1

Research Dossier
Introduction to the Research Dossier:
I decided to research the Common Core State Standards Mathematics because it is a big
issue being discussed by the teaching community. Originally, I was broadly researching the
Common Core State Standards but after researching more I decided to narrow it down to just the
mathematics section. The Common Core State Standards have begun to be created over the past
few years. They are replacing the standards already in place in public schools around America in
the subjects of English and Mathematics. The goal of these standards is to be clear in what
students are expected to learn so that teachers and parents can help. The standards are made to
relate to the real world and apply learning topics to real work situations. So far, 45 states have
agreed to implement the standards and the rest are currently working on plans of how to
implement them. The Common Core State Standards Initiative allows me to read the standards
and see directly how things are stated without any bias. This will provide background
information for my readers and me before going through the research. With such a big change to
schooling and teaching, there are many opinions about these standards. In my research, I will
focus on just the subject of mathematics in elementary schools and the different views that
school officials and teachers have on them. The three main perspectives I have found are those
who believe the CCSS-M are beneficial and do not need any revisions, those who believe the
CCSS-M need some revisions before being implemented and those who believe the standards
should be forgotten because they are doing more harm than good for the schools. There are a
good portion of school officials and teachers who believe that the Common Core State Standards
are good enough to be implemented right away with no changes made. These people believe that
the standards will only benefit the children and enhance their learning. On the opposite side,
there are the school officials who believe that the Common Core State Standards should never be

implemented. These people look into the political view that many teachers and parents do not
take into consideration. The standards have cost schools a lot of money to train teachers again
and to create new standardized tests. These people believe that the school system changes so
much that putting this much into one that may not even last ten years could be a waste of money.
Matthew Larson discusses this view in his article. The majority of people who have looked into
the Common Core State Standards Mathematics believe that both sides have valid arguments.
These people wanted changes in some aspects of the Common Core State Standards
Mathematics before they get fully implemented. Cindy Long from the National Education
Association discusses this in the Five Ways to Get Common Core Right. These are the main
problems that school officials are finding in the State Standards. Long focuses on the main ideas
rather than just the math standards. Maria Eugenia Albina discusses specific problems to the
mathematics section of the Common Core State Standards. For example, the new standards are
focusing a lot on how the children find the answer to a mathematics problem rather than if they
got the correct answer. This is the main problem that is confusing teachers, students and parents.
Parents are occurring problems helping their young children with their mathematics homework
simply because the student knows that even if their parent can talk them through it, if the work is
not done correctly, they will not get the credit. In my research, I will go into further detail and
discuss more of views on the Common Core State Standards Mathematics.
Research Proposal:
Date: 10/12/15
To: Steffen Guenzel
From: Stephanie Steedle
Subject of my paper: Common Core State Standards Mathematics
Purpose: My Major and why writing about this topic will be beneficial to me: My major is
elementary education. I want to focus on the problems of the Common Core State Standards

(CCSS) mathematics. The CCSS-M have been changing so much that teaching and learning is
almost becoming forcing students to memorize different information and procedures for one
problem. The more people reach out about the problems of the CCSS-M, the more likely they are
to be changed back to previous standards.
Preliminary Thesis/Argument: The increasing amount of material and procedures that the
CCSS mathematics requires of elementary school students to master has overwhelmed many and
thus needs to be reduced back to the standards already in place.
Intended audience: My intended audience is the class and Professor Guenzel. My audience can
benefit because most of them will eventually/already have kids of their own that will have to go
through the school system. It will inform them what the new expectations of children are and
how children of a young age are not psychologically capable of all the new things they are being
told to learn at that age. They will realize there needs to be a change and how they can reach out
if they do not agree with the standards being implemented. Some other people who may come
across my research are those who discover my ePortfolio. They can benefit because I will show
my research process and how I got my information which will help them conduct their own
research. It will also show informal items that cannot be put into my research paper.
Types of research areas: I will be using scholarly evidence from the Common Core State
Standards themselves along with internet sources that show the effects on teachers and students
that these new standards have. I can use articles and studies to help back up each case and use
previous standards to show pass/fail rates. I believe my major, elementary education, would
accept these types of evidence.
Kinds of sources I will use and why they will benefit my paper: I want to have a balanced
variety of sources. I have found a few scholarly journals that seem to relate to the topic. These
will offer professional research on the subject and will help clarify the exact changes that have
been made. I also will use some internet sources I found on the National Education Associations
website. This will help provide insights from teachers in the field currently. I can possibly
interview current elementary school teachers and get their thoughts and ideas on what the CCSSM is doing.
Graphs or charts: I could find a chart that shows pass/fail rates before and after the CCSS has
been implemented.
Documentation Style: I will need to use MLA format because it is the style most used in
education fields.

Research Map:
Research Questions

How have the Common Core State Standards Mathematics made learning and teaching
more difficult for teachers and students in elementary school?

Are the Common Core State Standards pushing too many mathematics standards into
elementary school students that it is making them hard to accomplish that young?
Have the new CCSS-M standards done more harm than good for situations outside of the
classroom (ex: budget, teaching accommodations, etc.)?
In what ways can the Common Core State Standards Mathematics be revised in order to
fully benefit the teachers and students? To reach/use its full potential

Keywords: Common Core State Standards, elementary school, changes, difficulty, pros and
cons, mathematics, pass/fail rate
Kinds of research:
I will be mostly using library research through the databases that UCF offers. I am also going
to use internet sources to find public opinions from teachers who are having to adjust to the
changes. I would like to try and get some field research. I work with someone who is a fourth
grade teacher in Orange County and went to an elementary school in Seminole County where
I could go and interview a teacher.
Time Schedule:
October
Sun
27.

4.
Complete
Reading
Response
11A
11.
Complete
Digital
Paper
Trail

Mon

Tues

28. Blog Post 29.

Complete
Reading
Response 9
AND Start
DPT
5. Reading
6.
Response 10 Complete
Due
Reading
Response
11B AND
add to DPT
12. Digital
13. Work
Paper Trail
on
Due
Workshop
Draft
Dossier

Wed

Thurs

Fri

Sat

30.
Reading
Response
9 Due

1. Complete
Reading
Response 10

2.

3. Moms
Birthday
Celebratio
n

7. Reading
Response
11A&B
Due

8. Complete
Reading
Response 14
AND
Blog Post

9.

10.

14.
Reading
Response
14 Due and
Workshop
Draft
Dossier

15. Complete 16.

17.
Workshop
Georgia Georgia
Draft Dossier
AND
Blog Post

18.
Georgia

25.
Brothers
Birthday
Celebratio
n

19. Georgia
Workshop
Draft
Dossier Due

26. Final
Draft
Research
Dossier Due
and Revision
Research
Proposal
Due

20. Peer
Review
Workshop
1
AND
Blog Post

21.
Complete
RR 15 and
Edit
Dossier
Reading
Response
15 Due

22. Work on
Final Draft
Dossier AND
Complete
Revision
Research
Proposal

23.
Comple
te
Dossier

27.
Complete
RR 16
AND Blog
Post

28.
Reading
Response
16 Due

29. Complete 30.

RR 17 AND
work on
Workshop
Draft RA

24. Work
Event 211pm

Work
Event
4-11pm

31.

November
1. Work on
WDRA

2. Reading
Response
17 Due

8.
Complete
Final Draft
of RA

9. Reading
Response
18 Due
Work on
TED talk

15.
Complete
Draft 1
Research
Paper

16.
Workshop
Draft 1
Research
Paper

3.
Complete
RR 18

4.
Complete
WDRA
Workshop
Draft
Rhetorical
Analysis
Due
10. Work
11. Final
on TED
Draft of
talk
Rhetorical
AND Blog Analysis
Post
Due and
Pitch the
Ted Talk
17. Peer
18.Draft
Review
RS Paper
Workshop AND Blog
Draft 1 RS Post
Paper and
Workshop
Draft 2 RS

5. Peer
Review
Workshop
2
AND Blog
Post

6.

7.

12. Begin
RS Paper

13.

14.

19. Work
20.
on RS
Paper Draft
3

21.

Paper

22.
Complete
Draft 3

29. SelfAssessmen
t
AND Blog
Post

23.
Workshop
Draft 3 RS
Paper
AND Blog
Post
30.
Workshop
Draft SelfAssessmen
t Due
Finish RS
Paper

24. Peer
25. Finish
Review
RS Paper
Workshop
Draft 3 RS
Paper

26.
Thanksgiving

27. Black
Friday

28.

December
1. Peer Review
Workshop Draft
Self-Assessment
6.

7.

8. Practice/ Write
TT AND Blog
Post

13.
Practic
e TT

14.

15. Give TED

Talk and
Feedback to
Research
Presentations and
E-Portfolio and
End of Semester
Survey

2. Final Draft
Argumentative
RS Paper Due
AND Blog Post
9.

3.
Practic
e/Write
TT
10.

4.

5.

11.

12.

16.

17.

18.

19.

Annotated Bibliography:
1. Albina, Maria Eugenia. "How Did You Get Your Answer?." Teaching Children
Mathematics 19.1 (2012): 64. Academic Search Premier. Web. 12 Oct. 2015.

This is an article that emphasizes that, for the CCSS-M, how you got your answer is more
important than if you got the correct answer. The author is a second grade teacher in
Illinois. She talks about the struggles that students have while trying to solve their math
problems. She is bias towards wanting change in the CCSS-M. Abstract: The article
presents information on teaching techniques for mathematical thinking and reasoning in
second grade mathematics education in the U.S. The author looks at the U.S. Common
Core State Standards for Mathematics, solution strategies in mathematics, and the
development of critical-thinking skills.
2. Anderson, Kim, Tiffany Harrison, and Karla Lewis. "Plans to Adopt and Implement
Common Core State Standards in the Southeast Region States." Issues & Answers 136
(2012): 1-15. National Center for Education Statistics. Web. 11 Oct. 2015.
<http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/southeast/pdf/REL_2012136.pdf>.
This article is about the southeastern states and how they implemented the CCSS.
It details the specific things each state picked up from the CCSS and additional
things the school systems changed to go along with the CCSS. This article gives
the specific steps and the timeline each state used to implement these new
standards. The authors study higher education. There is no bias here. It simply
states the facts.
3. Common Core State Standards Initiative. "Read the Standards." Read the Standards.
Common Core State Standards, 2015. Web. 23 Sept. 2015.
<http://www.corestandards.org/read-the-standards/>.

This source allows me to read the standards and see what they actually say. It also
offers FAQs that I can look at and see the answers to. It breaks the standards down
by subject. It does not mention an author and there is not any bias because it is
just the written CCSS.
4. Editors of Rethinking Schools. "The Trouble with the Common Core." Editorial.
Rethinking Schools. Rethinking Schools, Summer 2013. Web. 11 Oct. 2015.
<http://www.rethinkingschools.org/archive/27_04/edit274.shtml>.
The authors are bias towards finding the bad in any schooling. They are
experienced in writing many arguments against school standards. This editorial
goes past the surface level things that come from the CCSS-M. It goes into the
deeper concerns that they want edited and changed before implementing them for
all of the students around the United States. Abstract: It isn't easy to find common
ground on the Common Core. Already hailed as the next big thing in education
reform, the Common Core State Standards are being rushed into classrooms in
nearly every district in the country. Although these world-class standards raise
substantive questions about curriculum choices and instructional practices, such
educational concerns are likely to prove less significant than the role the Common
Core is playing in the larger landscape of our polarized education reform politics.
5. Karp, Stan. "The Problems with the Common Core." The Problems with the Common
Core. Rethinking Schools, Winter 2013-2014. Web. 11 Oct. 2015.
<http://www.rethinkingschools.org/archive/28_02/28_02_karp.shtml>.
Stan Karp is the editor of rethinking schools. Karp is against the CCSS. He
believes that the supporters do not take into account all of the larger forces that

the CCSS causes. In this article he goes on to talk about many of the issues of the
CCSS such as too much testing and budget cuts. He has a bias against them.
6. Larson, Matthew R. "Will CCSSM Matter In Ten Years?." Teaching Children
Mathematics 19.2 (2012): 108-115. Academic Search Premier. Web. 12 Oct. 2015.
Matthew Larson is a K12 mathematics curriculum specialist for Lincoln Public
Schools in Nebraska. He also is on the National Council of Teachers of
Mathematics Board of Directors. The article looks at the Common Core State
Standards for Mathematics (CCS-M). It says that the CCSS-M will dominate
mathematics education reform efforts because the two common assessments are
being developed to determine student attainment of CCSS-M. It also notes the
need for teachers to have professional development time and a supportive
environment if the implementation of CCSS-M will emphasize the Standards for
Mathematical Practice. He is for the CCSS-M.
7. Long, Cindy. "5 Ways to Get Common Core Right." NEA. National Education
Association, n.d. Web. 23 Sept. 2015. <http://www.nea.org/home/56589.htm>.
This source wants the CCSS to be implemented correctly if they are going to be
implemented. It gives five actions that it wants the readers to take in order to
benefit the students and teachers rather than hurt them through this change. Cindy
Long writes many articles for the NEA and is biased towards helping the students.
She is against anything that puts students back or makes them struggle.
8. Long, Cindy. "Menifee Union School District." Menifee Union School District RSS.
Cyber School and IES, 28 June 2013. Web. 11 Oct. 2015.
<http://www.menifeeusd.org/district/Department/37-curriculum-andinstruction/News/39518-Six-Ways-the-CCSS-is-Good-For-Students.html>.

10

Cindy Long is a writer from the NEA who is biased towards student views and
wanting changes for the CCSS. Long discusses the ways that the CCSS can help
the students. She says there are only six ways they help. She has written previous
articles about how to edit and fix the standards before implementing them and
now she is discussing the good. She always looks into the students best interests.
9. Main, Laura Fricke. Too Much Too Soon? Common Core Math Standards in the Early
Years. Early Childhood Education Journal 40.2 (2012): 73-77. Print.
Laura Main studied at Western Connecticut State University and writes for an
Early Childhood education editorial. She is bias towards wanting revisions for the
CCSS-M before being implemented. This editorial is about focuses on the
concerns about the CCSS-M. Abstract: The author expresses concern about the
math standards of the Common Core Curriculum in relation to young children.
The editorial cites others who share concerns about how the global community
uses standards. She suggests caution in implementation because the overemphasis
on the standards may overlook the investment needed in effective curriculum
development and professional development for teachers. The editorial concludes
with the revisions will be necessary to the current version of the Common Core
Standards given the concern.
10. Matney, Gabriel T. "Early Mathematics Fluency With CCSSM." Teaching Children
Mathematics 21.1 (2014): 26-35. Academic Search Premier. Web. 12 Oct. 2015.
Matney is an associate professor for mathematics education. This article shows
the many ways that kids are being forced to learn math. There is a bias towards
wanting the students to understand how to do the new mathematics methods. He
believes that the students can do it and is fine with the CCSS-M being

11

implemented. Abstract: The article discusses the development of second-grade

students' fluency in mathematics by their teachers. Topics included are the
learning of how number relations are organized under the Common Core State
Standards for Mathematics, the ability to add and subtract figures up to a hundred,
and the opportunity given to students to use appropriate tools for understanding
and solving word problems.
11. Schoenfeld, Alan H. "Common Sense About The Common Core." Mathematics
Enthusiast 11.3 (2014): 737-744. Academic Search Premier. Web. 12 Oct. 2015.
Alan Schoenfeld has a PhD in mathematics. The article discusses how the
standards can be implemented. The bias is towards wanting the standards
implemented with a few revisions. Abstract: The article offers author's insights
regarding the standards and usage of Common Core State Standards for
Mathematics (CCSS-M) in the classroom. Topics include the properties that a
classroom must possess, conflicts in implementation of Common Core, and the
use of technology in mathematics instruction.
12. Silbey, Robyn. "Planning And Teaching With The Common Core State Standards."
Teaching Children Mathematics 19.9 (2013): 536. Academic Search Premier. Web. 12
Oct. 2015.
Robyn Silbey is an author and educational consultant in mathematics. This article
is for the CCSS-M and is helping teachers come up with new strategies on how to
work with the standards so that more people are in favor of them. Abstract: The
article presents advice for U.S. teachers on how to incorporate the U.S. Common
Core State Standards in math lesson planning. The author looks at the standards
for fourth grade mathematics education, including multiplication, addition, and

12

subtraction. The article also discusses the U.S. Standards for Mathematical
Practice.
13. Sweetman, Charlie. "Changes by Common Core." Personal interview. 2015.
I could conduct an interview with someone I work with who is also a 4th grade
teacher in Orange County. I would ask questions such as Has your school
implemented the CCSS yet? What changes happened/are you expecting to
happen due to the CCSS? Are you in favor or opposed to the CCSS, why?
Does it change how you have to teach? Have your students done better or
worse with the new standards? What do you like about the standards? and
What do you dislike about the standards? I can meet with him any day after we
work together. He is a newer teacher and I do not know if he is for, wants changes
or is against common core yet.
14. Zhang, Shaoan. "New Teachers' Implementation Of The Common Core State Standards."
Action In Teacher Education 36.5-6 (2014): 465-479. ERIC. Web. 14 Oct. 2015.
Shaoan Zhang has a Ph.D. and is an associate professor of teacher education at the
Department of Teaching and Learning. He has published 12 articles before. He is
very interested in teacher development leaning him towards a bias of the teachers
and what is best for the strategies of a teacher. This document has many different
views from different teachers. Abstract: This study investigates new teachers'
challenges in implementing the secondary mathematics and English Common
Core State Standards (CCSS) using a survey approach that addressed 17
secondary mathematics and English teachers' understanding and implementation
of the CCSS and their needs for collaboration with peers in a positive learning
community. The findings included new teachers' perspectives about their lack of

13

preparedness and their challenges in understanding the CCSS language, content,

and student learning. The teachers also reported difficulties in working with
veteran teachers. The teachers described needing preparation during their teacher
education programs; collaboration among teachers of similar content areas,
programs, and schools; and professional development and support from
administrators.