The national Common Core reading curriculum is based on a 50-year study done by a national panel asked to do this by Congress, with their final report submitted in 2000. Examining 50 years meant it went back to a time when all five reading concepts were in use and studies were premised on these. According to the narrative provided by the Iowa educators who wrote the Iowa Core, they only used data from the time memorization was put in place, thus explaining why it did not initially use all five of the necessary reading concepts nor any studies based on these.
While the Iowa Core has been adjusted to now include all five reading concepts, the rationale still fails to include the earlier studies based on these concepts. The importance of this omission becomes more obvious in an examination of not only the curriculum content, but also in all the wasted time spent by a panel studying dyslexia (in the mistaken belief this explains why the Iowa Core is not working). The national panel read the studies that included information showing some students to display symptoms of dyslexia when all five of the reading concepts were not effectively taught — “effectively taught” being strategically important. The Iowa group lacks this knowledge, so those Iowa educators controlling this curriculum prefer to waste time continuing to falsely blame students for failing to succeed when the Iowa Core is used.
The Iowa Core has content promoting teaching methods that continue to use memorization in lieu of effectively teaching the five reading concepts, thus discriminating against students in a variety of ways. The content, when compared to the national Common Core, is also not up to national grade level. In addition to being in violation of the Every Student Succeeds Act with this discrimination, they are also holding back skill levels at national standards, making Iowa graduates less than nationally competitive.
The state made a big deal about the new assessments, but what they did not disclose is that these are based on the Iowa Core as well as the lower Iowa standards. While Iowa has raised its standards to halfway close the gap with the national standards, this begs the question of why Iowa is refusing to rise to national levels so Iowa graduates have the skills to be nationally competitive? Do the educators in control of this lack nationally competitive skills?
Sue Atkinson
Baxter