Common core is a pretty interesting curriculum. There is something similar for science (I don't remember the name). Arizona teaches Common Core math but not the science version of it. It links things together across subjects at a higher density ... stuff that, when I was a kid, I did on my own time. I think I would have enjoyed Common Core a lot as a kid.

Finland has an education program that goes along the same lines that cuts across all of the subject matters.

The downside is that common core is great for neurotypical kids ... and not a kid on the Autism spectrum.

Common core is also weak on drills and practice. It's great for learning but not for mastery. That's me being raised in a first-generation Taiwanese family and my martial arts experience in my 20s talking. Without the drilling that happens after learning, the kid never develops sufficient grit and discipline. There is a tendency to short-circuit. You think you can stop when you "learned" it, and never dive deeper. You fool yourself into thinking you know the material, but you don't. (Personal experience). Basic skills are not practiced to the point of effortlessness, so building advanced skills on top of basic skills is fraught.

> Common core is a pretty interesting curriculum.

Common Core is a set of standards that curricula need to meet, not a curriculum. It may seem nitpicky, but it's an important distinction considering the amount of hate lumped on to Common Core because of shitty curricula that implement it.

I think the standards are great, and well-designed curricula (as it sounds like Arizona has), are fantastic.

When my kids were starting school, I looked up Common Core. At the time, some of the states had published their standards. My impression was that the standards seemed remarkably "normal" if I may use that word. It was pretty much the same subject matter that I learned in school as a kid.