The New Community College: A Response to the Common Core Standards in K-12 via the Modern 3R’s Dr. Derrick Barbee derric

1. The New Community College: A Response to the Common Core Standards in K-12 via the Modern 3R’sDr. Derrick Barbeederrickbarbee@hotmail.comMarch 12, 2013

2. Activator • I constantly ensure that all learners have an equal opportunity and access to an excellent education, industry-specific skills, and pathways to employment (Barbee, 2011). • Rigor – in addition to academic content, there must be a daily emphasis on the importance of critical thinking, communication skills, and collaboration (Barbee, 2011). • Responsibility – all stakeholders must provide consistent resources, innovative teachings, and a commitment to test the skills of which all students need to master to succeed as global lifelong learners, workplace leaders, and citizens (Barbee, 2011). • Relationship – create a sense of belonging for all students through a professional relationship with their educator, school, and community (Barbee, 2011).

3. Budget • Of the 21,810 public high school graduates in spring 2008 who enrolled in a community college within the next year, 64 percent took one or more “developmental” courses (Robertson, 2010). • UNC system campuses had 4,884 students receiving remedial instruction during the 2007-08 school year, at a cost of $2.5 million (Robertson, 2010). • The price tag for remedial courses for students 21 and under in the community college system was $26.3 million in the 2008-09 fiscal year (Robertson, 2010).

4. Budget • In 2000, 76% of the colleges and universities that enrolled freshmen offered at least one remedial course (NCES, 2003). • Remedial classes are offered at 100% of community colleges, 80% of public four-year institutions, and 59% of private four-year institutions (NCES, 2003). • A nonpartisan report estimated the annual cost of remedial education in community colleges nationwide at around $2 billion (Robertson, 2010).

5. Background Part 1 • The reform efforts during the 1990s and the idea of pumping money into low performing schools appeared to have little to no influence on the student achievement overall (Orfield, 2001). • Orfield (2001) indicated that schools need to be diverse, demographically, in order for all students to develop character, grow intellectually, and to have a better chance at succeeding on standardize testing. • The increase in private and charter school education had a negative impact on the social economic statistics in public schools (The Civil Rights Project, 2000).

6. Background Part 2 • Zhang and Cowen (2009) disregarded previous research that mentioned race as the primary reason for the achievement gap, though suggested that it was due more to location. • The initial thinking behind modern standardized testing was to find a more accurate way to measure both student and school performance (TERC, 2001). • Doherty (2004) believed that most state assessments may be better at gauging rote learning than at evaluating thinking skills. This is an example of how testing influences the achievement gap at the “top” as well. • According to the SAT Report of College and Career Readiness, 43% of 2012 SAT test-takers met standards linked to a high likelihood of college success (The College Board, 2012).

7. Accountability, Standards, and the Growing Achievement Gap: Lessons from the Past Half-Century Part 1 • Government-Based accountability was the publishing of school achievement scores on standardized testing, updated graduation requirements based on student level of achievement, annual yearly progress reports, and other statistical measurements employed to assess growth of students and schools (Harris and Herrington, 2006). • Harris and Herrington (2006) said, “The current school choice model that was intended for disadvantaged students in the United States education system was an example of a marketing-based accountability" (p. 220-221). The disadvantaged student could choose a school based on their educational needs and escape low-performing schools.

8. Accountability, Standards, and the Growing Achievement Gap: Lessons from the Past Half-Century Part 2 (Harris and Herrington, 2006)

9. Algebra I Concerns • Algebra was considered a “gateway” course for the sequence of mathematics and science courses that prepares students for success in later schooling (Matthews and Farmer 2008). • Algebra may be integral to preparing students for success in college and the labor force, including careers in competitive mathematics related disciplines (NCES, 2010). • Many colleges and universities today are faced with the problem of low student academic achievement in math. Some of them are trying to improve student academic achievement through the use of technology (White, Myers, and Earl, 2008). • An 18% overall statewide decrease in the number of students who scored at or above achievement level III occurred as a result of the new Algebra I standard course of study (North Carolina Department of Public Instruction, 2009).

10. Issues of Some Past Educational Reforms • There was not a supportive platform for a professional student- teacher relationship. • Technology was being employed as the primary tool of learning. • Lack of a consistent supply of resources for students, parents, faculty, or districts. • Some reforms were not given enough time to be fully implemented or to produce significant statistical results for comparisons. (ACT Inc., 2004; NCREL, 2005)

11. How Do We Change This Trend? • A 3-minute video on Common Core State Standards (CCSS) … http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5s0rRk9sER0&noredirect=1

12. Difference From Previous Reforms • The standards promote equity by ensuring all students, no matter where they live, are well prepared with the skills and knowledge necessary to collaborate and compete with their peers in the United States and abroad. • Previous standards were unique to every state. The CCSS enables collaboration between states on a range of tools and policies, including: the development of textbooks, digital media, and other teaching materials aligned to the standards. • A portion of the referred guided criteria to develop the standards were: • Input and feedback from numerous organizations across the country. • Alignment with expectations for college and career success. • Inclusion of content and the application of knowledge through high-order skills. • Improvement upon current state standards and standards of top-performing nations • Reality-based, for effective use in the classroom. • Scholarly research and state-led. (National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers, 2012)

13. Early Achievement in Schools(CCSS adopted some of these Scholarly concepts) • Beating the Odds IV, found that the Great City Schools were making important gains in math and reading scores on state assessments (Casserly, 2003). • The Consortium on Chicago School Research found that a student-centered environment is more effective than a teacher-centered classroom (TERC, 2001). It allows for more self-pacing and cultural experiences to enhance the learning of the students. • “Clearly, the more skilled teachers are at communicating, the more effective they will be…” (Hoy and Woolfolk, 2001, p. 284). • Problem based learning and applications to the real world allowed the students, in the interactive environment, to better relate to the concepts being taught (TERC, 2001).

14. North Carolina Common Core State Standards • The Common Core State Standards Initiative is state-led and coordinated by NGA and CCSSO • The standards were developed by teachers, administrators, and other experts to give clear concise guidelines to prepare students for college and today’s global workforce. • Standards provide applicable benchmarks for students of all backgrounds. • These standards explain the skills and competencies needed to succeed in entry level college courses and/or work environment. (National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers, 2012)

15. Common Core in Mathematics • High school math standards focus on analyzing, understanding, and modeling mathematic situations as opposed to “brute math”. • Standards help cultivate college and career readiness by creating rigor through problem-based or mathematic situations applicable to real-life. • Students are being required to reason and think mathematically by applying cross-curricular inferences. • These standards explore the application of technology to utilize data in real-life situations such as government, economical processes and science and sustainability. (National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers, 2012)

16. Common Core in English/Reading • Ensures that all students achieve college and career readiness and literacy (reading, writing, speaking, listening, and language) upon graduation. • Standards call for a wide and thoughtful view on quality works of literature and broadening of worldviews. • It is important to note that the 6–12 literacy standards in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects are not meant to replace content standards in those areas but rather to supplement them. • Develop the skills in reading, writing, speaking, and listening that are the foundation for any creative and purposeful expression in language. (National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers, 2012)

17. How We Learn • 10% of what we read • 20% of what we hear • 30% of what we see • 50% of what we both see and hear • 70% of what is discussed with others • 80% of what we experience personally • 95% of what we teach to someone’s else (Rigor – One of the goal’s of CCSS is to create higher order thinking and ownership of one’s learning)

18. Effect of CCSS • Rigor – states that adopted the standards are currently collaborating to develop common assessments that will be aligned to the standards and replace existing end of year state assessments. These assessments will be available in the 2014-2015 school year. • Responsibility – provided educational standards, tools, and policies that will help teachers to ensure that their students have the skills and knowledge they need to be successful by providing clear goals for student learning. • Relationship – for shared accountability and to develop higher order thinking skills, a student-centered environment will take place.

19. Effect of CCSS on Students • The standards provide clarity and consistency in what is expected of student learning across the country. • This initiative helps provide all students with an equal opportunity for an education, regardless of where they live. • The CCSS will not prevent different levels of achievement among students, but they will ensure more consistent exposure to materials and learning experiences through curriculum, instruction, and teacher preparation among other supports for student learning.

20. Effect of CCSS on Educators • Allowing states to develop and provide better assessments that more accurately measure whether or not students have learned what was taught. • Providing goals and benchmarks to ensure students are achieving certain skills and knowledge by the end of each year. • Helping colleges and professional development programs better prepare teachers. • Guiding educators toward curricula and teaching strategies that will give students a deep understanding of the subject and the skills they need to apply their knowledge.

21. How Could We Foster Collaboration? Part 1 Outline • Conduct presentations followed by an open discussion for stakeholders whom are from 4-year institutions, UNC institution administrators, community college administrators, community college system office personnel, College Fund North Carolina pathways personnel, and various community organizations. Outside of state personnel, only invited stakeholders within an hour drive of your location. Thus, you want to initially grow your ideas regionally while aligning them with various state initiatives. • At this open discussion, you will be sharing programs initiatives and student retention methods, to gain more access to public services and to take a more holistic approach to every students' education. • The first potential presentation would be the Department of Health and Human Services which would allow everyone to have more access to their services and understand how to implement them. Services such as this would potentially allow education organizations to retain more students and faculty. The discussion will also raise awareness of the vital role in which public services could have on the academic success of a student.

22. How Could We Foster Collaboration? Part 2 Outline • A second presentation could be on Common Core. Intentions of this presentation would be to better inform everyone of potential impacts on the entire educational system, especially higher education. This would enable us to start making adjustments to the Common Core now rather than waiting the normal 5-7 years. • Third presentation, is to be on a current or newly developed program at a college. The audience’s feedback would be considered when making future any adjustments. Next, this program is to be shared with other institutions (conducting on-site presentations) to initiate the process of having a Common Core for higher education. It is important for programs to be similar at all levels of education (P-20) which would bring clarity to the pathway(s) for all students. • A final presentation should occur on student retention strategies. This will allow community colleges to further align practices and programs. This approach models both the Common Core initiative and other state goals for higher education. Teams will be created to develop projects and ideas for future discussions.

23. Questions/Comments/Concerns • I constantly ensure that all learners have an equal opportunity and access to an excellent education, industry-specific skills, and pathways to employment (Barbee, 2011). • Rigor – in addition to academic content, there must be a daily emphasis on the importance of critical thinking, communication skills, and collaboration (Barbee, 2011). • Responsibility – all stakeholders must provide consistent resources, innovative teachings, and a commitment to test the skills of which all students need to master to succeed as global lifelong learners, workplace leaders, and citizens (Barbee, 2011). • Relationship – create a sense of belonging for all students through a professional relationship with their educator, school, and community (Barbee, 2011).

24. References Available Upon Request