).[78]
MaineFormally adopted
MarylandFormally adopted
MassachusettsFormally adoptedDelayed Common Core testing for two years in November 2013.[85] Ballot question on future of standards in 2016 has been ruled against by Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court as of August 12, 2016.[86]
MichiganFormally adoptedImplementation was paused for a time but was approved to continue.[87]
MinnesotaPartially adoptedEnglish standards only, math standards rejected.
MississippiFormally adoptedWithdrew from PARCC testing on January 16, 2015.[88]
MissouriUnder review[77]
MontanaFormally adopted
NevadaFormally adopted
New HampshireFormally adopted
New JerseyRepealedAdopted New Jersey Student Learning Standards in lieu of Common Core beginning in the 2017-18 school year.[90]
New MexicoFormally adopted
New YorkFormally adoptedFull implementation of assessment delayed until 2022.[91]
North CarolinaUnder review[77]
North DakotaFormally adopted
OhioFormally adoptedThere is currently legislation in progress to repeal Common Core from the state.[92]
OklahomaRepealedLegislation restoring state standards signed June 5, 2014.[93]
OregonFormally adopted
PennsylvaniaFormally adoptedPaused implementation in May 2013.[94]
Rhode IslandFormally adopted
South CarolinaRepealedA bill to repeal the Standards beginning in the 2015-2016 school year was officially signed by Governor Nikki Haley in June 2014 after deliberation in the state legislature.[95]
South DakotaFormally adopted
TennesseeUnder review[77]
UtahUnder review[77]
VermontFormally adopted
WashingtonFormally adopted
West VirginiaFormally adopted
WisconsinFormally adopted
WyomingFormally adopted


  1. ^"Frequently Asked Questions". Common Core State Standards Initiative. Retrieved December 4, 2013. 
  2. ^Gibbs, T. H.; Howley, A (2000). "'World-Class Standards' and Local Pedagogies: Can We Do Both? Thresholds in Education". ERIC Publications: 51–55. 
  3. ^"About Us". Achieve, Inc. Retrieved October 3, 2013. 
  4. ^Closing the Expectations Gap 2011: Sixth Annual 50-State Progress Report. Achieve, Inc. 2011. Retrieved October 4, 2013. 
  5. ^"Ready or Not: Creating a High School Diploma That Counts". Achieve, Inc. December 10, 2004. Retrieved October 4, 2013. 
  6. ^Hess, Frederick (February 28, 2013). Straight Up Converstion: Common Core Guru Jason Zimba. Education Next.
  7. ^Heitin, Liana. "The Common-Core Reading Standard That Should Have Been". Education Week. Education Week. Retrieved May 6, 2016. 
  8. ^"Forty-Nine States and Territories Join Common Core Standards Initiative". National Governors Association. Archived from the original on October 4, 2013. Retrieved October 4, 2013. 
  9. ^ ab"Implementing the Common Core State Standards". Common Core State Standards Initiative. Retrieved October 4, 2013. 
  10. ^Common Core State Standards Initiative | Terms of Use. Common Core State Standards Initiative. Retrieved July 19, 2013.
  11. ^Common Core State Standards Initiative | Public License. Common Core State Standards Initiative. Retrieved July 19, 2013.
  12. ^ abcd"Overview of the Common Core State Standards Initiatives for ELLs"(PDF). Archived from the original(PDF) on 3/7/2018. 
  13. ^ abStaehr Fenner, Diane (2012-03-09). "Standards That Impact English Language Learners". Colorín Colorado. Retrieved 2018-03-07. 
  14. ^"States adopting the Core Standards". Corestandards.org. Retrieved June 27, 2014. 
  15. ^"Why Did Minnesota Skip the Math Common Core Standards?". Minnesota Public Radio News. June 12, 2012. Retrieved July 19, 2013.
  16. ^https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2014-02-10/common-core-isn-t-a-government-conspiracy
  17. ^"Common Core Support in Free Fall". US News and World Report. Retrieved August 22, 2014. 
  18. ^"President Obama, U.S. Secretary of Education Duncan Announce National Competition to Advance School Reform". U.S. Department of Education. July 24, 2009. Retrieved February 18, 2014. 
  19. ^Fletcher, G. H. (2010). "Race to the Top: No District Left Behind". T. H. E. Journal. 37 (10): 17–18. Retrieved March 14, 2014. 
  20. ^"Fulfilling the Promise of the Common Core State Standards: Moving from Adoption to Implementation to Sustainability". ASCD. 2012. Retrieved March 19, 2014.  
  21. ^Anderson, Nick (March 10, 2010). "Common Set of School Standards to Be Proposed". The Washington Post: A1. 
  22. ^Korte, Gregory (December 11, 2015). "The Every Student Succeeds Act vs. No Child Left Behind: What's changed?". USA Today. Retrieved December 18, 2015. 
  23. ^"Appendix L — Connections to the Common Core Standards for Mathematics"(PDF). Next Generation Science Standards. Retrieved October 16, 2013. 
  24. ^"Appendix M — Connections to the Common Core Standards for Literacy in Science and Technical Subjects"(PDF). Next Generation Science Standards. Retrieved October 16, 2013. 
  25. ^"Common Core State Standards For English Language Arts & Literacy In History/Social Studies, Science, And Technical Subjects"(PDF). Common Core State Standards Initiative. Retrieved February 7, 2014. 
  26. ^ abcdefgh
A map showing states in the U.S which have either adopted, not adopted, partially adopted, or repealed the Common Core State Standards:

  States that have adopted the Standards

  States that have partially adopted or partially repealed the Standards

  States that adopted but later repealed the Standards

  States that never adopted the Standards

One thought on “Michelle Malkin Common Core Essay Prompts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *