system? we have just seen what happened in texas with the capitalistic health care system and now it's going to cost us millions and millions to clean that mess up. >> regarding ebola and hospitals not being ready you had a guest on oh gosh it couldn't have been eight or nine years ago and i forget the author's name. she wrote a book called pandemic and she went into how our hospitals were prepared under the bush administration. we had a shortage of doctors and nurses. i wonder how that fares today. we were not ready then and we are not ready now.

now to a debate from last week between arkansas republican candidate for governor asa hutchinson and challenger mike ross. the current governor beebe is term limited. "the cook political report" rates this racist leans republican. from little rock this 40 minute debate is courtesy of ktv. >> live from the university of arkansas at little rock channel 7 is present and election central special, the arkansas gubernatorial debate. this broadcast is presented statewide on ktv little rock nt hbs. now your host and the moderator for tonight's debate channel 7

scott inman. >> moderator: perman said the university university theatre on the campus we welcome you to the 2014 gubernatorial debates. hello everyone. i'm your moderator for tonight's debate scott inman. we know you have a very important decision to make. in fact four weeks from today is election day and we hope over the next hour we will help you make that decision from what is said in tonight's debates. who will be the next governor of the great state of arkansas for the next four years? two of the men who want that job are here tonight so without any further delay let's welcome to the stage please ladies and gentlemen congressman mike ross and former congressman asa hutchinson. [applause] [applause]

it is obvious we have a lively crowd with us tonight. the university theatre holds 650 many of them filling seats tonight. before you begin we want to take a moment for you watching at home and live in our audience tonight to go over the rules for our debate tonight. let's take a look. the candidates will each have two minutes for their opening statements tonight. the order of the statements determined by acquiring flip earlier in the week. the debate tonight consists of three question and rebuttal segments followed by a segment for what we are calling tonight the spin room. that's the final segment when the candidates and representatives give us their analysis of the debate and tell us how they think their candidate performed. panelists will also be allowed to ask follow-ups to their questions tonight and here is how that questioning will go. the candidates will have one minute to answer the question and thereupon it will be given 30 seconds for a rebuttal.

those questions and rebuttals will be timed in the candidates will be stopped if he goes over the allotted time. that will be my job is the moderator despite not interrupting people when they are talking. i have to do that tonight. finally we wrap up the debate portion of the program. each candidate will have a two-minute closing statement as well. please welcome to our panelist angela taylor from k. hbs in northwest arkansas and -- from top business and politics. [applause] we also want her mind if you want to follow the actions might you can follow us on social media with twitter. we have a hashtag katv debate and you can find that as we go along with the play-by-play and chime in tonight at hashtag a. r. gopal do the trick. he mentioned a coin flip to determine who would go first and the winner of the coin flip was

asa hutchinson and let's get started with their opening statement. hutchinson: thank you scott and i appreciate the sponsors and you l.a. are for hosting this debate. this is an important debate for arkansas's future. i'm delighted to be joined by my wife susan here in the auditorium. we have been married for 41 years. we got married, the preacher made a prayer and seven i hope they have enough struggles in life to keep them close to the lord. his prayer has been answered in our life we have had enough struggles to stay close to the lord. i think back to my parents. my mom and dad were married during the depression years so they understood struggle. susan and i have understood enough struggle and today we have a struggling middle class and arkansas. they are trying to make ends meet. they are working two jobs sometimes. they're wanting to move up the economic ladder but it's hard to do so. to me that's what running for

governor is about. as to how we can focus for economic development and job creation for a middle middle-class, i have a very specific plan that i have laid out for economic growth in and arkansas that will help us to address the job creation that we need. better paying jobs, moving up the economic ladder. starts with the competitive tax system and arkansas, fewer regulations, computer science at every high school. these are things that are essential for moving our state forward. whatever -- whenever you look at our stated think it's important we bind together. i've been blessed to live in northwest arkansas, in central arkansas. i have grandchildren in both places and i think that's what unites us together. today i received the endorsement of the national federation of independent business. the nfib endorse my candidacy because they see me as someone

as governor that can move our state forward in job creation and economic growth for the greatest future of our children and grandchildren. >> moderator: thank you mr. hutchinson. mr. ross. ross: i would like to thank channel 7 for hosting this important debate this evening. i have never run for statewide office so for those of you who do not nomad like to share who i am and why i want to leave this state of ours. i'm a fifth-generation lifelong arkansan. am the grandson grandson of the farmer a homemaker or railroad worker and a nurse and my parents who are here with me tonight for schoolteachers. i've been married for 31 years to my best friend. her name is holly. she is a pharmacist and she's here with us tonight. honey i love you so very much. she has given us two wonderful children. they are all grown up now and we have even picked up a son-in-law in the last year and we love him too. former small business owner, i cut my teeth and press kit so i

understand local government. i understand rural arkansas. it's been 10 years in the arkansas state senate. i spent 12 years in congress and if you think you are fed up with washington i was so fed up that i didn't run again. i was fed up with the partisan bickering and dysfunction. that is the last thing we need in state government and arkansas. during my time in congress i was consistently listed as one of the most independent members of congress. i have a history and a record of bringing people together and that is what i will do as governor. i have got a positive vision for the future of this day. it starts with education. my parents for schoolteachers. they taught me in an early age the power of education. i said i want to be the education governor because that's how we create more and better paying jobs in the state. that's how we grow the middle class and the state. i look forward to talking about my plans for lower and fair

taxes for equal pay for equal work for women and to put an end to domestic violence and arkansas during this important debate this evening. if you are listening from home thank you for tuning in. thank you for caring about the future of our state. >> moderator: thank you mr. ross. that will conclude the opening statement portion we will now going go into questioning. our first question comes from roby rocket nets for mr. hutchinson. >> with a view expressed support for the minimum wage proposal to raise the minimum wage to $8.50 per hour. tell me how you came to the conclusion of wanting to support the minimum wage proposal. did you feel low income workers needed to raise? did you want to avoid the potential negative attack ads that might come along with the minimum weight support? ross: i have supported since 2012 an increase in the state minimum wage.

it's the right way to accomplish and i will be voting to raise the minimum wage. i think it's important not to focus on what is the minimum wage and arkansas that i want to have folks move up the economic ladder. it's about better paying jobs not minimum wage jobs and that's what i want to focus on. i want to add, mr. ross talks about being independent in congress that he had an opportunity when mr. stearns offered an amendment in committee that he would support making sure if you like your health insurance you could keep it. he did not cross party lines to vote for the amendment that of mr. stearns. that was an opportunity. he could have done something. i hope he will explain that. the best example of where i think there has been partisanship in washington. i have demonstrated an ability to work together across the aisle and i look forward to doing that. >> moderator: mr. rossi have 30 seconds. so buy them a consistent supporter of raising the minimum

wage and congressman hutchinson he sounds more like a slick lawyer or slick d.c. politician. he has been both. he has consistently opposed raising the minimum wage. he was against the ballot initiative to raise the minimum wage and arkansas before he was for it. you know you have to make decisions asa not based on public polling that decisions from a hard panic until you this. people that get up and go to work every day and i'm $13,000 a year in minimum wage they deserve better and that is why it's been a consistent supporter of raising the minimum wage. >> moderator: this will be directed to mr. ross. >> express support for pre-k funding but with varying degrees of commitment. what is your position on pre-k funding and how is it different than your opponent? ross: thank you angela and that's been a hallmark of my campaign. i think we will start sooner and finish stronger.

ever pre-k plan and if you are a parent and you have a 4-year-old and you want them in a pre-k classroom there should be a desk for them regardless of your income regardless of your zip code. congressman hutchinson consistently opposed pre-k programs as a congressman and he said my plan was the wrong direction for arkansas before he decided he was for additional pre-k and arkansas. what asa does -- says is what asa does. and press kit arkansas we do what we say and we say what we do. >> moderator: mr. hutchinson 30 seconds to respond. hutchinson: mr. ross that i oppose raising the minimum wage. false. he says i consistently oppose pre-k as a congressman. false. he also should recognize the distinction as to what you support in congress is a national initiative versus a state initiative and as governor i support expanding pre-k when

it comes to those households that need it the most below 200% of poverty. we have an existing program for pre-k education. i support that rather than expanding it to print a% of poverty which is what mr. ross does. we want to fund existing program first. [applause] >> moderator: back to mr. roby for third and final question. >> mr. hutchinson you are both committed to tax cutting proposals. i wanted to tell me what the biggest difference between your plan and your opponents plan. hutchinson: the biggest difference is the mind is doable. we have a clear objective for next year. mr. ross will not say what he wants to do in the next legislative session. as we have revenues that come in. he wants to do 600 -- over $600 million in tax cuts over

eight years which is $70 million a year and he won't tell us what he wants to do next year. mine is a very specific and doable plan. the second difference is my objective is different. we are not competitive with the 7% income tax rate in arkansas. i would lower that down to 5% starting with the middle income. those are the people that are struggling and hurting. let's start there and lowered from six to 5%, create jobs so aren't objective is totally different. he says i don't include everybody. that's true. let's concentrate on meddling come. that is where the focus needs to be. [applause] >> moderator: mr. ross 30 seconds to respond. ross: i've never been accused of

hollering before it. i have got a plan for lower and fairer taxes. a single mom working two jobs to make ends meet earning $30,000 pays the same income tax rate is making 300 thousand a year. we are going to do it exactly the way governor beebe -- congressman hutchinson was running against governor beebe for governor and he said governor beebe was making an empty promise. governor beebe said we will do this because we can afford it and that is what i will do. 40% of the people go to work everyday and arkansas aren't rich enough. mod that we are going to cut it off there. [applause] more questions to come and don't forget the spin room coming up at 7:45. more of the 2014 juvenile court -- gubernatorial debate in just a moment.

we welcome you back for more of the 2014 gubernatorial debate with mike ross and asa hutchinson. it is angela taylor's turned has the next question. >> mr. ross debate about court attorney general are interpreted differently in different counties so where do you stand on open carry? ross: i'm a life -- with the nra and i have a high rating with the nra. have a conceal and carry permit. in terms of open carry there are some who believe because of a change in legislative laws in recent years that perhaps it's legal and the attorney general has ruled it's not legal. they said it was never an intent to have open carry. look, no one is more program than i am but i think we have to be careful on this and i will work with the legislature to see what we need to do on it.

i have concerns about being out shopping and someone walking in and carrying a gun. 55 to 75 county shares have endorsed my candidacy. they have a serious concern about trying to distinguish between the good guys and the bad guys. i feel strongly about concealed carry and i think it's a deterrent to crime. people don't know if i'm caring or not. [applause] >> moderator: mr. hutchinson. hutchinson: the legislature amended the law the last session that said you can carry as long as there is no criminal intent and that's how most prosecutors interpret the law and that's the way i understand it. however the courts are going to make that more clear. likewise the nra has given me an a grading. the nra second amendment was under assault hired me to protect the second amendment. it was when our second amendment was under the greatest assault on our country after the

standing against it and then mr. ross knees buckled and he said it was time for -- he and i have a different opinion as to what we need to do in our country in reference to the second amendment. [applause] >> moderator: thank you very much. we will go to this roby rock for the next question. >> recommence in a state prison only to be built and in light of the problems we have seen the high-profile tragic case of beverly carter that the news recently. what needs to be done to solve our public system when it comes to parole? >> i'm not convinced the department of corrections have looked at enough options in the 100 million-dollar prison. i want to make sure there are options on the table to provide an additional prison space. we have a crime problem in

arkansas and we have experienced it personally in recent days. three sad cases. i've been her federal prosecutor and i've worked with law enforcement and state law enforcement all of my career. including the dea. it's a drug connection to parole connection to most of the crime we see. i want to bring my experience to bear to reduce that threat of violent crime and i resolved to make our streets safer and also to make sure we have a separate parole system more effective for those coming out of prison. alternatives to incarceration when they are not violent such as drug treatment courts. this is all part of my plan for public safety. [applause] >> moderator: thank you mr. hutchinson. mr. ross bird bottle. ross: i don't know if we are going to need another person or not. there's a study done to

determine that but we need meaningful criminal justice reform in the state. we need smarter sentencing but we also need tougher sentencing. we have got to put them into the revolving door with repeat offenders. at the same time some folks need drug treatment and others need to get a ged. some need to learn a job skill so they can go to the work like the rest of us. we learned this recently with the tragic death in little rock. some people never deserve to b be -- [applause] >> moderator: thank you mr. ross. our third and final question comes from angela. >> a lot of women will be watching this debate in both of you have mentioned your wife so whoever wins your wife will be arkansas's first ladies to what causes will she championed mr. ross? ross: my wife is a pharmacist and i'm so proud of her. she gets up and goes to work

everyday and i can tell you health care is a passion of hers. we now have almost 200,000 people. we have cut the uninsured rate in arkansas in half. she has expressed to me that she would love to help with people that haven't had access to health care to understand how powerful and important preventive medicine is and to address the immunization issue in arkansas to continue to ensure that our children are immunized so they will never face the horrible situation my mom here had. when she was a year old she had polio. she spent more time growing up in children's hospitals and she did it home. she spent her whole life with a crutch and a brace. it hasn't stopped her. she has been a schoolteacher and i'm so proud of her. [applause] >> moderator: i will give you 30 seconds to talk about your wife. hutchinson: she will make a terrific first lady. she would be a will to speak to

her suffer what issues she wants to address that she is an incredible love and passion for children. she serves on the board of the children's advocacy center looking out for abuse in oakland to children in difficult home environments. in a lesser passion of hers and she will continue that. whenever you look at the challenge of domestic violence and the challenge of drugs in the home whenever you are looking at the challenge of abuse of children i know she and i will work together to reduce that challenge in arkansas and protect our children. [applause] >> moderator: we are about halfway home in tonight's debate that we have one more question and rebuttal segments so stay with us. we'll take another break and be back with more from there unr campus in capital city. mobs are i would welcome you back to the ewiner campus for

the 2014 gubernatorial debate but if you want to follow one twitter hashtag katv debate or hashtag a. arco. we will start with ropey ross. >> mr. hutchinson we have support the private option and when would you name one change you might insist on terms of changing the private option under your position is a little bit of a let study this. ross: a private option is working well for our rural and urban hospitals reducing the indigent care. it is also helping those that have never had health insurance before so there are some very good things about the private option but as governor is very important that we actually ask can we afford it over the long term is a sustainable and how much is it going to cost goods

we did not have those cost figures in yet. we have to pick up 10% of that cost while i will be governor in the first term. i was talking to some hospital groups today and they agreed with me. they said it is working but we want you to consider the costs and also i asked him how do we fine-tune this? how do we make it better? they say we will help develop profiles. that has not been done yet. we know some are working moms and dads that are getting health insurance for the first time that others who don't know. we need to know how we can improve it in afford it. >> moderator: mr. rossi of 30 seconds. ross: now think they got an answer from congressman hutchinson whether he will support or oppose the private option in arkansas. i think we are from the beginning. as governor i will support the medicaid expansion the private option in arkansas. number one at help save our hospitals. we lost a hospital in my hometown in the mid-90s so

that's something i don't wish on anyone. secondly we are finally number one in something. under governor beebe's relationship we have cut the uninsured rate in one ear. louisiana refused to do the medicaid expansion and in louisiana they're asking for an 18.5% rate increase. >> moderator: these guys have been great on time. our next question from angela taylor. >> mr. ross name thing -- one thing you will do on day one but as governor by executive order by proclamation. ross: one of the things i'm going to do as governor early on and that is i'm going to order every state agency to review any rule or regulation over three years old to determine one if it still needed him two it was ever needed. i want to reduce bureaucracy. i want america and the world to know that arkansas is open for

business. we need to create more and better paying jobs in this state and that's part of the way we do it. our lower tax plan to help manufacture the best to modernize their plants with lower tax cuts and also by cutting burdensome government rules and regulations and that is what i will do on day one and began to put arkansas to work. >> moderator: 30 seconds for you. hutchinson: i'm going to call a half-dozen businesses across the country and say what you consider relocating to arkansas? i while also on day one -- [applause] so we do not grow state government without specific approval so we get people in place so we know what our budget needs to be. thirdly we will introduce legislation when the legislature comes back that we'll have computer science in every high school to make sure you get a math or science credit for.

we will make sure the dollars go to programs that do server than needed and are doing a good job. >> moderator: back to probe you for the next question. >> the supreme court passed the lower court's decisions related to same-sex marriage this week. and in fayetteville there has been debate about should the city ban discrimination on sexual orientation. what will your administration do to push for civil rights in the state of arkansas? ross: this is a difficult issue because the people of arkansas have spoke and the courts are reviewing whether that will be sustainable and held constitutional. the supreme court has said it has basically been left up to the state and they have not given guidance beyond what the lower court has said. let me make it clear that i have supported the arkansas constitutional amendment that defines a marriage as between one man and one wine.

[applause] that is my belief but it's also what the arkansas people have spoken through the constitution. now the courts are going to have a ruling on it. we simply need to wait and see what that is down the road. both the arkansas supreme court is looking at as well as the middle quartz and i hope they leave the discretion to the states to determine what is the proper definition of marriage in our society. >> moderator: thank you. mr. ross? ross: i believe marriage should be between one man one woman and that is how i've consistently voted to let me be clear i will not tolerate discrimination of anyone in the state of arkansas. [applause] >> thank you very much. back to angela for next question. >> third-party groups kim makes drawn charges on your behalf to

should there be more restrictions or regulations at the state level to make third-party advertising more transparent and triple? what would you be willing to do as governor on this front? mr. ross? ross: i'm tired of this out-of-state money. congressman hutchinson has spent millions in out-of-state money representing the facts and distorting the truth and lying about me. [applause] if you do not live in the state of arkansas you should not be able to contribute to a candidate for governor or any other office in the state of arkansas. [applause] >> moderator: mr. hutchinson? hutchinson: there is such a thing as the constitution in the supreme court has ruled. [applause] i think what's important is that candidates take responsibility for their own ads. our ads if you look at than positive to this campaign.

i'm proud to have my granddaughter and wife susan talking about responsible government. we are proud of the message we have had. yes there are outside groups that come in. i think what we have to do is strengthen the candidates in what they can raise and the voices they have in the campaigns themselves. i'm responsible for our ads like mr. ross is responsible for his ads and i'm not accountable for your allies in washington and president obama's been attacking me. [applause] >> moderator: we have time for one more question before we get to closing statements. >> mr. hutchinson i had a lot of contacts and teachers in advance of the debate asking me to ask both of you -- ross: and needs to be fixed. when i see a teacher that comes

up to me that shows a pay stub of $3800 regular pay for a month but $1100 deducted for health insurance, that causes that family to struggle. in the meantime they provide the health insurance for their family. the legislature took action to fifix it.it's not completely fi. we have more work to do. i will work with the legislature to test the teachers insurance fund and make sure it's stable and it's affordable for our teachers. we have to look at different options including bringing this school district back into the equation to make sure they have the flexibility they need them providing that insurance would also it paints a bigger picture. we have got ms under the affordable care act that middle-class families, families across our kids are getting hit with high insurance payments and not just that, to the high deductibles they are being hit with as well. we need to change the affordable

care act. we need to make sure we have affordable health insurance for teachers. >> moderator: thank you mr. hutchinson and now mr. ross. ross: our teachers need to be focused on teaching our children and not be distracted and worried about whether or not they're going to be able to afford their health insurance. what the legislature did was a band-aid at best. as governor committed to working with democrats and republicans to fix the teacher health insurance problem once and for all. we have got to look at funding. we have got to look at who pays what. teachers in most school districts only have $150 a month to pay for their insurance and most people in the public-private sector get as much as 150 or more. everyone has to have skin in the game. that is how we reduce over usage of the system and we have to get everybody back into the pool. we can do this and i'm committed to doing it. it will be a top priority for me. >> moderator: time for one

more question. we'll have angela asked that. >> what is the funniest thing that has happened to you on the campaign trail mr. ross? ross: oh gosh i was doing a meeting in answering a lot of questions at a town hall type setting and arra town in southeast arkansas and a man got carried away asking me a question. the top part of his front teeth fell out. he continued to ask the question. i answered it with a straight face. >> moderator: can you top that? hutchinson: in today's campaign where we have trackers that follow you. this tracker was following my red dodge ram pickup truck and i took a wrong turn. i wound up being on top of the levy which was a bypass. if anybody sees a video of me on

youtube with a big red truck on a bike path that is what happened. [laughter] mob that we can get away with anything anymore. i will conclude our question-and-answer portion of tonight's debate and we will now move into closing statements and since mr. hutchinson went first in the opening statement will start with mr. ross. ross: to all the folks that come think you were tuning in tonight and to my friends and family and press the arkansas thank you for your love and your support and go worlds. let me say this congressman hutchinson and this out-of-state special-interest has spent millions trying to convince you of something that i'm not. i'm a conservative, pro-business pro-gun god-fearing arkansas democrat. let me be clear i'm not running to be governor for the democratic or the republican party. i'm running to the governor for all the people in this great state. i pledge to work with anyone and everyone who will work with me to make this data better place to live, to work and to raise a

family. my family taught me growing up in a country church outside of prescott midway united methodist church the values of faith family hard work personal responsibility. i think those guys have served me well for the last 53 years and i wanted to know the same things will service my moral compass as i do my best to hopefully lead to this day. i love the state and i believe in arkansas. i believe in you and i know we can do better. i'm proud to have the endorsement of governor mike beebe. i think he has been one heck of a governor and i want to build on the foundation is laid in improving education cutting taxes creating more and better paying jobs. i want to be the biggest economic ambassador this state has ever had and i want our daughters to be able to earn the same pay as our sons. women in arkansas or 77 -- earn 77 cents for whatever a man next

to the dollar. as governor of a plan to address it. finally we are going to send a message loud and clear that domestic violence will not be tolerated in arkansas. my name is mike ross and i hug him humbly for your vote and support. together, together as democrats independents and republicans we can do a lot to move arkansas forward. we can make a difference. [applause] >> moderator: thank you mr. ross. thank you for participating and finally to you mr. hutchinson. hutchinson: thank you and i want to thank everyone who's watching this debate and has participated and mr. ross as well. we have similar backgrounds in some ways but we come from totally different perspectives when it comes to the direction of our state. i was blessed to be appointed by president ronald reagan as united states attorney. i learned some things are present writing parrot learned about being a consistent conservative than i also learned

about hope and opportunity for our great country. while i find myself fighting for for the conservative cause in many instances in congress and others i've seen mr. ross on the other side. i've seen them on the other side too many times. we need a governor that understands the importance of tax cuts for the middle-class middle class, that understands the opportunity for computer science in every high school to understand the importance of growing the private sector of our economy. these are things that are differences between us. we have differences in experience. i serve not only in the legislative branch but i served in some of the toughest executive positions in our government after 9/11 in homeland security as head of the dea but also here in arkansas. i understand in a private sector running a business tightening your belt and i want to bring those problem-solving skills to our state as governor. my wife susan and i have been blessed with a family, with a

passion passion for this day. we want to serve this state because we believe in its future. as ronald reagan was optimistic about our country even though we struggle and have challenges i'm optimistic about our country and most us -- optimistic about arkansas that we can be united and grow together and we can solve problems together and we can be one team to make this the best place for our children and our grandchildren. i asked ask for your vote. thank you. [applause] >> that's going to do it for the debate. we thank mr. ross and mr. hutchinson. we have had a very lively group. we will give you one more opportunity to get behind your candidate and say thank you for tonight's debate. mike ross and asa hutchinson. [applause]

crist: are you saying there are so many races in the republican party could remain a republican? what is the work here is a pretty simple thing. if you remember back in 2008 in some of the e-mails distributed about the president by some members, not all of the republican party they weren't exactly flattering and i think you can research and find out what i'm talking about it but it wasn't right. i can tell you that their reaction i've gotten from some

in the republican party leadership was horrible and it was clear to me it wasn't just because i was willing to work across that what the democrats to get the recovery funds to cover florida paos also apparent to me because it was the first african-american president. i don't enjoy saying that. it's not what is fun to say but i'm going to tell the truth and those are the facts. >> moderator: governor scott. scott: charlie you are divisive. you are mudslinger. you are a divider. the entire time you're you've been in politics we have done is -- you are a divider. look at what we want to have. we live in a wonderful state. we are the best nothing taught in the world. we have so many wonderful people here that come from all over the world and you want to try to divide. i want everybody to have the same shot i had to live the american dream.

crist: nothing could be further from the truth. i reached across the aisle when i was governor and her work with the president. this governor, governor rick scott won't work with the president even to get high-speed rail which is so important and central florida and eventually the whole state. $2.4 billion to florida and some 60,000 jobs. he will not lift a finger to get medicaid expansion done and as a result of 1 million floridians were watching tonight are getting healthier today as a result of that inaction on rick scott's part plus it would bring another 20,000 jobs. scott: first off charlie, first off you left me with a $3.6 billion budget deficit. he borrowed $9 billion barred everything you could and then he left a donor table though it costs us billions of dollars and you want to talk about medicaid. you are governor when i pass. why didn't you get a pass rate than than? why didn't you expand it right

then? i actually have worked for the federal government. as an example something you wouldn't do, we settled that decades long settled -- settlement lawsuit over the everglades.

now discussion on the challenges to the common core education standards initiative. this is part of an event hosted by the american enterprise institute. it's 90 minutes.

[inaudible conversations] >> good afternoon everybody. welcome to the american enterprise institute. we are happy to have you. as we talk about sort of backwater issues no one is really talking about hasn't gripped the public consciousness. today we are here to talk about the common core an issue that has an incredible amount of salience in the news media and politics and we have three outstanding panelists to discu discuss. kaplan who is a veteran education reporter and assistant editor for education week. she co-authors with eric groveland the blog curriculum matters and if you want to get up to speed on the common core

and particularly how the common core is played out and classrooms across the country catherine and eric's reporting has been with some of the best and we are lucky to have her today to share her thoughts. next are of course often imitated never duplicated and i would be rick hess director director of education policy here at aei. the coeditor of common core meets education reform what it all means for politics, policy politics in the future schooling. he participated in the intelligence debate on the topic embrace the common core and took the negative position and he is a new piece leaving the fall issue of national affairs entitled how the common core went wrong. next to him we have chris up for the executive director of the nationwide nonpartisan membership organization of state superintendents of education. in 2009 he was the strategic initiative director of standards

assessment and accountability where he led the development and adoption of a common core and 45 states and the district of columbia. in august panel and we are going to forgo the usual speechmaking and talking points that begin these confabs often. i want to jump right into the issues. i would like to actually start with the laying of the land. i think catherine you might be the best to give us an overview so we are hearing all across the country that schools and districts are implementing common core. what does that mean? what are school districts doing differently this year that they weren't doing last year? >> i wish there was a uniform answer for the whole country. >> it would make all of our jobs easier. >> things being what they are i feel districts and schools all over the place, you have some that haven't done a whole lot and are still getting a sense of what it is they are supposed to

do that's different and you have at the other edge districts plunging in on the leading edge and making change. as you know i spend eight months hanging around the district of columbia watching what they were doing and top to bottom thorough changes. so it varies. we have a lot of leading-edge projects that are coming from grassroots levels. i think washington and nevada have been highlighted for efforts from teachers. our state isn't really helping us much. we gargling to create resources. it's really all over the place in the studies show the center for education report last week just showed a full one third of the districts are behind on some of the pieces that are going to make this work. they are putting things into practice but there's a lot of

us. >> i want to read for those of you that are following at home on the livestream are joining us on c-span the conversation is also taking place on twitter with the hashtag what's in al-sisi? after we talk up here i will give questions to the audience as well as those coming in. i have my handy phone here so feel free to tweak the questions either timmy at mq underscore mcshane or what's in al-sisi and i will do my best to follow along while we are talking. chris a lot of the preparation that is taking place that catherine is talking about is to get in line for these new tests that are being rolled out so that toupee consortium and using the great map that catherine and andrew have compiled. one of the large consortium of 17 states participating. park is the other large consortium has nine states plus

the district of columbia in 17 states are doing their own thing and seven are rated as undecided. i question to you with how do you leave this fragmenting tests going? >> thanks and thank you for inviting me to be here and for your coverage. obviously you are into the details of this. you know we had said in 2010 that we would have 26 states participating in working together on assessments no one would have predicted that. we had 50 states each writing their own test and so i think 26 is real progress. granted there've been some states that have stepped away from the contortions i think there are number of reasons why. first the federal involvement in this has been not helpful in every scenario that we have been following. so you see any sort of push

background testing has usually been rooted in the fact that the federal government was involved in funding the consortia and that putting incentives for common core standards. i think in the end we will see the group of states, most of the states have decided to give the test so i don't see a lot of more eroding of the 26 we have now. there's one big thing we have to figure out if they are going to stick together on what the test scores look like. both consortia's are committed to doing so but as they think about about what their own assessment might look like how are we going to make sure they don't backslide on expectations. whether you call a common core or something else we know we need higher standards for kids in this country. how do we do that is the question and i think that is a question for us is how do we make sure the assessments are at the level that are different than what we were doing before.

>> rick i would love to hear your response on this here read in the states choosing to peel off and go their own way. is that a positive development for the long-term health of the common core or is it a risk and how do you see that affecting it? >> it's a great question and let me join chris and saying i think catherine's work on this has been invaluable. one of the reasons i think we are where we are is because the common core felt like a surprise to huge numbers of americans in 2013. i remember catherine called me probably late 2009 early 2010 during the rollout of the standards. i have blogged about for jobs in education. catherine was like you really don't care about this do you? i don't know what any of this means yet. i think most americans had little idea what common core meant until they started to hear relatively cocchiarella characterizations one way or the other.

i think that's how we got here and i think catherine and ed have dinner with her markell j job. a couple of things. one i agree wholeheartedly with chris that i'm for higher standards. i don't know anybody who's against higher standards. i think a big part of the question is how confident we should be that the common core standards are higher. for me as i have written i don't have a problem with common core standards. i am unpersuaded that they are higher and better especially in practice and i am concerned that some of the stuff that goes along with common core like the affinity for close reading, like this commitment to -- i'm not sure some of the advocates understand this as well as they think they do or what it means in practice. i personally would like to have time to see how it shakes out before i know that this is a

train we are all jumping on. for that reason i think the number of states edging away from the common core is probably a good thing. personally i think to chris' point the federal government has never waded into this back in 2009. i think 15 states a dozen dozen states may be 20 but about 15 states probably would have done, and core on their own. i think they would have figured out a way to do a common assessments like it been done in new england for several years at that point among three states and i think what we would have seen is they truly and genuine genuinely -- that effort and if it was being implemented while other states would have wanted them. unfortunately i think that's not what we are looking at an obviously it's washington so it's fun to spend a lot of time arguing about how we got here and i'm happy to do that. i think also some of what we are talking about today is what are

the strategies for moving forward constructively given that this is where we have 10 -- happen to be sitting in 2014. >> chris you and rick agree on this idea that the federal government caused a lot of the problem for this. do you see an appetite on the behalf of common core supporters to push back more vigorously against the federal government to take a more proactive you all need to stay out of this and want to handle this ourselves? >> i think it's pretty clear that most of us, i mean i can't say all of us but most of us believe declaring our independence in making sure that it is and remains to be -- is critical so figuring out how as governors we step into this space. i think the harder part is we just don't have -- at the

fund-raising issue in the anti-side and there's no fund-raising on the pro-side. granted there are resources on both sides but the anti-protest that passion and money and it's going to be a hard road to change the branding of common core. i think the bigger thing is figuring out how do we lantis so educators who believe in these and i disagree. i just think the shift in the common core are based in research and are also based on what teachers tell us they want to do. they have already been -- began doing it with their kids. i can grant you there was no common 2010 there wasn't the intention as in 2014 but you still look at it despite all of the negative attention, and core is received. teachers are pulling positive when it comes to common course of their something about the standards that are worth holding onto.

that's the piece that rick and i disagree on. i think the bigger thing is how do we lantis thing so that teachers are able to teach to the entire standard and we have kids graduating a higher rate if that if you look at the early results out of kentucky we are making progress with the kids and we can debate all but one in washington about whether or not this is a good thing. more kids are ready to go to college. markets are ready to do what they want to do next in their lives. this is important. that's the stuff i don't want to lose. i can lose all the other stuff but i don't want to lose. >> one thing i'm interested in doing as we talked about the vague terms are generalizing. take a couple of minutes and drill down some of the sticking points and understand what's happening. the first issue that united people both on the political left and the political right was the -- so maybe catherine is this something in your time in

schools and districts talking to parents and teachers and others how big of a concern was that for those folks on the ground level versus mordecai larger political conversation taking place? >> i'm not the best person to ask simply because we have reporters focusing on that but it's a concern. i will put that another way though. that goes right to what i was hoping to get a chance to say. this whole debate reminds me of when you go swimming and hear the noise above as soon as you get under the water is quiet. where i've gone this is not the stuff people are talking about. the stuff people are talking about is can i find instructional resources for common core and how do i figure out what that means? can i we urbanized my district to figure out what good tv looks like? is my district reorganized and that's the stuff i've been hearing about. when i, but the water and come

back that hasn't been what i've heard from schools. clearly they're aware of the pressure. the superintendent survey in the district there is a much higher response and i feel more backlash from outside of the district then i did years ago. in terms of doing the work that's what people are talking about when i'm out there. i don't know about data privacy and the school so much. >> i think there's an interesting dynamic here which is i think catherine's take away would apply pretty much across-the-board from a talk about special education, would we talk about federal grant requirements. when you talk to educators, talk to leaders who don't generally hear a lot of grumbling about this. what you generally hear is people just trying to figure out how this stuff works and when it comes to something like federal

grant requirements in title i or when it comes to questions about iaea oftentimes what we do is we create unhelpful framework and educator spend all their time trying to comply. i totally buy that educators are out there and this is what you hear. i was in mississippi yesterday. they're busy working on the implementation of common core but certainly for me and i think this is kind of a good-faith difference where i think we the people should be able to argue about it in a way that we haven't much is when i look back, and core standards, they are fine. they are not that different to be honest from what a lot of states have one paper at the time but there's also a lot of stuff that goes along with common core. some, gore advocates talk about how common core is actually smuggling and content because there's a 57 work little appendage they are that my good friends at fordham are very enthused about.

.. >> how do we actually have deep commitment to doing it well, let them try and let others of us trying to stay on the sideline and see what it is actually works out. >> is there a way to do that?

>> no, there's nothing that gives force as you know. we're going state by state. there's nothing reinforcing the state to stay in the common core. and i always get chastised when i say something about the adoption of standards. but there's not nothing preventing states from rewriting the common core and doing what they want to do with it. i think this narrative about what is in the standard and what is not, of course we want kids to do well. it doesn't mean that they can read epa manuals at the same time. we want kids to be reading a lot of books and have higher education standards and i don't disagree with the goals that we are trying to accomplish. and there hasn't been a process with the massive amount of input

that we had to write this. i think that we have written a better set of standards in any state has had. and i think that we disagree about that. >> another issue, and catherine touched about this. for those on the right side of the political spectrum, one attractive feature is the idea of a nationwide marketplace for instructional materials rather than just having a textbook market. they might be able to access this and so catherine, i'm wondering if you could talk about these issues that schools have faced in trying to get good common core and instruction and have there been challenges and how are folks finding this? >> you know, everything that we here with few exceptions. the publishing world as we have known until now has not done a

stellar job of making these changes in its materials whether physical or visual materials. there are some things that are promising, but i think if there had been really deep input and we talk about deep input. teacher organizations are trying to get input now that they didn't get before and that speaks for itself very but i figure there think that there are materials being created at the grassroots level. teachers and smaller publishers. that is one of the most universal and consistent complaints that we here in our reporting. so it's really not much different than it was before the common core. and so it seems that there is a strong incentive to take the same product that they have always had and slapped it just as they had before. but are there efforts that are

at work to try and do something about that and help states sort through all of the options that are out there? >> there was one organization that is brand-new, they are beginning to look at the alignment of the materials in this is overdue. and i don't think that we should do anything but acknowledge the fact that we have been slow to provide teachers with what they need to teach these families. and i think that we have to then start from that point and move forward. katherine's reporting has been very consistent on this and it's not just her that has been us. when i go into this goals, teachers are saying where is the stuff he sees different standards. so you cannot say that the standards are not that much different and say that we need different materials to teach these standards. and so we also need better materials and that is something

that we should acknowledge as part of the transition to the standards and we will have to get better materials as teachers >> that's great. and this takes us in a good direction. at some point in the near future, the rubber is going to hit the road and it will be administered and consequences will be attached. having heard all of this, looking forward, where is this headed? as schools and teachers are held accountable for these new standards with the new tests, there's concern so they don't have the necessary material and it seems like a lot of stuff going into the meat grinder. have you see that pan out to . >> one of the simple truths for me instead if my employer tells me that they want to do more to hold me accountable for my performance, that is reasonable. and if my employer tells me that they want to change the way that they measure, whether i'm doing a good job, that is reasonable.

i don't have a problem with that. if my employer tells me simultaneously they want to change the way that they measure whether i'm good at my job and that they want to or ringing consequences to bear, that makes me feel like someone has put a target on my back. unfortunately that has been the way that evaluation has played out along with common core. what you have seen them play most explicitly in new york state and you've seen this in a lot of places, frankly this takes us back is federally induced timelines, through race to the top and in other waivers, what we wound up with were federal political timelines for the rate at which stage should be making the transition to common core and the way that they should transition to test-based teacher at valuation. these two things have been conflated in a way that strikes me as unproductive area the way forward again and it is not talk

of -- not talk of blanket, you know. hold out periods of this everywhere. but i think that accountable public officials in state and districts ought to be making decisions about how they will serve well. there are some state that are enthusiastic about common core that seem to be doing it well and they have the educators on board and they ought to go ahead and move forward on new teacher evaluation on a way that makes sense. there are other states that are being dragged kicking and screaming to this stuff. and i don't understand why we imagine it is good for kids and teachers to try to force this march on washington. and so i think for me a really simple place to start is by recognizing that when you are doing and when you are trying to change the way you evaluate performance and change the consequences to performance,

there are timelines that are based on pragmatic considerations and political considerations and i think we have spent too much time working on political timelines. >> chris, one response to this has been the ability to push back the consequences for the timelines in which states have to start using this. are we expecting to see more of that in the future? you think that that has been a productive strategy or do we need to rethink the way that we readjusts these timelines? and how we do this? how do we set these timelines? well, we are here to talk about the common core. it's very tough to separate these issues. but the teacher valuation largely of what was said, i think that states and states governors need to decide where they should go. it needs to be in the hands of the states because quite frankly

the scenarios are so different from state to state and so i think that a single federal timeline was always hard. but i do think that we have seen real commitment from state about stepping into this and we hear the most from the states that are having the hardest time with this and there are a lot of states that are moving forward in a positive way around, how we are evaluating and helping teachers get better. that is the bigger thing. i don't care to much about the evaluations i but i do care about teachers getting better feedback on how they are doing. so i was hopeful that that whole initiative would land them on spot and not the spot where we can use the example of that rick has used. i don't see the evaluation being taken off from a but i do think that states and districts are going to have to understand that this is not the federal government. >> your experience in schools and districts as the sort of

landscape changes underneath teachers, do they see themselves -- i guess one question is do they feel that they are part of the process? do they see the goalpost moved? are they seeing this transition and they are more valid assessments and how are they responding to all of this taking place at once? >> i think that they are trying to figure out how to do a good job and they're feeling very frustrated. >> we have kids showing up on monday. >> as i said, a lot of my time has been spent in the district. and i think teachers are pretty excited about what is in the standard. some are feeling overwhelmed especially with timetables. and there was this taking timeclock. always looking at the clock on the wall. and they are dealing with all kinds of challenges and this coming from every which way on

the opportunity to learn spectrum. and that is the huge missing piece that i keep talking about when we talk to schools and teachers. that we have the standards, but maybe we don't have construction material. very little strategy or support or understanding for how to deal with kids who have the greatest need. those that have the greatest distance to go before getting standards that are envisioned. >> absolutely. >> there is an interesting story today in my google alert for the common core, it fills my inbox every morning with interesting things. a story by daniel dillinger in new orleans this morning. it caught my eye because the headline was in first common core year, louisiana public schools grade improved slightly. well, a a lot of the narrative around us is that when we increased the standard, we should expect to see larger and larger number of students fail

to meet this new definition of proficiency. and so secretary duncan kind of got in trouble as to what the implementations might be. but as i read into the standard one of the things i felt was interesting, is how could this be -- it says that the grading of the tests, lessens the impact of the new standard. john white of the u.s. department of education, acknowledge that the questions were tougher this year and the grading was easier. students have to get fewer items right to get the passing mark a basic than they did in 2013. in your comments you said that you want to be on guard against this backsliding and lowering standards. but in these timelines are talking about, a reasonable response would be, well, if we can't bump this back, we just make this easier. what does that pretend for that moving forward? >> well, we would have a repeat of what happened with no child

left behind. states are allowed to set their own standards and we saw what happened. so we have to guard against that and i think there's a number ways of ways to do it. the first one is to make sure that as states are thinking about setting a common performance standard across this, that that is a really important part of it. if the state decides on a different direction than we have to really be thinking about what that means for their kids. but their kids are unable to achieve the same level as the others in that group. so i don't see that with the states are working together but the individual states are giving their own assessments are letting us work. we will have to continue to work with them and i see a different attitude about the new assessment than i did five years ago. five years ago the states were trying to do it as cheap as possible and i think states are recognizing that they need a

higher quality set of assessments in order to grate against us and i do think that the consequences need to be looked at in every state individually. and there should be a one-year delay on consequences and kentucky's. >> are doing fine come, everyone is working together, but their other states that probably need these tests rule out before there are consequences. this should not be a single conversation. >> i would also highlight earlier this week there was a libertad line that read andrew cuomo concedes defeat in the common core wars. i guess he put out an advertisement that has the quote that we won't use common court test scores for at least five years and then only if our children are ready. but i'm wondering about sort of changing this. because it seems like states like kentucky that we have highlighted have sort of let the fight, which had to be tough politically in a lot of places

to total line for these high standards. when these laggard states don't live up to their standards. so are you sort of cutting the knees out from the folks have been making the tough decision to toe the line? >> sure, and in fact kentucky superintendence, one of the more outspoken leaders in the organization, he said wait a minute, all of these national things are making it harder for them to keep doing what they were doing. so absolutely, by trying to drag everybody along on the common core train, instead of letting the 15 states are 20 states that one at u.s., what has happened is you have those guys in first class and then you have another two dozen states getting tracked long coach and they are kicking and screaming and the noise is effective and it's honestly making us more controversial than the states that want to do it. let's also be clear that part of

the problem is that by making it something that everybody should do instead of a true coalition of states that are excited about it, you have wound up with all kinds of design complications and one of the reasons that we supposedly needed this common core was because we had all of the gameplaying in the no child left behind. were states would take tests and nobody was getting good accurate readings on how the kids were doing. well, that is fine. the solution to that is what you really want is a test that folks can't finagle. there is testing windows, for instance. it's a recommends to state something like a 60 day testing window. this is because they regard different times and so if you're going to test folks at a 5% coming from flexibility. and there's also a long and proud tradition when it comes to testing of school districts pushing back this to the testing

window because that means at their kids get a lot of extra days of instruction and their schools look good. so the way you would combat this is make a condition of joining us testing consortium, but you don't get this with the testing window that they are going to look at the master schedules and work with them and this is one that you're going to test. that wasn't part of because are trying to get as many as possible to play. part of what you would want is an agreement to we will judge whether kids are passing or not and you only get to be part of this if you actually agree to abide by these. that was never part of that commitment. and the goal was to get as many guys as possible. part of the problem with treating common core is something that we want everyone to do rather than as an activity that would be led by states that we are passionate about. we have one wound up optimizing the way that the test generate

the results. personally i fairly despond on us and i strongly suspect that in more it 70 or 80% of states, it will feel in 2018 exactly like it filled in before. >> i just think i can't contain myself. okay, so first off -- i could not disagree more about the testing window thing. i can give you a better example of something. but i think that -- i think that the states started different times and are trying to test on technology and i think that this is the only decision that they can make is to give people a lot of time to take these tests. of course people are going to push it as far along as they can with the testing window and i don't think about is a problem, i think that we can work it out. i would add that i think that the bigger question is whether or not states will stick together on this in terms of at

the end of the day giving these tests, getting these results, are we going to show is a country, we're going to have a more fair benchmark across the country with 26 states work together on these tests. i think that's a real positive. and in the end the common core was never built for 50 states. and so we never encouraged the 50 states. so other states coming along kicking and screaming, i don't know of any that really want that they can't get their legislature to pass out. and we had 45 states to start with and we have to states back out and we have 43 still. what is the deal maximally states kicking and screaming, there's only two left. so i don't understand. >> one thing, it seems that you're highlighting a catch-22 here that in order to maximize -- if you want more people to because of you and some things

you have to lower the requirements of what it takes to get in. but the whole point of being in it is that you hold each other accountable to keep high expectations for this. so i'm wondering how you would respond to that. so if you need people to be in these to hold themselves accountable and you worry about backslapping outsider back, how do you navigate back? >> that is the question that i would rather debate. how are we going to put systems in place to make sure that when we get to this that states are still in this game. and that is what i want to hit on. one of the structures that can put in place, what are the policies that we can act as a group and not federal, but states working together, to make sure that in the long run consortiums are successful. quite frankly getting a better test for kids is what is going to push a across the goal line. because we have, you know, were

asking what is going to be different in 2018. if the test are not different than will have a problem. >> okay, so the challenge is, all right, what are some constructive alternatives on what to do? i would love to hear, if any, just how any of this strike you if you feel like weighing in on it. one for instances that i would like to see the consortia layout nonnegotiable equipment. if you're going to be a consortium member they have to agree that they will look at start aides and they will tighten the windows for specific states. find these windows and then they will have a given state that should be much more tighter. that is something that the governing board should agree to and you should play by those rules. they should have a mandatory scoring schedule and it should be mandatory and not something that you can be a member of and still opt in or opt out of. we don't know yet how

translatable the results are from the computer assessment and taking a paper and pencil. they are looking at this based on the spring results and i suspect that they will have some issues with that. i would like to states with higher to use whatever translation we settle upon. so for me, for instance, i think the point is that i want to see if you're going to be part of a consortium to incher integrity. i want that to mean something. and i suspect that that probably means to some that that is not quite for us. but for me that is a good result. so catherine, i would like to hear your response to that. if there are these more stringent things that folks have to agree to be part of that, how does that trickle-down school into the teacher? >> i'm not sure that i have the ability to answer that. i do think that it is situational and it will be

different district to district. but it does occur to me that even though it might not feel like a mandate from washington in the current environment, what would that feel like. one more thing handed down that states need to do. when chris talked about the common core that there could be a state that wanted to get out but they can't. there are things like this like race to the top and they make certain agreements and we have are the scene with the u.s. department of education did in revoking one waiver because the thing was not up to snuff. clearly these things are operational and the environment is heavy with that. i don't know what will wireman with consortia would do. but it does seem to me that one of the questions about the test scores is what you going to do. and in other words you have to

report them. there is power in having states within the consortia that have to publicly disclose what those look like grade then there is the question of what you attach to them. will that be her high school exit score and will you peg high school exit to the college readiness mark. because that is a whole different thing than saying we will take it differently. and the political part of that is that both things are different. what part of the higher education system will accept these for replacement? all of these things about what you do and not to mention teacher evaluation. i feel it does have a lot more kind of hanging in the air and the question of the testing window. >> i think it's fair. part of the challenge here is that -- but if we have spent all this time and passion the last several years and over the next several years doing this, and we wind up with that states are

going to administer the common core assessments in smart ways and that public officials are not going to fudge the results, that's pretty much where we were from 2001 until 2009. and i am not sure that any of this will have been worth it if all we are doing is lining up with tests that are written by the consortia rather than stay test. it seems to me for any of us to been worth all of the effort that what we want is, my answer on all of this is i don't want the feds touching any of that. i want them to make decisions as they see fit on all of us. but for all this to have been worth while it seems to me that i won an idea that these results are going to be feeling much more like the sats were feel much more like the ap than they feel like the old state assessment for this.

>> i would be interested in hearing your side. seems like they are calling for some sort of governing body that is not a federal government. so someone there that's going to do things like old people to account, are there efforts to create that? work is something to be done to create a body like that. >> not that i know of, but i agree. i think that making sure that the states that are in these two groups really want to be in these two groups is really an essential part of that. i don't see any way that would come out on the other side states sort of giving us test and then saying they're okay with it and then not really being committed to sticking together as a group. i would agree with that. i don't know what this looks like a long long-term. i think that's an issue that we will have to resolve. running another set of standards would be very difficult at this

point. and there would be a lot of controversy and i don't think that we would be able to get through that process, especially from washington dc. i do think that the states need to own these processes in their states. but working together, they are going to have to figure out how to update their standards as well. >> that brings us to an elephant in the room that we need to talk about which is politics. the politics of the common core, yeah, we were referencing it and i want to bring it to the forefront here. there's a lot of conversation about this about the role that it might play in the midterm elections and there's another discussion to be had about what role the common core might play in 20s team. so rick, you publishes this morning in "the washington post." it's kind of an interesting study about just how much or how little people are actually talking about the common core. i'm wondering if you could share that and talk about that

implication for the broader conversation. >> sure. it turns out that when you look at what the candidate individuals have set on their website, only three of the 35 democrats running for governor mentioned the common core. two supported it and one opposed it. only 10 of them mentioned the common core. neither they are opposed and one that they support it. frankly what is interesting is about half the republicans running for the u.s. senate mention the common core all negatively. that you can actually do very much which makes it suggest that there's more noise the mic going on there. and so the bottom line is here that one reason this has been politicized as we talked about is we've gotten wrapped up in things that look very good to the reformed community than two

dozen 91 president obama was pulling 65 or 70% and it looked less good to the community one president obama is much less popular. and so i think that -- of that is true of several elements that are wrapped up and can be a waste of time. so i think that one of the opportunities especially for folks that are, you know, as i have read in the debate last month, i'm not opposed to common core but i just want to see how these things shake out before we jump on us as a nation. so for folks that are confident that it is the right way to go and that it's good for kids, i think one of the opportunities is how to use the bridge is from washington politics where it is an issue that a governor can address and name much more problem-solving and state centered fashion and partly i think the senator lamar alexander has offered about this. there's language in the statute that created the u.s. department

of education, and there's language behind. it says the federal government won't touch critchlow more instruction and senator alexander has closed the door. let's just say the federal government will not touch anything and i think one of the real opportunities to chris alluded to was for folks that really embrace common core as a statewide initiative to stability jump on that train. for them to be saying, look, this is the kind of language that everybody should be able to agree on, democrats and republicans, whatever has happened in the last five years has happened. but let's make it clear that whoever gets elected president in 2016, this is not something that is supposed to open the door for them to make decisions. and this includes how much of a role, if any, the federal government should have an approving state assessment

because that opens a big door for the department of education whether or not they are behaving appropriately and my personal preference is not to have u.s. government whether or not this is the case. >> i would love to hear your thoughts. >> i haven't read compose well, it sounds interesting. and i would just say that my experience and what rick just said, there are is a lot of fervor in the media with a few people in every state about the common core. the only actually start talking to people that are not actively involved in politics, there is a lower level of understanding of what the common core evenness. the polling that i have seen is that one in two people don't have an understanding of the common core and so half the country doesn't even know we are talking about here and there's a

real opportunity for us to just turn explaining and as rick has said, sort of independence from the federal push on us would be very helpful for us. and granted there is a proper federal role in education as it should be wanted to make sure that states are not doing bad things to kids in terms of equal opportunity and things like that. but i think in this case and i think that rick is right that we have to make sure that it is clear that the states are the ones that made the decision that i have to keep owning them. whatever we need to do to make sure that it's clear. >> okay, great. before i turn it over to the audience, feel free to send me questions. i want to ask to lightning round questions to all members of the panel. asking each of you to weigh in in turn, so what do you see as the biggest threat to the common core effort moving forward to so

we will start with chris and move down the line. >> okay. i actually think the transition this year will be a big challenge, making sure that we are able to honestly tell kids how they are doing and then move that drew. can i have a second answer as well? >> absolutely. what we identified as the materials gap is a big challenge. >> i think an over exuberant advocate in the more folks like chris talking about this, you know, addressing legitimate concerns and the better the prospects are, the more the folks say that this is awesome to raise any concerns. i think that that is just a recipe for people to say absolutely. >> the quality results of the tests. >> that's right, you took the lightning round quite literally

on that one and i appreciate it. >> you must write about education. you have spent time in classrooms. more questions also, what does success look like? and what does winning look like? running a story 10 years from now and be education does these great retrospectives, looking back on a nation of risks and in order for her to include this sentence, the common core has been a success, what are the types of things that would need to have that happen? in this way i think i can go in the reverse. so in order for you to write that article, what are the types of things that you would need to have seen? >> it will take longer to do that and i guess that it seems to me that from the district's perspective and not states in

the political sense but educators in states and in districts, it seems to me that they would have to have some sort of evidence that kids were really doing better than i will throw this in just because of the kind of things i'm interested in, that the kids are the farthest behind have actually made the most progress and they are closer to going where they need to go and the opportunity gaps close, achievement by some standards of measurement, whatever that is, is better, college success rates and in other words for mediation and other measures and it was actually making an impact on higher education because i think that often what gets forgotten in the debate is the original intent of this college and career readiness. and college readiness, that there's no impact or brian and what was that about.

>> your time. >> i think that the outcome that was alluded to in terms of employer satisfaction and his performance in the postsecondary, i think that the second one is that that will be contingent and resolving some of these questions about what it means to teach the common core well. i get lots of e-mails from folks, including teachers that are frustrated about this. so we see some of the outrageous stuff online and their there are other folks that say that that is crazy and not at all what the common core is trying to push. the stuff has to be resolved in a way that is not about this and frankly i'm not sure which way it will be at sorted out. so it has to get sorted out in ways that don't encourage instruction. >> i would agree especially on the mathematics side that we

have work to do to help teachers talk about mathematics and we have reentered this were there have come back. so we need to have that conversation. but i think for the first part we have been successful in a major way already. i think that we have had a discussion in the country towards the idea that kids need access towards these higher expectations the matter what. no matter what you call them and no matter what happens in this day, i think we've had a measure of success that is largely part of those that came before me. so in terms of what we are looking for, i think some of the things that katherine mentioned, remediation rates in universities and colleges, kids are paying for classes that they should have had in high school and that rate needs to drop and i think that we are going to have more kids graduating with meaningful credentials.

whether or not they have a certificate to go into or a post secondary training program, going right into the university or community college, those are the correct things in terms of data points that we are looking for. >> chris, you have been such a good sport. do you agree or worry that some of the advocates have been setting this up by setting such a high bar? i mean, secretary duncan, which we have been going after all day, we might as well pile it on here. the common core may prove to be the single greatest thing to happen to public education in america since brown v. board of education. so in some way are you worried that -- you could do great things and you could talk about what you talked about and what could conceivably be achieved and are you worried about that gap? >> i can only advocate this. there's a lot in this room that i know of and we all have our

own style. my sense is that this is a big deal and that we shouldn't under emphasize the fact that we are asking more across the country this year. and so secretary duncan i think has done a pretty good job and i think that his push to look at the standards and assessments were all okay. i think we've gone to the place where incentives and other things, that is where we ended up in a challenge. am i concerned about the way we are doing this? rick and others can debate that and i think the biggest thing is we care about kids getting to the standards and that's what the organization is focused on. we are willing to talk about in the standards. and so i think we're going to turn it over to the audience now. i've i very been getting questions on twitter.

that is outstanding. if you'll remember that the hash tag is what now cc and i am mcshane. one of those that are sending tweets, i will probably combine a few because i've seen a lot of them they're sort of in the same area and they might not be able to read it exactly. and number two, those of you that are joining us, if you haven't been to an education event before we generally have two rules for questions, the first one is that we ask that you identify yourself and we will have folks that will come help you and number two is that you actually ask a question where we are trying to go light on soliloquy. i can arctic sea from the smattering of hands that went up, a lot of people are getting the nice quick questions. 140 characters, get it out

there. before we go to the room, the first question that i have seen with different variations of and maybe we will start with catherine. a lot of people have been asking about the effects of the common core on non-taxing subjects like the arts and so many other issues that we want schools to talk about. in your experience have you seen any evidence of curriculum on to these or any evidence of fear focusing on what the common core does and you might push out the other subjects. but i will have the other panelists respond as well. >> i will have you respond by saying neither. what i have seen is there is a genuine attempt in a lot of places in a lot of places don't quite get this, but there's a genuine attempt in place as to implement these expectations of

the common core. and there's a lot of expectations about what that really means. we have heard them referred to as social studies standards. but they are literary standards specific to certain disciplines. so how do you deal with scientific material or respond to? i've been in places that are really trying to do that, having to involve science and social studies teachers in doing that. i've seen that a few years ago in kentucky. those folks didn't seem concerned about that and if anything it was a little bit of a broadening to that and everybody in the building was getting involved to try to figure out how to handle a literacy in the subject.

>> i know that you have expressed some concerns about that. i'd love to hear you talk about it. >> again, i think it comes back to the common core, i like to see things before i buy them. and with catherine, with her first off, we then under norma's pressure to focus on math and english arts for 12 years under no child left behind and i don't think common core changes that one way or the other but i think that it it hypothetically certainly creates an opportunity for this kind of collaboration among people which is going to actually deliver on the promise that it's going to help make sure that instruction is rebuffed and frankly, for instance, the boston public schools is subsuming, essentially, this under the english language arts. and that is, you know, for me

that's an indicator that there is something that i worry about and i think it's easy for us to talk about this that sure, we're going to carry this stuff up into the other courses that may or may not lead to good or interesting instruction. and i have yet to see anything that convinces me that it's going to we to good and interesting instruction more often than not. >> i do not have much to add other than we have to guard against any set of standards, whether or not it's common core or anything else. whatever standards that the states have, it's been happening in the past been my experience is that the teachers have told me that this is giving them more space rather than less. and i'm sure that there are places where this is not working exactly the way we would want it to. states have standards and i hop

that we are teaching to the standards that we says advocates for the common core we should be advocating for those things as well. >> okay, great. let's take one from the audience. the gentlemen, if you would be so kind to identify yourself and then ask a question. >> you are from national review. because the question is mainly sort of from a neutral standpoint, and i'm going to give an example of what i mean. but the question is are you finding the teachers are finding that they even understand what it is that the standards are asking him to do, or are they finding a that it isn't educational bureaucratic gobbledygook. the reason i'm asking this is

what will give one example. >> i'm just going to quote one thing from an introductory specifically from the common core. that is that it says that this is what it is telling math teachers that they need to get across to their kids. students should have two abilities. they should have the ability to decontextualized and to abstract a given situation in manipulating this as if they have a life of their own without necessarily attending to the reference and the second is the ability to contextualize what's needed during the manipulation process in order to probe into the reference that assembles what's involved and the question

is, what does that mean two. >> are teachers able to translate that into practice? >> okay, so how have they been translating the actual standards and practice? >> i guess it depends on where you go. honestly we have a lot of teachers in this country. there will be a lot of variations with how they would have been trained in how good the district is at explaining these things and giving them support and i guess it really depends on where you go. i have spent time in places that are doing a great job and really getting stuff together. we know well the story of what is going on in cleveland and i have hung out with those folks when we talk about this for the entire day, wrestling with the standards from the earliest days on up, translating what it means with units and lessons and it didn't seem like they were

really getting support to do that and in other places, it's completely taboo. so they do need help understanding and i'm sure there are teachers that are really confused and others that feel like they are ready to go everywhere in between. >> do you have a response to that? >> yes. okay, so i think that one of the hardest things we wrestled with his head we make sure that the standards actually represent what mathematics is so mathematicians can interact as well as parents and kids and obviously this was more complicated than most folks with what they would engage with. that's a balance that try to be striped if you go to most state standards before common core, many of those things were in the state standards and i think that we can get better at making the

standards more easy to read and easy to understand and i can also quote some standards that are like very straightforward language also. in the balance we were trying to strike a something that is competent enough or mathematicians were appointed tedious than high school in addition to parents and kids. >> oh, absolutely. taking another one from twitter. this is what wikipedia is for. there are some questions from earlier and i will try to put it all together here about technology and about the new tests that are designed to be taken on computers and the capacity of schools actually do this. bandwidth, hardware, software, in order to meet this in the time frame. so starting with you if you're

interested in seeing how schools are trying to get up to speed and haven't had enough time and do they need more time, is a money. what are we doing to administer this. >> it depends that there is a reality and there have been tremendous investments in the stock. the the cep report identified that having the infrastructure as being one of the lagging indicators or fewer districts are willing to say i am good and ready. our reporting on field testing as we could about 26 states greatly to my surprise. there were fewer technological glitches and i were to guess. even all the level of anxiety around technological readiness and there were small glitches.

that being said it's pretty well-established in the survey that i have in that we have a long way to go. >> so how do you respond to? does that make you nervous? >> yes, anytime those of us that are round no child left behind, there were all of the back-and-forth among those of us that don't have real jobs to talk about these kinds of things and in the educators are like, yeah, and then they were like this is awful. so i'm always a little bit hesitant of district leaders or teachers or anyone else and one of the big technology challenges is that one reason that folks are going to be able to get this is because they are using a

medley of devices. this when you talk to educators, you hear a lot of different stories and kids are using different devices or the first time and i'm kind of like, you know, they will take everything down and there's a pencil everywhere and this gets to the question about how much confidence we should all have including the validity of this to come out. not because were questioning anyone's intentions and not because i think that people are, you know, doing anything amiss because i do worry that this is an process where we will pay more attention on getting it done than place in which it gets done.

>> educators or arguments and i think that, you know, rick is onto some points that we need to be attending to his we go forward, the comparability across devices. we begin shifting the online access is of this and it took us five years to get every kid online in the state of oregon. i was 13 years ago and organize now is giving all their assessments online and has been for seven years now. and i think some states will have it easier than others and i think that this is a one-year transition that will be really hard and we took five years to get the transition could be online assessment and i think that we will see some glitches in the first year or two but i think that we will be giving these assessments online and that is this going to happen in this country.

and that you delete to take one from the crowd here. >> wait for the microphone to show up, please identify yourself and ask a question. >> hello. i'm from the center of education reform. i think you asked a most important question which is how it gets done. and i bet the common core debate has been a distraction from the largest element in the room and the structure of governance isn't there. you go to a good school but they don't care about common core and it's not really an issue, so shouldn't we be focused on fixing this so they have flexibility to figure out how they run their classes? >> it's a great question and i think that there are two answers. one answer is that this is

actually, i think this is something that is partly a thermometer on the common core for my friends who were very enthusiastic about the potential of the common core, they say yes, we care about this, but honestly this is what is going to give us the leverage to change the practice and change instruction and i think that that leads to the second issue which is there is a disconnect often times especially for those of us inside the beltway talking about the systems and institutions and how schools are run and folks out there who think that that is a bunch of noise and what happens with the curriculum. and i think that part of what has made the common core debate as unproductive as i feel like it has been as a lot of us talking past each other, then i'm someone obviously, as you know, that rings a lot about

governance issues and i think it matters a time. and i think it's easy to beat gnostic about what happens in classrooms. it's easy for them to say we are doing real work. and so for me, the reason that it matters so much is because i ain't that some of these conflicts in the way that stuff is playing out beaks directly to would have an instructional aid, i don't have any business talking at about because i'm hanging out in this building, but it also is going to play out immediately for the kind of decisions that the leaders make, for how dollars are allocated and how they prioritize olds. and i think that we have been so heated initially and so dismissive of questions and concerns that it spurred a backlash and i think that the backlash is so focused on this and on outliers that we are not actually having a direct conversation. part of it that i can hope that we can do is an honest

discussion about when does the common core get in the way and when does it impede the ability of families to make the choices for their kids and when does it facilitate the abilities of those two twitter. how do we think this through without necessarily questioning questioning each other's motives or intelligence. >> that's great, everyone's coming together on that one. i will take another one from twitter. a couple folks have talked about teacher preparation. if i might go to you first. the teachers -- there seems to be too nuts to crack, one is to get the teachers that are currently in the teaching force up to speed with the professional development that they need and the resources that they need it we have spent time talking about and there's this other question about getting the preparation program aligned with the common core to prepare the teachers necessary to teach. so with what you saw i will allow you to tell the tale of

teacher preparation online met with the common core. >> i don't have a tale to tell as much as others and the world hasn't changed but i did want to check with them to be sure and in general the teacher preparation programs, once again it does vary. there are places that are really looking at the common core and incorporating that into the preparation programs and there is also a divide there. there are programs that feel like okay, this is not their job to prep them for a given set of standards. and there are places that just don't feel like that's what they do and there's nothing happening there. and so there has been an allover response to this program than anything at all. on the other side that's a whole different ball of wax and we

talked about that as well. we talked about the good preparations for teachers and there's a lot that's shallow and so responding to this as well with common core advocates, university professors have a great deal of autonomy. it's sort of about cajoling him were convincing them and there doesn't really seem to be a lever that advocate to get these folks onboard including getting teacher preparation programs on board? >> the person in school districts need to be more active with the programs in the area. sort of establishing this we are teaching the common core in our school districts that we are expecting someone would be able to teach these standards is sort of an essential thing.

also whether or not we have it or not, we have to have this. there are good programs out there that need to be scaled. and then there are probably far too many programs out there preparing teachers for schools. so i think a separate lens, we could spend an hour and a half talking about it. ..