The Schools Matter blog has carried an article by Jim Horn.

He writes:

“Even though CCSS are not federal standards per se, no one disputes the fact they would have never been endorsed by 45 states almost overnight, had the Obama Administration not incentivized their adoption with bonus points for states hoping to land part of the $4.3 billion in federal Race to the Top grants in 2010.

“Nonetheless, the federal education goal, which consolidates years of work by the Business Roundtable, is for all states to have the same “state” standards and that new accountability tests should be developed and administered nationwide. If that makes them state standards, then surely, “what’s in a name?””

Note that Mr. Horn (doctor of education, I presume, but I didn’t look hard, and nothing told me for sure) is a progressivist. When progressives are panning the CCSS, it seems certain the CCSS is a bad idea.

It does make me wonder. Why would progressives oppose such an obliviously progressive set of rules? Of course, it is just as stunning to see Republicans and otherwise conservative people supporting it!

Actually, I might have a clue. Horn points out that CCSS doesn’t seem to be helping, and that standards that are different from CCSS are what do seem to be working. He then asks for a delay and studies. He asserts, correctly, that CCSS will have one certain outcome: Lots of students labeled as failures.

That seems to me a good reason for progressivists to oppose it. It inflicts negative labels. Conversely, I think that is why some conservatives support it. It holds accountable and imposes consequences.

Neither is a correct and realistic world view. There is a balance toward the middle, and CCSS does not help us get there.