I love change. I really do. I get bored when things become routine. I'm always first in line to think about how we could tweak this or that or restructure, refine, and redefine. I love making up new systems, new courses, and new answers to old questions. But sometimes enough is enough. And change based on whim, sound bite, or political expediency always makes me feel ... well, little twitchy. Saying I'm twitchy these days is lot like saying the Grand Canyon is mud puddle. Do you remember gold-standard research? A few years back, the research division of the U.S. Department of Education, the Institute of Education Sciences (the name alone makes me twitch), announced that gold-standard research required randomized control experiments, and only such research counted for selection of No Child Left Behind-acceptable teaching programs. While the decision created financial boon for such programs as Success for All and Direct Instruction, this unilateral decision caused many progressive approaches and programs to wither away. I was teaching on an Indian reservation at the time this announcement was made. Over the next few years, I witnessed--as direct result of this pronouncement--the elimination of culture-based programs designed to teach native children in ways that responded to and respected their histories and cultures. A lot was lost, that's for sure. But I was told this is how it has to be. Sure some people will suffer, but we have to focus on the greater good. No longer will programs be implemented in schools that are not gold-standard research based. That is, until the government wants to. Think Race to the Top. In 2009, President Obama and Secretary of Education Arne Duncan announced an exciting new reform initiative, Race to the Top. A very catchy name, I think. Perhaps not as uplifting as No Child Left Behind, but much better than the last Democratic education reform--Comprehensive School Reform. So, while we haven't learned much about how to support real change, we've learned that we need catchy names to sell it. This $4.35-billion U.S. Department of Education program was designed to bring to local schools, but Race to the Top is awarded to states, not local districts. And the application process is no less controlling than any NCLB funding process--there are strings. Race to the Top outlines key education reforms states must demonstrate commitment to advancing to be eligible for funding, such reforms include adopting standards and assessments that prepare students to succeed in college and the workplace. It seems here we should say allegedly or theoretically or hypothetically or some sort of qualifier. After all, there is no evidence, let alone gold-standard evidence, that such statement is true. Incentives for Standards The biggest string--about the size of an anchor rope--is an incentive enticing states to adopt the Common Core State Standards. Touting the principles of standards-based education reform, the Core Content web site (www.corestandards.org) claims these standards will provide a consistent, clear understanding of students are expected to learn, so teachers and parents know they need to do to help them. Such fundamental misconceptions always worry me. I'd only been teaching few days when I realized that understanding children need to learn doesn't ensure that we know how to help them learn it. Knowing is really quite different from knowing how. For example, I know children need to learn algebra but have almost no understanding of how I might effectively teach it. At the same time, I know all children need to learn to read, and I know the skills they'll need to become good readers. I've even taught many children to read. And in that process, understanding what wasn't nearly as important as matching my ways of teaching to each individual child's way of learning. …