By John Fensterwald - Educated Guess

The decision of whether California should join other states in adopting common-core standards in math and English will have a monumental impact on K-12 education. And yet neither the governor nor the Legislature has made any appointments to the 21-member commission that’s supposed to make the recommendation on common core to the State Board of Education by July 15.

That’s less than three months away.

The delay in activating the commission is not for lack of interest or understanding its importance. I assume it reflects the intense debate and lobbying behind the scenes over common core and its ramifications.

If California rejects common core in favor of keeping its current standards, ­then it will also be making the de facto decision not to join the $350 million federally funded initiative to replace 50 states’ standardized tests, like California’s yearly STAR exams, with uniform assessments that will be different and, some claim, much improved.

For better or worse, California would go its own way while other states are banding together with common standards and tests.

As part of its effort to improve its chances of winning Race to the Top money, the Legislature committed that California to moving toward common-core adoption by Aug. 2, the federal deadline; in doing so, California scored extra points on its application. In the end, that didn’t make much difference; California ranked 27^th out of 40 states in the first round.

The state hasn’t announced whether it will apply for the second round of funding; with the application due June 1, it’s looking unlikely. It so, then the pressure will be off for adopting common core by Aug. 2. Gov. Schwarzenegger’s advisers no doubt  have figured that out.

Role of Standards Commission

The Academic Standards Content Commission would compare California’s standards with common core and decide which is better. If it basically liked common core, then, in line with federal guidelines, it could alter no more than 15 percent of them. The State Board of Education, once getting the commission’s recommendation by July 15, must then vote the package up or down.

Teachers will have a strong voice. They must comprise at least half of the 21 members. Schwarzenegger will name 11 members; the Senate Rules Committee and Assembly Speaker John Perez each will name five. This is one area where the California Teachers Association could have clout.

The common-core standards are still in draft form; with so much nationwide reaction to them, the final version has been delayed until May. So in a sense, the commission isn’t behind schedule. But it faces a mammoth task, and members should have been debating the draft versions and joining those urging final changes.

Some of the issues that will be at play once the commission starts its work:

Standards: Most states will benefit from the rigor of common core. But backers of California’s current standards can argue that ours are already good, and new standards aren’t worth the expenses of new textbooks, teacher training and tests.

The flash points in the debate of common core vs. California standards are over whether Algebra I should be taught in eighth grade and how demanding to make Algebra II. But the bigger question is whether common core, and accompanying curriculum guides, would improve the odds of students’ academic success. Despite the state’s rigorous standards, most students aren’t ready for college or career by the time they graduate. If common core isn’t worth adopting in total, then what pieces should be incorporated into the state standards? Can the commission have that dispassionate, nuanced discussion without falling into warring camps?

Assessments: The future of the state’s standardized tests isn’t part of the commission’s charge. But it inevitably will be part of the back-room discussions, and the fight promises to be heated.

Stanford School of Education Professor Linda Darling-Hammond is leading one of two groups that the federal Department of Education will pay $160 million to devise new national year-end tests and formative assessments for teachers.  Her consortium, called SMARTER BALANCED, and affiliated with SCOPE (Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education), is promising more complex performance assessments that will downplay multiple choice exams they say lead to low-level learning and teaching to the test.

Defenders of the California State Standardized tests reject those criticisms and believe Darling-Hammond and others are over-promising. They also suspect that the performance assessments will unravel the federal government’s commitment to high-stakes accountability for schools and districts.

Teachers who don’t like the current state tests will favor Darling-Hammond’s approach. If so, then common core is the way to get to it.

Defenders of STAR will see killing common core as a way to uphold accountability.

The issues could get muddied. But the time to start having the discussions is past due.

Look for Schwarzenegger’s appointments – when he eventually makes them – as an indication of which way he is leaning.