Common Core Muddies Waters Between MD & VA

More so than the Mason-Dixon line, the Potomac River demarcation between Maryland and Virginia typifies the country's North-South, Blue-Red, political split: Maryland's reliably liberal yin to Virginia's traditionally conservative yang.

Such perceptions are once again being reinforced by the separate directions the two states are taking in education policy.

After sitting out the first round of the Race to the Top (RttT) competition, Maryland announced on Tuesday that not only was it going to submit a round 2 RttT application but, in an attempt to show Secretary Duncan how committed the state is to winning a grant, next month the state board of education will also adopt the Common Core K–12 standards in reading and math that will be publicly unveiled on Wednesday, June 2, 2010, in Atlanta.

On the flip side and across the river, Virginia governor Bob McDonnell announced that his state would not reapply for a RttT grant after finishing 31st (out of 41 applications) in the first round. Moreover, McDonnell blamed the grant criteria's emphasis on adopting the Common Core as a primary reason for the state’s decision.

McDonnell’s announcement was notable on a number of levels.

Most other states have cited other factors (e.g., union buy-in) for not pursuing round 2 funding. But even more noteworthy is Virginia's status as one of the 48 states that have been involved in the Common Core's development (albeit a decision originally made by McDonnell's predecessor) and the timing of the announcement—less than a week before the unveiling of the final Common Core standards.

McDonnell also gave voice to the whispered sentiment of more than a few of his gubernatorial colleagues who believe their respective states' standards are more rigorous than the Common Core's. "Our standards are much superior. They're well accepted. They're validated. All the education leaders have a comfort level with those," McDonnell said.

But it was McDonnell's assertion that the Common Core is not only a federal requirement but is also being federally developed that could prove to be the first of similar criticisms aimed at the standards once they are made public.

"A federal mandate to adopt a federal common core standard is just not something I can accept," said McDonnell, who was referring to the RttT program but could just as well have had in mind the Obama administration's proposed "blueprint" requirement that all states adopt similar college and career-readiness standards as a condition of receiving Title I funds.

Until now, there has only been minor state pushback on both the RttT, the Common Core, and the entwined nature of the two initiatives. But the Virginia governor's comments suggest that, for all of the talk about the Common Core being a state-led enterprise, there are state leaders who now consider the standards a federal venture or federal mandate.

ASCD, which is now an endorsing partner of the Common Core project, strongly warned the Department of Education not to make state adoption of the Common Core standards a requirement to win a RttT grant when the scoring system was first introduced. To his credit, Secretary Duncan revised the final criteria to give states extra credit for adopting the standards rather than making it a mandatory action.

Nevertheless, the connection between the Common Core and RttT is now firmly established and hard to separate. The irony is that in promoting the Common Core in its high-profile federal initiatives, the Obama administration may have blurred the line between where the state development ends and federal involvement begins and given some state leaders pause about adopting the very standards that were the goal in the first place.   

Whether other states follow Maryland's tack or Virginia's path will have rather large implications for the success of the RttT program, the Common Core Standards Initiative, and the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA).