|
|
9486 in the collection
Diploma Project raises bar for state
Facts be damned--they just keep repeating the lies. Thanks to Steve Davidson for insisting that Relevance, not rigor, should drive the educational curriculum.
January 28, 2008
Dr. Gary Nixon, Executive Director
Tennessee State Board of Education
9th Floor, Andrew Johnson Tower
710 James Robertson Parkway
Nashville, TN 37243-1050
Dear Dr. Nixon and Board Members:
In Governor Bredesen’s 2007 "State of the State" address, he related plans to raise education standards by calling for every high school student to take four years of high school mathematics and announced that he would ask the state school Board of Education and the Tennessee Department of Education to review the curriculum throughout the state's school system and work to make it "more specific, more rigorous, and better aligned with what our children really need to succeed in college or the workplace."
This is similar to what Bill Gates told a congressional committee on March 7, 2007 when he said, "the U.S. cannot maintain its economic leadership unless our work force consists of people who have the knowledge and skills needed to drive innovation…We simply cannot sustain an economy based on innovation unless our citizens are educated in math, science and engineering." In February 2007, the Aspen Institute released a report, paid for in part by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, calling for increased regulation and standardization of American classrooms.
How, exactly, will increased standardization lead to innovation?
If Mr. Gates truly desires innovation, then he should work to free our best teachers from the corporate-created shackles currently preventing them from (1) risk taking and (2) creative problem posing, two behaviors that lead to innovation in the first place.
More importantly, Gov. Bredesen and Mr. Gates must work to free our children from these same shackles. There is nothing innovative about repeated testing and nothing innovative about reducing the K-12 curriculum to math and science, gods who politicians want every American child to worship. Governor Tom Vilsack (Iowa) demonstrated his understanding of the misguided intentions of non-educators when he recently said, "We don't need a nation of standardized test-takers. We need a generation of creative risk takers."
The governor also proposed an investment in personalizing the high school experience as a means to engage students in a rigorous curriculum. In addition, he wants to ensure that all eighth- and tenth-grade students take the appropriate ACT test, which will be used to help create individual learning plans for each high school student. This is a contradiction of his first proposal. There is no room for creating individual learning plans when the curriculum continues to be narrowed.
The word "rigor" is used to suggest that our students are not receiving an education that will allow them "to compete on a global scale." Rigor implies "strictness, severity, harshness, inflexibility, and the inability to respond to stimuli" which is an antithesis of effective pedagogy and meaningful learning. The statement that "we…are behind much of the world in math and science" is a mantra spoken by education bashers and parroted by those who should know better (i.e., educators). What research supports this claim? Even international test comparisons such as PIRLS, PISA, or TIMMS do not uphold it.
Psychometrician Gerald Bracey states that although schooling no doubt is a necessary ingredient for successful human development and growth, how well students perform in the classroom isn't necessarily the best indicator of a nation's economic future. Education, as it turns out, is not nearly as important to economic competitiveness as educators would like to think. Researchers for the World Economic Forum, in its Global Competitiveness Report, showed that, despite widespread criticisms, "The United States remains the most competitive nation in the world."
From 1950 to 2007 Americans have won 208, or 57%, of the 363 Nobel Prizes awarded in medicine, physics and chemistry. The sky is not falling.
Professor of chemistry and mathematics, Dr. Dennis Redovich asked, "What is the rationale for all…high school students passing three (or four) advanced courses in math and science to receive a high school diploma? What is the rationale for 'all' high school graduates satisfying the requirements for admission to a four-college program? There is none!"
Higher mathematics, except as an extremely important college entrance requirement, may be the most insignificant academic subject taken by students in elementary and secondary schools. According to the Department of Workforce Development, higher mathematics proficiency is not important for everyday living nor is it required for more than 90% of jobs. Only 5% of jobs in the United States in the 2000s might require higher math and or science course work. But high stakes mathematics testing and higher mathematics course requirements are being used to retain students in lower elementary grades and prevent students from graduation from high school. Why is testing math proficiency more important than any other academic subject, other than reading, at every level of K-12 education?
The reason is that mathematics is an academic subject for which tests can be easily prepared and scored quantitatively. Those who wish to expose public education as an academic failure can conveniently use mathematics test scores as evidence that public education is failing. The political, business, and education leaders…who are responsible for education policies…ignore the actual employment statistics and projections. Only selected statistics and anecdotal stories that support the spurious claims about the crisis in American K-12 education and future skill worker shortage are reported.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics (2007) predicts that most of the education and training occupations with the largest job growth from 2006 to 2016 will require on-the-job training or work experience in a related field (69%). Next on the list, at only 12.5%, are occupations that require a bachelor’s degree.
Two facts that have been ignored: (1) All high school students are not going to college and (2) all college students are not attending because of their love, or need, of math (or science). Adding another unnecessary high school requirement to the already nearly-full plate of existing requirements will do nothing more than prevent students from making educational plans suited to their individual interests. If students are interested in English, music, drafting, history, art, science, civics – and yes, even math – they may choose (called electives) to take the courses that fit their individual plan, as he proposed. It just is not possible to "standardize" American (or Tennessee) education and at the same time make it more "innovative" or "individualized" for our students.
Cognitive scientist Eric Jensen calls for educational plans tailored to each student's strengths and weaknesses, allowing for students to pursue multiple paths of learning, growth, and development. Arguably, such an approach is far more likely to produce the type of innovative thinkers Mr. Gates calls for than is the standardized approach he currently funds, and which the governor proposes.
Those who are calling for more math requirements evidently are lacking in their own math skills. An unintended and detrimental by-product of adding two (or three) more requirements will result in the deletion of that same number of electives. There are only a limited number of periods in which a student can arrange his/her classes. If additional math, science, P.E., and personal finance classes are added, the opportunities for vocational training will be reduced or eliminated, as well as disrupting the vital continuity of fine arts classes. There will be many students who will have to sacrifice elective classes (a) that are important to their non-math/non-science career choice and (b) that may be personally important.
Unfortunately, traditional educators tend to favor modes of teaching geared toward left-brain thinking, while downplaying the right-brain approaches. Left-brain scholastic subjects focus on logical thinking, analysis, and accuracy. Right-brained subjects, on the other hand, focus on aesthetics, inventiveness, and creativity. Why should one type of student-learner be targeted at the expense of the others?
These changes are being driven by the draconian, one-size-fits-all, law of No Child Left Behind, not because these changes are educationally, personally, or socially beneficial. How many math and science classes are actually needed to succeed in life…or in the majority of workplaces? Retired educator Terry Olson stated that:
Except for the tiny number of people who pursue careers in mathematics, science, engineering, computer programming, accounting (maybe), medical research, academic research (involving statistics), or professional gambling, who needs algebra?
Not bankers, teachers (the ones who don't teach algebra), nurses, doctors, musicians, real estate salesmen, clerks, longshoremen, truck drivers, carpenters, painters, architects (I don't think), firemen, policemen, warehousemen, gardeners, laborers, maids, restaurant workers, journalists, diplomats, Wal-Mart CEO's, or even school board members.
One goal of State Board of Education is to increase the graduation rate (reduce drop-outs). I posit that increasing these "requirements" will also increase the drop-out rate, thus reducing the graduation rate. There will be demise in vocational education programs and fewer students enrolled in fine arts. I envision fewer successes and less inspired students which can only result in more negative consequences, especially with those who are already considered at-risk. To re-quote the governor, is this really "what our children…need to succeed in college or the workplace?" I think not. Relevance, not rigor, should drive the educational curriculum.
Respectfully,
Steve A. Davidson, Ed.D.
by Gary Nixon
Today's economy demands a more qualified work force and schools that emphasize higher-order skills and critical thinking.
In 1996, the National Governors Association and executives throughout the nation created the American Diploma Project to help states improve the education pipeline. This national movement is centered on collaboration among higher education, K-12 and business communities fostering consensus regarding the minimum skills of a high school graduate. During the past year, Tennessee has taken this national movement to heart, embodied today in the Tennessee Diploma Project. The goal is to prepare all of Tennessee's young people for postsecondary education, work and citizenship.
Advertisement
The Tennessee Diploma Project includes several significant strategies to help Tennessee students reach the higher bar. First, Tennessee has realigned the academic standards in English, mathematics and science to reflect the skills measured on national tests like the ACT, SAT and the National Assessment of Educational Progress, which is known as the "Nation's Report Card."
These skills reflect the type of understanding and application that both postsecondary institutions and employers demand. ACT's research clearly shows that the reading and mathematics skills needed for success in freshman college work are about the same skills needed in jobs such as carpentry and electrical and plumbing contracting. The "Ready Core" academic requirements are the same for students bound for college as for those bound for the workplace.
Four years of math required
Second, beginning with this year's class of seventh-graders, all high school students will be required to take mathematics each year, especially the senior year.
The rationale is simple: Even Peyton Manning couldn't sit out a year in the NFL and then expect to successfully compete on day one. Tennessee seniors must do the same with mathematics. They must be ready for the full-contact sport of life on the first day after graduation.
Third, Tennessee has eliminated the high-stakes exams known as the Gateway exams. Instead, more rigorous tests in the content areas will count a percentage of a student's final grade. Our goal is for students and teachers to take the exam seriously while receiving an authentic indicator of academic standing in relationship to rigorous national measures.
After several years of administering these new tests, a statistically reliable benchmark will be established to hold schools accountable for the disparity in average classroom grades vs. test performance. This unique view of assessing student learning has the potential to serve as a key indicator of how well rigorous standards are stressed in the classroom.
These changes are far-reaching, exciting and will include increased professional development for teachers in the transition. Ultimately, you can be assured high standards and higher expectations are well worth the effort for all Tennessee students, whether they are bound for education after high school or the work force.
Gary Nixon, Ed.D., is executive director of the Tennessee State Board of Education.
— Gary Nixon, with rebuttal by Steve Davidson
e-mail
2008-01-28
INDEX OF OUTRAGES
Pages: 380
[1] 2 3 4 5 6 Next >> Last >>
|
