“It means taking out some of the things that aren’t really important.” Like what? “[W]hether or not kids should read Shakespeare. Most of the studies say Shakespeare is not critical.” That’s Chris Minnich, director of standards at the Council of Chief State School Officers, talking about the English/language arts content being drafted for the ‘common core’ state standards initiative. The CCSSO’s one of the two primary organizers of the standards initiative.
I spoke at the AFT’s QuEST conference earlier this week on a panel that included Bill Schmidt from Michigan State and Dane Linn, executive director of the education division at the National Governors Association, the other force behind the common core initiative. I was cautiously optimistic – suggesting that the common core initiative could strengthen the presence of the liberal arts and sciences in the classroom and help ensure that each student receives the kind of education we believe is so important.
So we’re stunned that the common core effort is looking to throw out possibly the brightest star of our literary heritage and replace it with … well, we don’t yet know. But Minnich’s comment isn’t encouraging. Of course, in a few years the loss will hardly be noticed, as someone wise once pointed out: “He that is robb’d, not wanting what is stolen, / Let him not know ‘t, and he’s not robb’d at all.” (Othello, Act III, scene 3)
Lynne Munson
[...] We’re going to dump Shakespeare? Lynne Munson of Common Core at the eagerness to “throw out possibly the brightest star of our literary heritage and replace it with … well, we don’t yet know.” Of course, in a few years the loss will hardly be noticed, as someone wise once pointed out: “He that is robb’d, not wanting what is stolen, / Let him not know ‘t, and he’s not robb’d at all.” (Othello, Act III, scene 3) [...]
Minnich says, “Most of the studies say Shakespeare is not critical.” Critical to what, I wonder? What literature will fit the bill, in his opinion? Poor Harold Bloom must be beside himself.
Of course Shakespeare shouldn’t be the only thing read, but is the field really so crowded with other important literature that his work should be shut out entirely? And what to think of a CCSSO director of standards who would utter that phrase? Has he consulted with teachers? With parents?
When I taught English lit at a high-performing high school outside of Chicago. the Illinois state standards in English/RLA were never mentioned; they were considered pathetically underwhelming. Looks like the national standards under development could be of a similar, sad caliber. What a squandered opportunity….
[...] eagle-eyed Lynne Munson of Common Core spotted a troublesome quote in a piece at Politics Daily about the work of drafting common state standards. It [...]
[...] Common Core Promoting a full core curriculum. « Taking Out the Trash [...]
That’s so discouraging and depressing that I’m not sure what to say about it.
When was it that you saw this quote? Because the version of the article currently showing does not have the part about Shakespeare being “not critical.” Methinks someone ‘updated’ the page and removed that bit.
Happen to take a screen capture?
[...] has suddenly disappeared from Linda Kulman’s Politics Daily piece, which was cited by Common Core, Joanne Jacobs and the Core Knowledge Blog (HT: [...]
[...] Last Thursday, Common Core’s blog criticized Chris Minnich–CCSSO’s director of standards–for telling Politics Daily that Shakespeare isn’t important enough to be included in the national standards. His response? To somehow convince the publication to change his quote. Here’s the original: [...]
Minnich’s statement, as quoted, is incredible. It’s hard to believe that the director of standards for the Council of Chief State School Officers could think such a thing, much less say it.
One has to wonder at the value of a process led by people with such misinformed ideas.
I don’t see the comment in the Politics Daily story. Was this comment in the actual story? Or was it something Minnich said during an AFT panel (in which Munson participated)?
If the comment was in the Politics Daily on-line story and has subsequently been removed, you’d have to wonder about more than the value of the process. You really would have to start worrying about its integrity. (And I say that as someone who tends to think national standards are probably a good idea.)