EdSource is conducting a series of interviews featuring educators’ experiences with the Common Core State Standards. Garden Grove Unified is one of six districts that EdSource is following during implementation of the new standards. For more information about the Common Core, check out our guide.

Gabriela Mafi, superintendent of the Garden Grove Unified School District, is a Latina raised in urban Los Angeles. She is a first-generation college graduate who received her master’s and doctoral degrees in Urban Educational Leadership from the University of Southern California. She has been superintendent in Garden Grove, in northern Orange County, since the summer of 2013, after a career that included serving as a K-12 teacher, an adjunct college professor, and an assistant superintendent of secondary education.

The following are edited excerpts from an EdSource interview with Mafi about the changes in her district under the Common Core.

What stands out to you as the most specific change you’ve seen for students under the new Common Core State Standards?

There’s a very thoughtful vertical design which was not present in any of the previous iterations of standards. With the previous standards, if you had a 2nd-grade teacher and a 7th-grade teacher, their terminology was completely different; it was like a Tower of Babel of sorts in that there was little continuity across grade levels and one didn’t necessarily see how these standards built upon each other from year to year.  Now, we have a clearer pathway for student learning from kindergarten through 12th grade.

In terms of the content of the standards themselves, there’s a much greater focus on analysis and on expository reading and writing across content areas that was not as prevalent in previous standards. This is especially important as the majority of reading in college and careers is non-fiction.

When it comes to the assessments, what we saw in the field tests is a much higher level of rigor. There are so many more elements now than just filling in a bubble with your pencil. Students now have to explain their thinking on a mathematical problem or a response to a reading passage. The questions are more open-ended and require greater critical thinking.

What do you see as the biggest challenge presented by the new standards?

We are concerned about the lack of textbooks and materials aligned to the new standards. We’ve just now finished piloting the state-approved math program to launch in the fall. However, the English Language Arts materials aren’t available yet; the state is approving them sometime this coming fall. In the interim, we’ve been using materials we adopted back in 2002 and 2003, which aren’t aligned with the new standards.

Are you seeing any opposition to Common Core?

There is opposition, but we haven’t experienced it much with parents of our students. There are some community groups in the county, however, many of whom have chosen to home-school their children, and who hold very strong beliefs against the Common Core which often manifest in hyperbole about practices that bear no relationship to the effective instruction seen in Garden Grove. Often just that phrase, “Common Core,” is so charged. Many do not realize that the California Department of Education regularly updates academic standards for all schools in the state, and these standards have been and will continue to be updated periodically.

We don’t call the new state standards “Common Core” because they are truly the latest iteration of the California standards. As we’ve interacted with both parents and community members during some parent nights and at board meetings and other events, we’ve said, “You know, the standards are developed at the state level. That’s not something that we have control over, and while we are required to teach the state standards, we’re continuing to focus on the same good instruction we have always provided our children, and you’re going to see those same positive results continuing even as the standards continue to change over the years.”

How do your teachers feel about the new standards?

In general, we’ve had a very positive reception from our teachers, staff, and students. They are all embracing the change. Our district has worked hard to ensure teaching resources, including instructional technology and student assessments, are available so that teachers may implement the new standards as seamlessly as possible.

At the same time, a great deal of change at once can be difficult, and one of the challenges of the new standards, although it’s not insurmountable, is that both math and ELA standards have changed at once. Typically in the past, the math standards would change, and then a few years later the English language arts standards would change. In this way, you wouldn’t have all the textbooks needing to be updated at the same time. Add to that, at the same time, an entirely new assessment (that’s taken, for the first time, on computers). So what’s been a challenge for our folks is that even as they’re enthusiastic and they’re extremely professional and conscientious, it can be stressful to experience that much change, and be dealing with it all even as you’re teaching students every day. So we recognize our teachers may feel overwhelmed by all of this change. It’s our job to be the support for them, to help them to feel good about what they’re doing and let them know that we are all learning together and no one expects perfection.

The new standards really have caused people to want to collaborate more, to want to discuss and share more. So I think there’s been a greater emphasis on that, even as we’ve always had a very collaborative culture in our district. Our teachers are enthusiastic about collaborating. They like working together, and we have a very robust professional development program that emphasizes collaboration. We have various meetings, networks, and online resources which allow teachers to share lessons. In each of our schools, teachers have collaboration time built into the day.

 

SHARE ARTICLE

Comments (6)

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comments Policy

The goal of the comments section on EdSource is to facilitate thoughtful conversation about content published on our website. Click here for EdSource's Comments Policy.

  1. Sam Piha 2 years ago2 years ago

    One of our concerns from teachers we have talked to is that common core has not altered the reliance on a single measure – standardized test scores – to judge teachers and schools.

    I was hopeful that the common core would lessen the emphasis and pressure on teaching to the test and time spent on testing. But, I have heard that this is not the case.

    Replies

    • Gary Ravani 2 years ago2 years ago

      Sam: I suggest you read several other posts on EdSource re the State Board's actions re the API which was the pseudo-accountability system operating in CA for too long that was the real driver of "teach-to-the-test." Neither the Common Core itself, nor the "complimentary tests (SBAC/CAASP), lead directly to an over emphasis on testing. It is what is done with the eventual test scores that determines if potential problems, you outline, exist. This current SBE seems … Read More

      Sam:

      I suggest you read several other posts on EdSource re the State Board’s actions re the API which was the pseudo-accountability system operating in CA for too long that was the real driver of “teach-to-the-test.”

      Neither the Common Core itself, nor the “complimentary tests (SBAC/CAASP), lead directly to an over emphasis on testing. It is what is done with the eventual test scores that determines if potential problems, you outline, exist. This current SBE seems to understand that little positive came out of the last API and are in the process of trying to do something with “multiple-measures” that might drive richer learning, give adequate information to parents and the public, and promote continual improvement.

      • Paul Muench 2 years ago2 years ago

        Seems to me that NCLB is the real driver of teach to the test. The CORE districts have a waiver from NCLB, but if I remember correctly the condition of that waiver was a plan that included evaluating teachers at least in part by test scores. All other districts still have to comply to NCLB, at least once the US education secretary starts enforcing it again. The future of NCLB will matter … Read More

        Seems to me that NCLB is the real driver of teach to the test. The CORE districts have a waiver from NCLB, but if I remember correctly the condition of that waiver was a plan that included evaluating teachers at least in part by test scores. All other districts still have to comply to NCLB, at least once the US education secretary starts enforcing it again. The future of NCLB will matter more than what the state does, at least until NCLB is abolished or becomes non-punitive.

        • Gary Ravani 2 years ago2 years ago

          Paul: Yes and no. I was going to throw in something about AYP and NCLB, but decided to be uncharacteristically succinct. CA, after all, started down the road of testing and standards base "accountability" some years before NCLB was enacted. As to what's going on with USDE and its whims about what should/should not happen. Duncan has actually backed away from his draconian proposals about evaluation. I'm sure that was a political consideration and not the overwhelming … Read More

          Paul:

          Yes and no. I was going to throw in something about AYP and NCLB, but decided to be uncharacteristically succinct. CA, after all, started down the road of testing and standards base “accountability” some years before NCLB was enacted.

          As to what’s going on with USDE and its whims about what should/should not happen. Duncan has actually backed away from his draconian proposals about evaluation. I’m sure that was a political consideration and not the overwhelming tsunami of expert opinion and research debunking student test score based evaluation. Likely the “political consideration” has the face of Bill Gates, de facto Sec of ED, who found almost all of the stuff around evaluation from his MET study debunked.

          Whatever. The new policy leadership in CA has demonstrated that they are not going to let Duncan(Gates) pull the strings of CA education wherever their future whims lead them. At least for the present.

          • Paul Muench 2 years ago2 years ago

            Gary,

            True, there’s the Parent Trigger law, the Vergara case, and the ongoing battles over the Stull Act.

            • Gary Ravani 2 years ago2 years ago

              Paul: I never said the Duncan(Gates) cabal was the only way CA education could have its strings pulled in the wrong direction. There are unholy alliances everywhere. There are the charter school cultists for example. These, in spite of the evidence that for the most part their schools represent no improvement in achievement and when they do it takes little digging to see its due to restrictive (unofficial, but there nonetheless particularly for special education … Read More

              Paul: I never said the Duncan(Gates) cabal was the only way CA education could have its strings pulled in the wrong direction. There are unholy alliances everywhere.

              There are the charter school cultists for example. These, in spite of the evidence that for the most part their schools represent no improvement in achievement and when they do it takes little digging to see its due to restrictive (unofficial, but there nonetheless particularly for special education students) enrollment policies and high attrition rates where low performing, misbehaving, students are “nudged” back to regular public schools. Or they are just test prep factories.

              Then, of course, we have the billionaire types who either inherited vast amounts or used cutthroat tactics to accumulate the vast amounts and have now had an epiphany and found the interests of poor and minority students are at the forefront of all their hopes and dreams. It has nothing to do with the fact that the real interests of poor and minority students mean programs to fight poverty, level the economic playing field for parents, deal with growing economic disparities, and (most of all) increasing tax rates on the very wealthy back to those of the 1970s or even 1950s.

              Have I ever told you the story of the leopard who changed his spots and got a job as a jersey cow? No? Another time then.