National Standards -

I have been perplexed by the strong conservative voices that lined up in support of national standards (Common Core).  Well known conservative educational voices, Chester Finn and Fredrick Hess, Jeb Bush and some state stalwarts all spoke out.  Their arguments, actually, made a great deal of sense:  Since Colorado has made so little progress in improving student learning, it only makes sense that we join with other states in national efforts, aided and abetted, I might add, by the promise of much needed cash.
When a roofing contractor, a financial advisor or a Nigerian citizen entreats us to enter a business arrangement, what is our first consideration?  performance...perhaps a track record?  That, of course, is the problem.  We have this perfect plan but no track record of government performing successfully, why then should we accept the premise that this is different?  A quick review of 37 years of IDEA with it's mountainous compliance issues and it's failure to deliver promised funds, might provide some insight.
We're told Washington doesn't understand local control.  Might I provide an example  School districts and personnel, as well as the public, have been very involved in the development of Colorado standards, adopted by the SBE in May, 2010.  Following adoption of the Common Core (by 4-3 vote), anxious to move forward, they asked us what they should do next.  The answer...nothing, "wait until we find out."  Is that not indicative of the future?
One thing the R2T announcement made clear, Colorado is one of the leaders in educational reform.  Others are woefully unprepared.  Are we to wait for them or are they to make a gigantic leap forward?  We already work and collaborate with other high achieving states like Massachusetts, Indiana and others.
It is rapidly becoming common knowledge that the Race To The Top competition was poorly handled.  Colorado lost points because CEA refused to sign on?  What about the Quality Teacher bill, #191?  We may have lost out in the first competition precisely because of our lack of such a plan.  The entire region west of the Mississippi was left out (no, Hawaii doesn't count).  Because we were deemed inferior?  Or, perhaps, because we have so few electoral votes?  Washington insiders are abuzz about  the possible political backlash.
Why would we want to continue down this path?  Colorado needs to move forward without emeshing itself in D.C. politics.  Cash isa  problem, there's no escaping that fact.  I would like to see us withdraw from the partnership, reprioritize our next steps and move forward, following the path we have already set out on with the excellent cooperation of our districts, our public and other state entities.