some point when the democratic process is played out, you and you are at this scale that we nearly half the country is in a situation where they're being told you can't carry your marriage across a state line, that's the point thee if ever there was one constitution requirement -- >> the reason -- on the one habit helps you in a sense, maybe you're getting some tipping point. it suggests hand, the democrat ib process is working and indeed working quicklyely and very from the client's perspective. since powers. so it's been a long process of development. but, judge, what i'm suggesting thehat the ultimate role of federal court is to keep states liberty tog the

certain citizens. and here when you've got citizens who have a liberty interest, their marriage already their marriage is done, children,e now got and those children deserve to have two parents and the state is now saying because of our commitment to democracy, we're say no to you, and we're just going to wait for you to come up with $7 million and reverse our constitutional amendment. in a few yearsou when you can pull off that kind of raising and that kind democratic action. the reality is that these rights very profound, and we know from supreme court case law a verymarriage is significant thing. it's solemn, it's precious, it's attributes that allow you to have the relationship with your children or with your spouse, and this

can't be just subject to vote. i understand that in this early a state is trying to figure out whether recognition -- >> i'm just curious why you're about the better path. community getsay to pick the path, can you get your supreme court decision in june of next year or can you to change hearts and mind through democracy in the remaining 29 states. not obvious to me what's the best path. >> i'm trying to suggest a constitutional path both under due process and the vested rights -- >> the assumption of the question was that you can have either one. that's the assumption of the question. it's just not obvious to me why the supreme court ruling by five june of 2015 is the better path for the community. clients.sarily the community at large. changing hearts and minds happens through democracy, much

more effectively than happens through court decisions. i i understand, judge, but represent four couples, their kids deserve two parents, they today. them and that's, and they are theseed to those based on notions of due process and equal protection. especially when you look at the movement that's occurred. this is similar to the loving situation, which by the way was recognition case. that couple moved to d.c., got married, then came back to prosecutedd were because virginia wouldn't recognize the d.c. marriage. decision inof the 1967, there were 15 states that repealed the ban on interracial marriage. there was momentum going in favor. but the supreme court still prosecution.heir there were still 16 states that prohibited interracial marriage.

very helpful to your nonrecognition point, analysishat's not the that the supreme court follows in loving. the analysis the supreme court is not theloving fact that virginia wouldn't recognize a d.c. marriage, it fact that virginia wouldn't recognize for instate inout of state couples interracial marriages. so that actual path suggests, goes back to the first question asked, which is we really inquiry fromthis the enter respective -- perspective of whether the state in the first intans has the authority to deny same sex license. marriage >> even in windsor, and those facts came from footnote 5 in so they did consider it relevant, but even in windsor the supreme court makes a point it assumes state recognition of marriage is within the state. they say that twice in the majority opinion. aat we're developing here is

second tier of marriages in ohio. that comeex couples in with various legal hiccups in marriages from other states, but ohio says oh never mind. that ohiosex couples says no, you can't have your marriage recognized. to thes does get us other as respect of equal protection, and why special consideration should trigger an and aprotection finding violation in this case. and that is the notion of animus. got in this record a remarkable collection of all the into the passage of the 2004 ohio supreme court, or ohio constitutional amendment. one,f them, just to name it's exhibit q, is the state description of the measure. published by secretary of state blackwell, it's still on the website, and the cons.the pros and

and under the pros it says this measure will prevent the state from spending any money and allowing homosexuals, which they describe as being in deefiant relationships. so there's a real prejudice there. the measureion that gave effect to the private prejudice against gays is one that bears some weight. and i'd recommend to you that i cuss brief from -- >> i have a lot of sympathy for judge holmes on this point. to eliminate, is not to create a new category of going to labelw bigots. >> no, that's not the point. an employment in case where if i represent fireddy and my client was wouldn't act sowed

to a customer's demand, then in you don't have to, it isn't a defense to honor customer prejudices. in this type of situation, under palmore, you had a supreme court custody decision was made. ad the child was removed from situation because the judge thought, oh, living in an interracial family, that creates too much tension. the judge didn't have any prejudice, but was aceding to the presently disof others. what the supreme court said was don't let us pass laws that actually implement private others.e of so it isn't a finding that somebody is a bigot. finding that a law could get passed -- >> how is that a complement to people that passed passed thist they had animus?

>> it's not about being a compliment or not, it's about to lookfactors we ought at in order to determine whether this measure targeting this narrow group of peep, the same targeted in windsor, is constitutional. targeting, even in the measure's description by the secretary of state, the text by the way, think with the text. in constitutional amendment ohio says not only are we not going to define marriage to a man andher than woman, i says no civil unions. from us, asget away far as you can. and those are the types things at. the supreme court looks doingf even if we're rational basis, these are the factors, they all line up here this deserves the same special consideration that the court gave the federal measure

windsor. when you do that, especially in the federal role of courts to prevent states from to beg liberty to people, the back stop, it's appropriate to act now. was it appropriate before, i don't know, we weren't in this case before. i'm saying that now, with half the country practically in a situation where they're going to want to bring their marriage as cross state lines and with those children in the balance, yes, time to act. and it's appropriate to act. i would say also that we ought about the harm that we're dealing with in a this.ion like the couples that are plaintiffs them werese, three of i pregnant naited by artificial insemination. so there's no need to go to court and deal with fathers that are claiming rights.

law, if you're married and you use the process artificial insemination, the the parent ofed the child. that same rule should apply here. and by the way the implementation question is answered, just do a definition for all your laws, get away from husband and wife, mother and go gender neutral. so i don't think that that's a impediment to implementing marriage was, as it would be here. the difference is huge in this case. you've got the nonbirth mothers these three babies saying i am a parent. my kid doesn't get my support. call me if my kid doesn't show school. prosecute me if there's neglect of my kid. saying no, we don't want that? onel let this kid only have

parent, but if you're an opposite sex kid, then you will parents. that's a super harm to these children. why the's part of matter is urgent, because as we get more and more couples, with children, as we have in this case, presenting themselves in wait on the't democratic process and suffer that theyt this level are suffering. beh of those names need to on the birth certificate, and that's very practical. talked 11 separate times about the dignity that was owed couples.ex and in that opinion, it said over and over, targeting these couples for this tier status,d humiliating these children who relationships, andes of the very purpose

statute,l core of the is to treat them unequally, and ohio. what's happened in so we have both the same lack of that was recognized in windsor, and we have these very children problems of getting only half the parents. and they should get both parents. the district core was correct birtht said that the certificate is the basic currency by which parents can exercise those protected parental rights on the parents' side and responsibilities. the only common governmentally conferred recognized readily accepted record that establishes identity, parentage and citizenship, and it's required in an array of legal contexts. so in this case, what you see in come fromrms that

marriage recognition from cradle, as in the henry as in the, to grave, other playoffs, and everything in between. recognition these lack ofare denied consortium and wrongful death taxs, they're denied benefits, other benefits. that are are benefits taken for granted by different couples. i've been married to the same woman for 42 years, three great kids. in my favoriteed because i get tax benefits, i get other benefits. and if, and it's fair in a sense, to rig it in the favor of marriage, because we pay our taxes, we buy our houses, we buy care at the mall, we take of our kids, we put less demands on the government, and same sex piece of that. a there's absolutely no reason to with respectfairly

to this balance that the has drawn with respect to favoring marriage. and it's important. and the death certificate is the same thing, it's important that it be accurate. of athe last record person's life on earth, in this country. to be wrong? i mean, talk about a dignity violation. iat is absolutely huge, and think it bears, it's sobering really. so each of the four children in two parents.e have not one. and affirming the district court will cause ohio to recognize these families and the marriages that anchor them, affirming the district court will also cause certificates of

and john to reflect their marriages and allow those men to rest in peace. thank you. >> mr. murphy, have you a few rebuttal. >> thank you, your honor. just a few quick points. the questionoke to about isn't this case entirely the outcome of the other case, i think that's correct.xactly how michigan comes out will most explain how this case comes out. and michigan, i haven't her any exceptionhaving an for out of state recognition. the first point that was made was some due process right that but thaty rooted, doesn't take on the notion that due processeate

rights when there's a full faith and credit clause and it ignores the equally long standing -- >> but couldn't we say, if we to, that ohio is tofectly free to refuse recognize, or refuse to issue, refuse to recognize people who get into common law marriages the state. but then apparently allow somebody whose marriage is a common law marriage is anothered valid in state to come in and recognize marriage. >> it's a notion of public policy, i think there's no wouldon that ohio recognize some marriages that would not be lawful in ohio. alwayshink ohio has retained the exception for those marriages that violate public public policy exception long predates this debate. so i don't think you

the exception is tied towards animus or that there's no notion to the cited --, as in cases with peck to windsor, i completely disagree that the federalism rational played no rule.n the it wasn't a federal case on the outcome. rational was the entire rationale for why there was animus there. and that federal rationale is entirely gone here. government had engaged in an unusual intrusion, thatt was that law triggered the scrutiny under the and youotection clause, can't say that for these type of laws for the reason i just publiced, that the been --uestion has

>> but the public policy of not recognizing same sex marriages? >> yes. >> the content of which would been illegal, and a crime in ohio for most of that you're talking about. >> well, that just goes to show there those deeply rooted right with respect to out of of same sexition marriage. then the third point a like to point out briefly is the to some of the report materials, and equality foundation this court made quite clear that legislative motivations and the referenda are impossible to determine precisely because it a referenda. it's, it's analysis that is literally impossible. you can't gaze interest the mind forverybody who voted yes

proposition one. it's distinguishable from and windsor precisely, because the court in those cases are en gauged -- they said the laws on the face are unusual and the case here furtherif there's no questions, i respectfully ask the court to reverse the cases.t court in these >> can we go back to the 19th century history that we were talking about before you sat down? >> sure. >> it occurred to me after you sat down that you thought i was talking about the stuff ra owz stuff -- going across the united states. they knew that was impossible. they were going to the local people trying to get the right to vote on the school boards. stateere going to each legislature saying please en franchise women so that we can

ballots.he state and they did it state by state state. and when it came to the end, and to vote get the right finally in a few of those states, there was still the couldon of whether they vote in national elections. and that's why the constitutional amendment was required. so i just wanted to not be eve other.t >> yes. democracy might be slow, but in has morethink it legitimacy, and i don't actually think it's going all that slow this case. the initial process is being taken now, for instance. you may have had a question? okay. >> i'm fine, thank you, mr. murphy. we appreciate your arguments. submitted.ll be >> coming up on c-span a discussion on education policy

and the new common core education standards. then a look at the impact of vengs in ukraine on community. on the next "washington journal," elizabeth kneebone of the brookings institution report onthe new poffity and how it relates to current events. later we continue our look at johnson's vision for a great society with a discussion of 1967.r quality act our guests are jeff homestead, a assistant.a. administrator, and an environmental law professor at washington university. "washington journal" is live every morning at 7:00 eastern on c-span. bar association holdings its annual homeland security law institute today, in d.c.ngton you can see the discussion on live security challenges

starting at 2:55p.m. eastern c-span. >> here are some of the this weekend. friday on c-span in prime time, we'll visit important sites in history of the civil rights movement. saturday night at 8:00, highlight from this year's new forum, including cancer biologist andrew his el. q and a with new york congressman charlie wrangle at 8:00 p.m. friday night on c-span 2, writer reza aslan. at 11:00 p.m.ht eastern, lawrence goldstone on the competition between the brothers and glen curtis to be the predominant name in manned flight. on friday, a look at hollywood's slavery. of saturday night at 8:00, the 200th anniversary of the battle of blade ends burg and the

of washington. and sunday night, former white house chiefs of staff discuss presidents make decisions. find our television schedule one c-span.organce at and let us know what you think about the programs you're watching. us, or e-mail us. >> now a look at a poll examining attitudes toward public schools and how americans the new common core state standards. internationala and gallup hosted this hour 25 minute event.

>> good morning, everyone. how's it going? all right. ok, start. first of all, on behalf of gallup welcome to our beautiful great hall. my name is brandon. i am the executive director of education. delighted here to kick off the results from the 46th annual gallup poll. it started in 1969 which was many years before i was born. you have a deep appreciation for how many years we have been looking at public perception of schools. a special opportunity every year to share that with you. it's interesting, gallup in addition to the special half century of research we have done in collaboration with pdk in the last year has conducted more research and education than any organization we can think of. if i were to summarize some of the most important things we

have learned in the last year, which i am going to do in a few short minutes, it's safe to say that what we are seeing is that something is very wrong. but we have to be careful about what we mean when we say something is very wrong. because there is a lot of stuff that is still going. pretty darn well and i wonder if we haven't as a country started to become incredibly negative about schools and education. this is not just an american phenomenon. the whole world is worried about what is happening with education systems from kindergarten through career. but what's interesting is one of the things we have always learned from this poll is that even though americans, when you ask him about public schools nationally are pretty negative about that. when you ask parents who had kids in school about how they think their kids' school is doing, they are glowing ratings.

if you say, how do you think we are doing nationally? not so good. what about your kids school? americans are feeling pretty darn good about that. it is similar to what we know about congress. if we ask americans about congress, ratings are as low as they have ever been in the history of asking that i should. we have no confidence in congress. but if you asked them about their congressman or woman, they love them. so another bizarre thing. any of us who live in washington, you feel this every day. there are great americans who go to work in washington for a federal government every morning. but somehow we're in the middle of gridlock. literally and figuratively if you commute in from vienna like i do. i was just in san bernardino last week. it is the second poorest city in america. i was there with the superintendent of of schools. he gave an address in front of 8000 employees.

if anybody was, would be low on hope it would be this place. it is just the opposite. i have never seen more hopeful people in any school district i have been in. he had an interesting thing he said to all of his staff. he said, and this is my point about being careful about what we think is going wrong. he said, it is not the people that are the problem. it's the system they wake up to every morning. so let me tell you what we have learned in the last year from our student poll which surveyed 50,000 students. we learned that for every year they stay in school, they are less engaged in school. in elementary school, engagement is at 75%. and 44% in high school. the longer they are in school, the yet engaged -- the less engaged they become.

if a student believes that their school is engaged, and if they have one teacher who makes them excited about the future, they are 30 times as likely to be engaged in school. is just unbelievable. think about how powerful that energy from a single teacher in terms of its impact on the student can have. what we have learned about the teaching profession is pretty interesting. this is data from larger studies we have done on well-being. here is the fascinating thing about teachers. at the second-highest well-being of any profession in the united states. second only to physicians. that's amazing. if we are thinking about the secret to a good life, teaching may be one of the best professions you can go. into. but here is where they get that marks they are not doing so well on their work environment. and specifically their own workplace engagement. teachers, despite having the second highest well-being, are dead last on two things about their workplace.

o they are dead last in saying they feel their opinions that were count. dead last on feeling her supervisors create an open and trusting environment. what have we done that teachers are dead last on that measure? we know there is a broken link between our education system and the economy. this was from three separate studies we did. we asked the same question. we as provost at college and universities whether they think they are doing a good job of training students for success in the work lights. guess what percent are confident they are doing a good job? 96%. we ask americans, general population, do you think college graduates are well prepared for success in the workplace? little different. 14% strongly agreed. we asked c level executives of employers and only 11% strongly agree that college graduates have the skills necessary to do the jobs they are looking to fill. we know there's a ton of entrepreneurial energy and our schools. 42% of fifth through 12th

graders plan to start their own business someday. yet less than 5% are interning in a work environment right now. how do we give them opportunities to let that appetite and desire come to version? you might have missed this story about google this year. they came out and said, we have looked at all of our hiring data and we found no correlation whatsoever with the test scores of candidates and their success of the job at google. how many of you missed that story? one of the most important educational stories of the year and most of us in education just glossed over it. google is one of the world's most admired employers. as goes google, so goes the rest of the world. only five percent of superintendents strongly agree that grades and test scores are a great predictor of success in college. it seems that superintendents have believed what google just learned for a little bit -- for a while, because we surveyed them this year.

we'll see some data from the poll about how americans feel about testing. let me leave you with this. we're just on the largest study of college graduates. 30,000 college graduates in the u.s. and we found three special elements about their college experience that -- was in their long-term its success in work. and they were these three simple things. that if you strongly agreed you had at least one professor who, made you excited about learning, you strongly agreed that the professors cared about you as a person, and here was the most important of the three -- you had a mentor who encouraged your goals and dreams if you say strongly agreed to those three questions, it doubles your odds of being engaged in work and thriving in your overall well-being. think about how profound that impact is.

we saw no difference by type of institution, whether you graduated from a public, private, selective institution, top ranked. no difference by type of institution. but if you had that experience, how you did college was just astronomically different in terms of your trajectory of success in life. here is the killer. only 14% of college graduates in the u.s. hit that mark. are you kidding me? this is not dropouts. these are not high school graduates. this is college graduates. and on that one simple measure of having felt they had a mentor, only 22% hit that item. so let me say to you another way -- eight out of 10 college graduates don't feel they had a mentor and relationship in college. we've got to be doing better. it's not the people that are what is wrong right now. it may be the systems we have created around them. i think we could agree we have

done a marvelous job creating improved accountability systems around schools in the last 20 years. i worry we have failed miserably creating engagement systems within them. with that, i would like to nvite our great colleague to present results from the 46th annual pdk-gallup poll. hank you for being here. >> i want to extend greetings from our board of directors. pdk is a global education group that includes teachers in higher education faculty. we are committed to helping to grow and connect leaders in education. i want to bring greetings from our pdk board of governors. it is the foundation that funds the pdk-gallup poll every year.

so as brandon mentioned, for 46 consecutive years pdk has enjoyed our partnership with gallup. george gallup senior started the poll in 1969. i wish i could say what brandon said. was alive at that time. and he, dr. gallup led the poll for 15 years working in close association with pdk. then he turned it over to his son alec. alec directed the poll for 25 years. built the poll into its recognition we see today. these are two great icons in polling. and it's created a great opportunity to investigate and understand what americans believe about the public schools. because the poll is conducted annually for 46 years, and there are very few polls that can say that, we can revisit

many of the questions year after year and that allows us to be in a unique position to provide trend data, looking to see how americans' opinions change over time. the other thing i want to mention is we are dedicated to transparency. we list every question we ask verbatim in the poll. so we invite readers to take a look of the questions. we make interpretations but we invite others to make interpretations based upon the ay the question was asked. we were guided in the development of the questions this year by a 15 member advisory council that met in february. these are education leaders representing a broad spectrum, teachers, superintendents, prince polls, policymakers, college faculty. the listing of the advisory council is included in the report you have. allow me to take a few minutes to share some high-level

findings from this year's results. the charts i'm going to show you, by the way, are at our website. the website is pdkpoll.org. and if you go to the website, the interesting thing we try to do this year was we actually break out the responses you can see for the questions we have listed there. the responses for national totals. and then responses by political affiliation, republican, democrats and independent. and finally the responses for public school parents. let's begin. with our common core standards. last year only 38% of americans had ever heard of the four words common core state standards. major change this year. over 80% indicate they have heard of the standards. almost 50% self-described that they know a great deal or a fair amount.

we then asked those americans, only those americans who said they had heard of the standards -- this is the 80% who said they had heard of some degree of the standards. we asked them a straightforward question -- do you favor or oppose having teachers in your community use the common core state standards to guide what they teach? only 33% favored the standards while 60% were opposed. that is in the light blue bar that you see. however, we see that there are significant differences for republican and democratic responses. the democratic response seen in yellow, and the republican's response in orange. we then asked those who favored the standards why. they told us the number one reason is that they thought it would help students learn more of what they needed to know regardless of where they attended school.

similarly, we asked those who oppose the standards, why they oppose them. the number one response they told us is that they were worried it would limit the flexibility of teachers to have to teach what they would think is best. o let's turn to testing. we know from last year that only 22% of americans believe that the increase in student testing has helped the performance of the schools in their community. while the other three quarters have said it hurt or made no ifference. but do americans lump all standardized test together? what about other assessments like college entrance exams and advanced placement tests? here we see relatively strong support for these kinds of standardized tests. and that is what you see in the

dark orange and the light orange. we see for sat at the top, act, promoted from one grade to the next. the second set of bars. awarding high school credit, advanced placement exam for the third set. and then finally test to determine whether students can be awarded a high school diploma. but then we asked, and let me read the question to you -- some teachers believe student standardized tests help them know more about their students academic achievement. other teachers believe that student standardized tests do not help them. what do you think? that is a new question. it was clearly a very different response. americans have a divided opinion. 45% believe it helps teachers. 54% believing it does not. however, notice in the orange bars, those of the responses of public school parents. that is a very different

response they gave us. much more negative view of standardized testing and how it helps teachers know more about heir students. this actually opens the door for us to take a look at further research for next year's follow-up question to find out why did parents have a different opinion about this. so for 46 years, the very first question on the poll is what do you think is the biggest problem the public schools in your community must deal with? it is the first question on the poll. it is open-ended. we do not provide any prompts. we ask it intentionally first because we do not want any of the other questions to impact the responses. for a long time, student discipline -- gangs, fighting, drugs -- that was the number one concern that americans had.

but approximately 2000 -- in 2004 that began to change. now we see fully that 1/3 of americans indicate that lack of financial support is the number one problem facing the schools their community. student discipline still registers, but that has been added this year. these are new. concerns about standards with all of the information about the common core. and difficulty getting and keeping good teachers. brandon mentioned these questions. and i will share this year's results. again, early on, dr. gallup included these questions. we asked americans to grade the school. it's actually a three-part question we ask. the first question is to grade the schools in your local community. as you can see, approximately 50% gave the schools in their community an "a" or a "b."

this is a consistent finding we have seen for several years. this has not gone up or down very much. t stayed about the same. now, this is the second part of the question. we asked americans to grade the nation's schools. brandon talked a little bit about this. you can see the responses are very different. i will suggest to you that in fact there are no nation's schools. all schools are in residing communities. this is literally the depiction of the school in the media. what's interesting here is that the results again have stayed fairly consistent for several years. finally, and brandon mentioned this also, this is the third part of the question. we asked americans -- we asked

parents to grade the school that their oldest child attends. you can see, of the three comedies of the highest grade. they hover around 70%. they have gone as high as 77%, "a's" and "b's." this score tends to go up and down a little bit more than the ther two scores. so, local control of education in the u.s. remains an emotional issue. we have questions in our archive that address it. this year we reuse a question. -- we reused a question. in your opinion who should have the greatest influence -- the federal government, state government, or the local school board

we asked the question in 2003. at that time, it was the local school board that should decide what was taught locally. we brought the question back in 2007. we saw a very different response. from 61%. it went down to 49% of americans who thought the local school board. and proportionally both federal and state governments had higher scores in 2007. so we wanted to bring the question back now seven years later in 2014 if that trend -- to see if that trend had changed. it has. now it is moving in the other direction where americans are looking, they believe that local school boards should have more say in what's being taught locally. so, this completes the high evel findings we have. what i'd like to do now is to

bring our four panelists forward and join us up front. let me introduce them as they come up. katie is president of the education trust. tom is executive director of the national school boards association. dallas -- i forgot to tell you, there are no assigned seats. dallas is superintendent of the baltimore county school district. and nate ward is the senior program officer at the bill and melinda gates foundation. we have more extensive biographies included in your materials if you want to know more about our four. so, we're going to open it up to questions in just a minute, ut i have a question here. so, my question to any and all,

given what we have learned in the poll and from other information you have, how do you see the invitation of the common core state standards for roceeding? >> i'll jump in. i like to thank gallup for conducting this poll. t is helpful for us. i think of this question the issue of standards gets right to the heart of it. my sense from reading the poll was that there is a growing public concern about the standards because there is a perception that they are driven by the federal government. we saw much evidence, i think, of a lack of confidence in the federal role of education. we will talk about that, i'm sure. what's interesting is when i think when you talk to parents and community folks, business leaders, they would generally support what the common core and other higher academic

standards are trying to achieve. so i think the reality of standards has been overtaken by the perception of standards. we also know that a lot of the information is coming from sources other than public schools. so, part of it is that we have a job to do to explain what the standards are and what we are all trying to do in terms of improving education in this country. >> your question was a little bit about implementation. let me take that. my experience certainly, and i spent a fair amount of time with teachers, is that teachers in general feel really good about the quality of the common core standards. i think most polls suggest that - that's loud. most polls suggest that that continues to be the case. i think all of us certainly knew that continued support from teachers would be a function of two things. one is how much support they got in implementing the very

different teaching strategies that are necessary for the standards. and second, how fair the timeline surrounding imitation is. we have gotten into many parts of the country both of those things wrong. not enough support and imelines that feel unfair. both of those things need real attention if the implantation effort is to get support it needs from teachers. >> very quickly i will jump in -- can you hear me? >> i get all the volume and you get none. > i'm a principal. katie hit this on the head. as a superintendent, one of the things we have all realize about implementation is the issue we are having in classrooms and why teachers do not feel they are as prepared to teach at a higher level but the instructional shifts that

are required to teach to these standards. one of the things we have to remind folks is anytime we have a country throw a name to anything, people throw darts. your summary states looking to repeal common core state standards. in maryland, we call it the maryland college and career standards. it is all the same. we have had standards for years. we have earned what standards are doing is just setting the bar for what we want students to know and be able to do. the question around the flexibility in terms of how you teach those, that is where leadership has to come in to make sure that teachers and principals feel supported. but i think what has happened in terms of teachers perception is that it has gone to the evaluation side of this. as the country is of limited three reforms at the same time, new standards, new assessments, and you evaluations that are tied to student achievement. we do not have the assessments yet. folks want to read it fairly. that is what they deserve. when folks think about common core, as a teacher, many times they think about the evaluation

piece of it. what we have to do as leaders is make sure the supports are in place, to let teachers know e're in this together. but there will be some growing pains. that is what we we need -- where we need state officials to help us get it right. the poll lets us know as a country where we are. we are very polarized as a country. i think folks perception in terms of the federal role in many issues has declined. so, this is just one additional indicator we have that says that we have to make sure we get it right for our nation, because our economy is counting on the fact that we are expecting students to learn at higher levels. >> thank you for your question. there are so many great things happening in implementation and so many great stories out there. i do not think we are talking about those enough. you can look at delaware where the state's common ground for common core program is bringing 300 teachers together every year.

you can look at orlando where teachers are collaborating in support of students that are behind grade level in reading. we can look at memphis, tennessee, where teachers are incorporating literacy standards in science classes. they are reading popular articles in "popular science." or in hawaii were kids are learning techniques to evaluate their own work. we are starting to see successes. you can look to kentucky. at the same time, i am a pollster by background. there were two themes that emerged for me. the first was how much misinformation and misunderstanding there is around the common core. i think each of us has spoken to that. this poll did find that 80% of people have heard of the common core. but that is only after the question described them as national standards that guide teaching, which is important for us to remember.

in other polls that ask a similar question without a description, we find that fewer than half of the public has heard of them. as you mentioned, we know the people that have heard of the common core aren't learning about it from teachers. they are learning about it from cable news. they are hearing about it in overtly political ways. meanwhile, teachers in washington state are going into. their sixth straight years with new math standards teachers in louisiana are heading back to school without knowing what standards they are supposed to use. so i think a certain amount of skepticism is understandable. the other theme that came out for me from this poll was really consistent support for high standards. that when you described them just as standards that will help all kids succeed when they graduate from high school, there is broad and strong support. he did not mention these questions, but i think they were important. for the people who supported the common core, the top reason

they gave was that these standards prepare all students for success regardless of where they live or where they go to school. that is exactly what the standards do. but for people who oppose the common core, the top reasons they gave was that the standards take flexibility away from teachers. that is not what the standards do. we know that when we talk to teachers, they say the standards give them more flexibility to be creative in their classroom. i think there are lessons for us to take from the polls. >> anybody else want to add to that before we open to questions? >> this point is what i would like to develop, because i think there has always been, and this is not bad -- there's always been a tension baked nto our school system. historically tension between how much state government should dictate and how much local school district should be able to develop their own programming. and so, we can frame almost every issue that way.

what we like to see in the poll is the growing public support for the role of school boards. but i think that is an indicator of something broader, which is that public schools are and should be the primary asset of any community. they are proud of their schools. data shows that people believe their schools are doing a good job. so, i think the message is we have to build on that. people want to see their schools as a local community asset. they want to own the schools. they do not want them to be an outpost of the federal government. if that is how they perceived, if the conversation is wrapped in that way, then i think it changes the discussion. so, by engaging local school officials and leaders, superintendents and others in this conversation, i think we build public support for public education in a way that we lose i think if it is just perceived as regulations that are being oisted on local schools.

>> a little tid bit. if you dig into the results, there is a lot of variance based upon political affiliation, republican, democrat, and independent. except around a couple questions. one of the questions is the grades that are assigned to the local schools. doesn't matter. those grades are the same whether you are republican, democrat or independent. let's open this up to the audience. we have two handheld microphones that will be circulating. we ask that you wait until the microphone arrives at your station. then we ask that you first identify yourself. one final thing, in order to get as many questions in, we ask that you have a question or not so much a long statement. if you understand what i am asking. i think most of us do. so, who wants to be the first to ask a question? you can directed to an

individual or the panelists in general. do we someone? young woman in the back here. thank you. >> greetings, everyone. my biggest question is -- you did say that. i did not follow directions. i'm the executive director for the -- a nonprofit for learning center. we deal with students in a k-12 sat and ged preparation. my question to the panel, anyone can answer this, is what are we doing to actually infuse a better collaboration with our teachers fillin -- feeling confident about their common core and their ability to implement it in their classrooms? >> great question. >> as a superintendent, i will start off. one of the biggest things we have to do, in baltimore county we have 173 schools. the biggest change we have to make sure is that her leadership understand fully what the standards are versus what they are not.

that they understand the instructional shifts we are expecting in our classrooms so they can support their teachers. in addition, in baltimore county, we have created two new positions that have been pushed in. one is a consulting teacher, which is associated with our peer review, which has switched all of our new teachers and all of her teachers that were struggling in various aspects of the profession. the other one is our stat teacher. baltimore county has an issue where we're going one to one over the next three years. they are professional developer teachers that work with teachers. but nothing beats making sure that principles fully understand the instructional shifts they need. if they are working with teachers, they can go in and model as well. that is what we are doing in baltimore county. >> i think he's given you a glimpse of what is going on across the country. what is important is to understand that the shifts that are required of teachers are

very big. teachers are being asked to teach in ways that they were never taught themselves. and that is a giant change to make. in some parts of the country, they are getting lots of support in making that change. sample lessons they can teach. lots of support and coaching and teaching those lessons. opportunities to come together and share how it went and to perfect the lessons over time. i had a lunch with -- who was describing what was going on here in d.c. really exciting. hundreds of hundreds of teachers coming together to work on that exact thing. but how are they going to bring their practice and lined with these new standards? here is the problem. it is very uneven across the country. some districts are providing much less support than others. some have more resources to invest in that support than others. some states have provided lots of materials for their teachers. some very few.

so, we are at this moment where support for making this transition is hugely important but so far, it is pretty darn uneven. so we have got a fair number of teachers across the country who are still getting too little support and are feeling very much on nerve by what feels like a gotcha game. that is the thing we have to get much more aggressive about working on right now. >> you mentioned collaboration. we hear from teachers consistently that more than anything else, more time in the day, is that collaboration is what they want. and the common core provides that. it provides opportunities to collaborate across states, across school district. it provides opportunities for teachers in rural districts that can connect with teachers in other rural districts. we need to focus on making the most of those opportunities instead of the political questions we are talking about. teachers are trying to prepare

their classrooms. they are tired of being pawns in a political debate. we can give them the supports they need to make that a reality. >> i think both are important. so we know the term common core has taken on a life of its own. i think that is a reality we have to deal with. i think the other challenges there's this conflation of standards and curriculum. i am not sure -- i am sure -- we have not done a very good job of helping the public understand the difference. this is that tension i was talking about. it is fair to expect that students no matter where they live have access to a quality education, that we have some standards we are holding everybody to. but how we deliver that needs to be something that is determined locally. i think most people would understand that. most people would agree with that. so, i think from a school board perspective, we have work to do in terms of helping people understand the difference. because if we do not answer

that question, if we do not make that effort, then i think we allow others to define it. clearly it is not been defined ell. quite question. yes, sir, in the back - thank you. great question. >> chris edelstein. since words are important, i want to turn to the press release that pdk put out. it says in the headline, new poll finds declining public confidence in uncle sam's education policies. that sends the wrong message, because common core is not uncle sam's policy. that fuels the divisions we are talking about. comment? >> comment. >> there is a question mark at the end of that, right? >>. we have been asked that question

i think unfortunately, and i think all of us in this room realized that the common core is not a federal initiative. it was created by the council of chief state school officers and the national governors association. i think we all recognize that. and we have done i think as much from this room and from this podium to get that word out to americans. however, it doesn't look that way to americans. we talked earlier about americans not fully understanding issues like charter schools. i think there's a lot of misunderstandings. i think a lot of americans believe that the common core is a federal initiative. it is in many states. it has gotten a lot of national media. so that is, that's unfortunate. that is one of the issues i think that suggest that the scores we have gotten. i do not know -- anybody else? >> it's a legitimate question. your headline, the public did

not write that. >> i think parsing polls is part of our problem, but if you can allow me to do that for a moment. the headline talks about declining support an increased awareness, but last year's poll just said, before today, have you heard of the common core? when they asked in that way, only 38% had heard of the common core. it may be blasphemy to refer to another poll that came out yesterday, but that found that awareness was at 35%. that makes sense. in this poll, the first the people heard of the common core was the question that asked awareness. how much have you heard about national standards for teaching? that is a question that does beg an answer. >> i would like to just comment, because i do not necessarily think the headline as that bad. i agree that the standards are not federal standards, but the reality is in the mind of a lot of people in this country, they

have become federalized. because they become embedded in requirements at the department of education. in order to qualify for funding. when that happened, across -- it crossed the line. the initiative that began in a productive way among governors and others to come up with common core, again, there were perceptions overtaken by reality. or the reality has been overtaken by the perception. in this case, that the federal government is driving the train. they did not create it, but clearly there is a federal impact on the standards that i think is affecting how people perceive them. that fits into the larger message from the poll about the public reaction to the federal role generally. >> i think very quickly, all of us recognize that our nation's demographic is changing. we have more black and brown students and more students who are on reduced price meals. all of us in this room really believe that every single kid

needs to get access to a quality education. if we truly believe that, i think all of us have to watch our words going forward because we have to make sure that we do not lower the bar and raise the bar for others. 10, 20, 30 years ago our country will reap those -- if we leave those. we all have to lead with the charge to make sure that equity tays at the forefront. when the federal department says states have to have college and career ready standards, they did not say they needed to be common core. with that being the case, we have to make sure we keep that in mind. lastly, students do not start at one school and finish at the same school. because there is a huge mobility rate, even within baltimore county, 27% of our high school students start at one student and did not finish at that school. 40% of our school do not start at the same school and finish.

if we do not have some type of equity, even successful school systems like baltimore ounty. >> susan, do you have a question? right behind you. >> i'm at pearson. what do we do know that time and support is not just the district issue of what school districts will provide the teachers. but it is a federal issue as well, and a state issue, in terms of the ways in which teacher evaluation and student evaluation on the new standards are adding to the concerns, adding to the negativity about the common core state standards. as people aside, i think people agree the state standards are good standards when they just look at the standards.

but it is these other pieces that seem terribly unfair, not just to teachers by two parents who worry that suddenly their child is not going to do well. what can we do about that? >> i think, and you certainly know this from your work over many years and many school district, the sort of two pieces of this and they are the ones that i alluded to in the beginning. one is that there is a fundamental state responsibility here largely to make sure that teachers across the entire state, including all school district, get the kind of support they need to move ahead. and that has got to be through some sort of combination of state assistance in terms of materials, and sample lessons, and training, but also monitoring of what goes on at the local level so that there is public information about how much support teachers are getting. some states are doing this hrough good surveys. most states are not. so it is a hugely important,

for us to make sure that teachers are getting the support they need. but a. second issue is one around timelines and the reality is that was not enough careful thinking looking across these ultiple reform strategies that were put into place at the timeline questions and what we have ended up doing is telling teachers we are going to evaluate them for the first time based on how much their students grow on an assessment they have never seen on standards they are barely prepared to teach. that was a fundamental mistake. and that has got to be fixed, so teachers feel like, and parents agree, that this is a fair timeline for both adults and kids. >> i think we also have to start giving teachers, parents, and students more credit, because what this poll shows is that it's not that people hate testing. they hate the tests that their kids are taking. it is a different thing.

the more we can talk about the new tests and what they do better, the better off we're going to be because again, it is not testing the people do not like. it is the test that kids take that do not have anything productive that comes out of them. and that is starting to change. the more that we can raise awareness, the better. >> one comment. i think it is fair to say that everybody in the public education system needs to be held accountable for performance. we are operating system that is funded by tax dollars. but i think the question we are getting to hear is how is that done? if there's a perception that teachers, for example, are going to be held accountable on the basis of a single test, that does not work for a whole bunch of solid reasons which i think most of the public would nderstand. there is so much being wrapped around this that troubles people at various levels. so i would agree with the comments, but i want to be

clear. i hope we would all stand for accountability, for how we are performing as a system. we owe that to the public, but i think we also owe the public a good, reasonable discussion about how that can happen in a way that actually measures to performance. a simple test is not do that. -- does not do that. >> yes, sir? >> hi. michael robbins. there is a common theme here. when we see pushback, whether it is common core or testing or data, our media response is we have not done a good enough job at selling the benefits to parents or students. they just do not understand. i think we are going to make that shift -- we are not going to make that shift until parents and students see how it benefits them. 'm interested if you see any districts or schools that are making progress and that.

really looking at common core standards as a way for students and families to understand in advance their own learning. >> i'll jump in. in both work on a we have what we call parent university. we have done a really good job. i think we can do a much better job in informing our parents what the standards are versus what they are not. so, making sure as they leave there, they understand so they can talk about it when they around the kids. the second thing is we are having instructional shift conversations with them on what they can do in terms of homework support or support at home so they can actually have an understanding of what their child is doing during the day. i have talked to parents he said, wow. please to do that in math when i was in sixth grade. now my third and fourth grader is doing it right now. yeah, your child will be on a path to over one much sooner. we are not just saying it is a middle school problem. i believe the school system has to set up a system -- has a set of systems in place where parents get that information, but they understand what supportive home needs to look

like. because the conversations around all of this begins to shift when they feel confident in what we're doing, but they feel confident that they can support and health at home as well. >> i think your question is a smart one, because it is saying we are not doing a good enough job of medicating is a copout. i mentioned a couple examples earlier. you can look at kentucky were college readiness has grown. orlando, the students behind grade level, are starting to rise. the standards are still so new and implication is so new. it will take a while before we have thomas of old games like that. -- we have demonstrable gains. what they are focusing on is increasing the communication. one of the virtues of the common core is that it gets everyone on the same page for what students should be able to do. there are districts that are sending home postcards on the first week of school that parents can put on the refrigerator that shows at the end of the year ease of the things your kid should

know. week by week, these are the things your kids should be able to do. that helps get everyone on the same page and working together. >> your question got it something that was particularly important, though, and that is the student part of the partnership. every year our organization identifies a handful of schools across the country that served very, very poor kids that hit it out of the park in terms of student achievement. >> we got one. >> sure. but what's been so clear about those schools is how much they get the student engagement part. that helping students to see themselves as active participants in the learning process and to begin to chart their own progress is at the core of why these schools succeed. what has been interesting for us, though, is the schools have always done that, even with the old standards. but one we visit them now and they talk about how much better that works with the common core, in part because both

teachers and kids agree that the focus of the common core is on what is important, not just all that little stuff that was in the old standards. so their argument is that these new standards help them do what they have always done well, and that is really engage students in taking responsibility for their own learning. these standards help them do that better. >> a quick comment. i was with some students who were in a school that was fully implementing the standards. and they were so enthusiastic about the instructional environment and what they were doing. the engagement. they are the best ambassadors for us to explain what this means and why it is important. when i talk about doing a better job, i appreciate your comment. it is not about a copout. we do have to do a better job of communicating what this is and why it is important. >> we had a question over here.

yes, sir? >> good morning. howard county public schools. i wanted to go back to a, that was mentioned about teacher support. just wondering from the panel if you could give some insight. we often are talking about the common core from a k-12 perspective, but as we look at teacher support and preparation, we are wondering if there has been any conversation connected to higher education in terms of how we are preparing our teachers coming out. we often in public education want to blame veteran or more seasons teachers for not being up to par, up to date with some of the new teaching strategies, but we are also finding in public schools that a lot of our new teachers coming out are still struggling with this educational shift. so i just wanted the panel to maybe comment on what connections are we making at the higher education level as we are looking at teacher preparation? >> i'll start.

i want to thank my colleague. howard county and baltimore county our neighbors. in maryland, -- we are fortunate to have the p-20 council that has pushed this conversation forward. at the state level, the conversation is starting to happen. but what we're doing at the local level and school superintendents know where the teachers are coming from. we had conversations with towson university. let's have a conversation about what you are not getting from your graduates. so we can have a true partnership in terms of how we redesigned both systems to make sure we are beneficial of others. what we're doing with towson university, starting next school year, we are totally designing our school of ed. their practitioners will be retrained on what common core is and what it is not. so, we know we have a responsibility to train the

9000 teachers we have currently. what we cannot do is that two or three years down the road we have to retrain people because we are not getting what we need for institutions. so i get really excited about that. what concerns me is that is happening in the silo. that conversation is not happening statewide or on the national scale to make sure that folks are truly trained. because if you look at the practitioners at the university -- i should not say practitioners, but the professors who are trained the next crop of teachers, in some cases they have been out of the classroom for 15 years if they have been in the classroom at all. >> one of the challenges in the past, as you know, is that when you went to talk to the folks in a teacher ed program, the common response was often, our teachers go everywhere. they go across state lines. if we are in pennsylvania. they go to 50 different states.

so we could not possibly just do pennsylvania standards, because after all, they go everywhere. one of the great advantages of common core is it takes that excuse away. for the vast majority of teachers, they will be teaching the common core standards. sorry. the question, though, he comes, ok now that the excuse has gone away, how much early proactive activity are we seeing? here i think there are some bright spots, but the recent review done by the national council for teacher quality of institutions across the country looked at their very question and found not a lot of strong evidence that the changes are actually being made. so, we need to be a lot, we need to be pushing a lot more on institutions that prepare teachers to make sure that they are prepared as well as possible to teach to these new ommon standards.

>> i'm liz from the american institutes for research and i'm interestsd in result that shows that so many parents are frustrated be testling. and you probably up a nuanced reading of some of those results but i'm concerned about what that meeps for accountability, particularly state district and school accountability for student subgroups which is one of the purposes of testing was to address that so. so i'm interested in what you see this meaning for accountability in the future. >> that the a place i think where the words in the poll matter. the question that drew the most doubt from parents was the one around do you think that standardized testing helps teachers to essentially teach children better?

and they were skeptable about that and given the quality of some state tests their skepticism is fairly well founded but when you look at how they thought about things like tests for grade promotion, the ap tests, tests for high school graduation, it was very strong support. so what i think we're seeing in this poll is very consistent with what we've seen in polls in general. and that is the american people actually support testing. but they think there's been too much of it recently and they're not wrong about that. so one of the questions for me is how do we make sure that we're only administratoring the tests that actually are critical to both helping teachers in terms of improving student learning but also helping with this role of public caubtability and get away from the kind of extra

add-on testing that many districts have done sort of defensively or to keep a trend line going and sort of forgetting that the overwhelming burden that imposes is a problem. so focusing on the tests that are really important, for both student learning and for public accountability. eliminating the unnecessary one. and making sure that the tests we're giving are actually good ones that in the end is the answer, i think. >> and the quantity of testing is only half of the equation. the other part is the quality of the testing. and we know that people want tests that are a tool. people by and large absept that testing is part of learning, it is a part of life. but what they say over and over again that what they want is a test for tool for learning and teaching. so people are very comfortable with tests that can inform instruction and tests that are an early checkup to find out when a student needs more help or when a student has mastered

material and is ready to move on. so there is a measured aspect of testing that people are comfortable with. but the tests have to mean something and do something productive for them. >> i think it really is at a high level of fundamental frustration about teaching to the test and to this point if testing is what it is supposed to be i think, which is a feedback too long and a means of helping to teacher work with the students to move them along i don't think there's opposition but what i hear is this teaching to the test. there's a perception that's what's driving us. and i don't think people are comfortable with that. and we've had a long experience with this now and in the -- this is my own experience out of pennsylvania. we had places where there were i think at one time like 15 items in the standards around third grade math. what are teachers supposed to

be teaching and what are they being held accountable for? we have to have a conversation about this bauds i do think people believe in the concept of standards, dallas' point is absolutely right people move all around the country. we have to have some assurance about that. but i think what we're also seeing is the sense that people want schools to be places where students actually learn, where they thrive. and there's a frustration that it's all about the tests right now. and i think that came through in this pole and i think as long as that's the perception we have a lot of frustration if not opposition to what we're doing in public education. testing has overtaken teaching i think and that's a problem. >> butlet remember why. why it's overtaking teaching is because we don't provide teachers with the curriculum that they can teach in confidence that their kids will do fine no matter what the test

is. we're the only country on earth who make teachers make it up. so it gets back to this issue of support. we bad mouth those who teach to the test but the reality is that's the only thing many feel they can do because standards don't themselves provide enough guidance for teaching and this is this whole issue of are we providing enough curricular support for teachers so they do not have to make up for what they're going to teach and guess what's going to be on the test and teach to that. so this is an issue where america's gotten it very wrong because our teachers feel like they have to make it up and we've got to fix that problem. it's coming up. it's on its way. in fact. you're going to get two mics. >> i'm a former principal as we will but not a superteannt.

a tough job. i would like to change the discussion. one, i'm reassured 50b9 all the questions about parents. >> introduce yourself. >> arnold, public advocacy for kids. i thought i did that before i had the microphone. but i'm reassured by all the questions around parents and i'm stunned actually by the high number of parents not only opposed to standardized testing but opposed to the common core itself. i think if we don't get that right we're going to lose the core. im just going to make a flat-out stainlts and school districts like baltimore where we have parent involvement but i would like to change the discussion a little bit. i'm looking at the score card around education of this administration and if you were to recommend to ane duncan how to get before he leaves office how to get an a from the c or

the c minus that he is getting on this report, what would you recommend that the u.s. department do differently to regain the confidence of the american public? >> well, let me jump in on that. i think it's a great question. there is certainly a feeling on the part of a lot of local school officials that the federal government is dictating what they should do. and in fact, the overreach issue -- this is not a political statement but i can just tell you local school board members and superattend pts that i talk to democrat and republican and all over the country, there is this feeling that the federal department of education is well outside of its lane in terms of dictating what schools should be able to do. not even through the regular regulatory process, through things like dear colleague letters and other statements that are driving policy without

even an opportunity for a fum conversation. so that's number one. and i think secondly there's a sense when you go to places in this country where there are very small school districts super attendant wears four or five different hats they're not in a position to implement some of these policies the way others might be. there's a bit of an understanding that there's a bit of a tin ear from the difference among school districts. the policy is inflexible. so at some level i think they're well motivated in what they're trying to do i think in some of the initiatives but the fact of the matter is i think there's a fundamental disconnect between what they're saying and what they're directing school districts to do and how distributes actually operate. so i think there needs to be much more flexibility and i think frankly respect for the role that local school officials play. i think they feel disrespected.

>> let me provide a slightly different perspective here. when i think about federal policy in where it is important, i think about it as leverage, important leverage to help education leaders to do what they know they need to do but it is often hard to get done. that is especially important around issues of equity and the federal role has been most important there. sending a message to school systems that all kids have value, all kids matter any have to do better by the groups of kids you have ignored in the past. whether you are talking the kids of color, poor kids, kids with disabilities or english learner. that federal role has been important.

even though it makes some people uncomfortable. it makes lots of people uncomfortable. that is why federal leverage is important. this administration has shows and -- has chosen to use leverage less frankly on those issues but on other issues that most education leaders think are important. certainly the effort to create common core standards as you know, started with the states, not the the federal government. the federal government putting andrage behind college career ready standards is something that most local and state educators appreciate. the push to evaluate educators, leaders and teachers more honestly, is a push that most leaders appreciate. the issue of really putting energy in turning around historically low performing schools is a push that most leaders appreciate. what they don't appreciate is the way this push occurred.

much more administrative detail, much more management of innards of this than is typical with federal policy. i think it is important as we think about this, the argument is not that in order to get an a, the federal government should abandon those important pieces of work. i think most people would argue it shouldn't. what it should have done, however, the more -- be more careful about not micromanaging the details and getting the timeline to be more fair and sensible. there was a rush to do this because it is important for kids. i think that this reality of how complicated it is to ask a big systems to do this well was under thought.

it is about fair timelines that have a sense of urgency because kids can't really wait. that don't get beyond what people can reasonably get done. >> if i could make a quick comment, i don't disagree. but maybe we are talking to different leaders. there is, what is missing here the role of the state. education is and should be fundamentally a state responsibility. the federal role should supplement that. even state leaders are frustrated by the federal role we are seeing. i completely agree on the issues of equity. there is an important federal role. but there is a sense that it has outgrown itself and it is driving education policy at the state and local levels. the poll we are discussing today indicates the public isn't comfortable with that either. >> i'm not sure the public will

ever be entirely comfortable with the push on equity, let's be clear. the only way we could get an a is to abandon that pressure. i don't think anybody in this room wants that to happen. i certainly hope not. again, the question is, the leverage got beyond leverage, it got into more of the innards and the timelines and is probably not the right thing for federal policy to do. that doesn't mean what it attempted to do is wrong. most agree it is right. how do we get the balance back where it belongs? >> in baltimore county, we are part of the group that is set of school systems that educate 1.1 million students around the country. they are different from the councils of city schools. what we say to each other is our school systems are changing and we are majority minority school systems.

we have been working to work with the administration and members of congress to reauthorize no child left behind. we agree that needs to happen. even though we do not see any insight for any time soon. we are pushing on the fact that what is the federal role, the federal role should be that every state should have college and career ready standards for every single child. then allowing states to develop accountability systems in conjunction with the department that will measure that for every single child. then allowing the support of the state and local level to get it done. we have been allocating for the fact that the federal role in education is needed. unless there is a federal push around equity, it is not going to happen. if we go state-by-state some , states will take it more seriously than others. the federal role does matter. as where they have to shift their thinking from compliance to support so they can support local systems to a better degree.

>> your question was about looking forward. there is a deep and abiding believe among americans that education should be the great equalizer. standards are what equalize education. that is the focus that we need to keep now. states, school districts, individual classroom teachers can decide how to get to those standards. those standards make sure that every student in the country graduates ready to succeed in college and career. >> back here. yes? >> thank you. michael, ceo of the national association for music education. in all of the responses you have talked a lot about the role federal, state, local entities, and about the need of practicing teachers, parents, and students to support the common core. mediad media -- any

analysis will show you that the rollout was done not by political leaders but by corporate leaders. corporate leaders don't have much credibility in this area with parents, practicing teachers and students. what can be done from what you see in this poll and your experience to get practicing teachers, parents, and students to be promoters of the common core? which clearly is not happening in the public forum, like it or not. >> we need to elevate the voices of teachers. in your introduction you mentioned teachers don't feel like their voices are heard. we see this in a lot of polls. in the scholastic primary sources poll, we see teachers do not feel their voices are heard outside of their individual school. we need to do whatever we can to elevate the voices of teachers, parents, and students. they are really busy. they are teaching and learning.

they are supporting their kids, supporting their teachers. that is a challenge. we need to figure out how to do that more. how to make sure teachers feel they have a voice in what is happening. and they have a role to play in decisions about how the common core is getting implemented. >> there is actually a bit more. you seem to be suggesting that nationally the only voices that got heard around common core have been business voices. i would challenge you on that issue. in many states, actually, especially states where this issue has heated up, the testimony in support of common core has come not largely from business people but from classroom teachers. they are filming -- they are filming videos in their own classrooms. they are tweeting about common core. there is actually a lot of grassroots activity among teachers who believe these standards are vastly superior to

the earlier versions in their state and are fighting for them. maybe too late, in many places, in terms of what we would have chosen. but the only voices out there are not business voices. >> one other comment, if i may. there is a lot of concern on the part of some people about some involvement of certain members of the business community trying to profit from public education. we are pushing back strongly on the profiteering notion. i would also say it is important that business leaders, along with others are engaged in this conversation about standards that we are expecting. it is unfortunate people see it being driven by business leaders. this is coming from a lot of folks who have embraced this movement as something that will fundamentally ensure the equity

issue and address it. and also in education forward. but we certainly welcome the engagement of the business community around that. we need to make sure we have others, most notably students themselves, who can be talking about the importance of the standards. >> thank you. robert with the rural school and community trust. this is a quick question to you. we talk about equity and diversity, and language. it is puzzling to me that all the questions were asked in english. in rural america, it is becoming more multicultural and multilingual. it may be an issue of resources, but i'm wondering what voices are lost in this conversation, particularly with parents when

there were not other language choices when you took your survey. >> you bring up a good point. it is one thing we are trying to address. if you go to the website you , will see we are addressing that. it is a resource issue in terms of coming up with the second script in spanish. we do not have the resources now. it is something we want to do. we have put up our website for support to make that happen. it is a point well taken. >> we promised panelists a chance to have a final wrapup. each individual. we are at that point of the program where we should allow that to happen. i will allow you to decide who wants to go first. final thoughts, a summary, address issues that didn't come up in questioning, it is your microphone. >> as a superintendent, i always let the board start. [laughter] >> successful superintendent.

first of i appreciate the opportunity to be here. a couple of closing thoughts. getting back to the federal role. i want to be clear, i think the federal role in ensuring equity is essential. we embrace that. our concern is that it has gone beyond that. as katy mentioned, it is how we operate programs. i think that has reached too far. something else i would like to think about, public education exists everywhere in this country. interestingly, school board exists in every state. not through a federal mandate that each state decided on its own for different reasons that it was important that the education system be led locally. i think that local leadership role for school boards is critical. i think it represents something bigger than local control, a word i try not to use. it represents community

ownership and public schools. people want to see these schools as their assets, something that is strengthening their community. the leadership of local school boards is critical to making that happen. their voice needs to be heard. it needs to be reflected in the conversations about policy. our goal as the national organization is to help ensure that these local officials are in conversations with state and federal officials to make good education policy. it truly is a federal system. has to be all these players working together. far,the balance shifts too i think that is where the public starts getting concerned. in my view that is what is reflected in this poll. >> so i think it is important to remember coming out of this poll today just where awareness is among the public. we know that may be a bare majority of people have even heard of the common core. those who have, have learned

about it from media sources and from facebook and from twitter and not from classroom teachers or school communications. that is driving a lot of the conversations that we are hearing. i will ask you to imagine what this would have looked like if we had more broad awareness of the common core. that was informed by teachers and educators. and by the local leaders who are working on the ground to implement common core. the one thing that we see consistently in all of these polls is strong support for consistent standards that make sure all kids are ready to succeed when they graduate from high school. >> i will pick up a bit with this thought. the changing complexion of america. this is the first school year in american history where a majority of our students are

students of color. we have not as a country done well by those students for decades. we need to. both to the shore -- both to assure their future and to assure our national future. it is very clear that having some common standards is critically important piece of making sure all of our children, not just some, live up to their promise. what this poll says to me is we have got to do a better job of getting the american people to connect and making sure the american people connect around -- we have got to do a better job of getting the american people connect around making sure the zip code doesn't determine education quality to these common standards. we've got to do a better job of helping people understand. we have to make sure we do a better job of providing teachers with the support they need to teach a curriculum with confidence.

>> three quick things. thank you for doing this. if we are going to remain the foremost superpower in terms of our nation we have to make sure education is right for every single kid in our country. second, making sure that as our demographic changes, making sure all voices are heard. this,e do a survey like make sure we capture those people who may not traditionally do a survey. the third thing is, making sure that our teachers feel like the voices are heard in a way that matters, and is cared for. that is the reason why perceptions among their parents may be the way they are. parents are going to go to their child's teacher before they go to the child's principal. many parents do not know who the superintendent is a must they appear on the news. they want to make sure that

teacher feels supported. we have to make sure that we have curriculum and resources to which will lead to higher make them feel confident. results. >> thank you. join me in thanking our panelists today. [applause] and, we want to thank you for outstanding, excellent questions. thank you. [applause] i want to end with a couple of announcements and some thank you's. thank you to our friends at gallup, we have enjoyed working with so much over the years. at gallup university. the executive director at gallup education, and codirector of the -- pdk-gallup poll.

we have several staff that are involved. joan richardson, and ashley kincaid, the executive director of our collegiate honor society. we have other staff that are not here that were instrumental in this. greg patterson, managing editor of content. managing editor for design. and also, our graphic designer who helped us put together several slides. finally, i would be remiss if i not affectnk -- did , irene, who is in the audience. a lifelong educator. she is been supportive in helping us. and our daughter jennifer who works in research, involved in policy. three final announcements. there is a lot more information

at the pdkpoll.org website. something brand-new this year, we actually held back half of the results for a second report that we will be sharing with everyone on september 16. results we have in the second report are going to highlight findings about teacher evaluations and preparation. support for children, undocumented immigrants, college affordability, and the importance of college and americans receptivity towards school change. there is good information coming out in that report that will be released my final announcements, september 16. the board knows this, i will retire next june. so, this is the last time i will have a chance to present the findings. remember when i was a high

school principal in my 30's was the first time i saw the pdk gallup poll. i remember taking that pole to a staff meeting and saying we have to look at the graduation requirements. it has been a joy and honor for me to be able to work with the pdk gallup poll for the last 10 years. it has been a highlight. thank you very much. thank you. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] c-span, arning on look at the impact of russian intervention in ukraine on the

global community. live at 7:00 a.m. eastern, "washington journal" examines a report on poverty and looks at air quality act of 1967. texas governor rick perry is an washington, d.c. today for a discussion on the new politics of immigration. we will be live at this event, hosted by the heritage foundation and the national journal. starting at 11:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> this month, c-span presents debates on what makes america andt, evolution, genetically modified foods. issues spotlight with utterance .ealth care irs, student healt issues including global warming

and fighting infectious disease. in our history to work from america's historic places. find our tv schedule one week in advance on c-span.org and let us know what you think about the programs you are watching. -3400.s at 202-626 or e-mail us at comments @cspan.org. c-span, we night on examine opposing views on climate change. channelfrom weather cofounder, who challenges the idea of global warming. here's a preview. around the world, science is focused on this great catastrophe unfolding because of man's years of fossil fuels. they are at their meetings, it was not all scientists -- it was

environmentalists, politicians. a consortium of people with agendas of one world government led by taxation on the nations that burn fossil fuels to help the third world countries. this was it. the scientists were invited to international conferences, glamorous places around the world, and they compiled these great reports and issued them and publish them. the entire focus was adopted by the press around the world. and it became a great concern. meanwhile, al gore is writing his second book, "an inconvenient truth your code you know what happens from that, that is a sci-fi movie. [laughter] there is al gore with his academy award, "an inconvenient

truth," best documentary 2007. then al gore and the u.n. ipcc received the nobel prize and the global warming scare has peaked. >> a look at both sides of the climate change debate. followed by the testimony of former epa administrators before a senate environment subcommittee. that is tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span. now, a panel looks at how russia's intervention in ukraine has affected u.s. foreign policy and the global community. this discussion was hosted by brookings institution. it is 90 minutes.

>> an event looking at russia and the future international order put on by brookings. here asu for joining us our auditorium at brookings is being renovated. today about an important point. russia's relations with the international order. the idea of partnership and .ooperation with russia replaced with talk of isolation and sanctions and confrontation. that has occurred at a time when it's not just a bilateral relationship. the entire world is interconnected in international order through the global economy and common interests such as counterterrorism and global

climate change. we need to see what russia's place would be toward the and what the order western response will be toward russia over the next 5-10 years. looking to other parts of the world as well, we want to ask, what is the role of the brits in this new era? we recently saw at the summit in brazil when putin was embraced by the leaders. is there a divide opening up in the international community? we are joined by a terrific panel to discuss this. the president of the brookings institution and the author of several oaks in russia and the author of an article today on food and in politico -- putin in politico magazine, which was edited by one of our other panelists, susan glasser was the -- the editor

-- aormer washington senior fellow at the center for of. and europe and co-author -- i believe that is coming out early next year with new added chapters. there is quite a lot of new material added over the last few months. we're going to open up with a conversation with the panelists and then, after an hour or so, open up to questions from the audience. hashtag on twitter. ukraine.

, with russiayou breaking bad over the last few months, what does that mean for the international order and international cooperation? busince there are three a -- three of us, let me reiterate my appreciation for my counterpart and the terrific work that brookings has done over the years. it has a particular contribution to make as a result of the carnegie moscow center. a lot of us rely on what comes out of that building in this building. i will make a couple of points at the beginning with what i

suspect will play into the conversation. i would say that the single most important and obvious issue here with regard to what the effect and be on globalization whetherovernance is boudin prevails are not -- boudin prevails are not. it should be the goal of the united states government and other like-minded governance -- governments around the world that victory for vladimir putin in ukraine's is just not an option. we can talk about that in terms of what's happening today and what will be happening this weekend. one reason i stressed that is, i would hope something that could be a matter of consensus among with if he does get away

violating what has been an ironclad principle of international law for quite some , a very important guiding principle of the post-soviet russian government when it was under borussia to and -- under -- if he werein to get away with that, it would establish a precedent that could wreak havoc in many parts of the world. putin, since boudin et away he did give scott free, that might have given other leaders elsewhere in the world the notion that they could be more aggressive in

pressing unilaterally and with force, territorial and maritime claims against other countries. the people's republic of china. it was a significant that, last 2013, the chinese government was thinking about putting this movable oil rig in waters claimed by vietnam, but decided not to. they did move into vietnamese waters. calls russia's breaking bad could be contagious if it is not punished -- i'm using that contained and -- deterred.

another point goes to what russia can do if and when it starts breaking good again. we the international community really need russia as the world's largest territorial state. a country that is made up of an extraordinarily talented and productive population. a country that has been on its way to being part of the solution to the world's problems . to once again be part of the solution and not be a problem itself. it is not just a way of slapping putin around to shut down the g-8. we needed the g-8 and the g 20. it is in the g 20. thatve russia in a mood almost looks for chances to