Date post: | 06-Apr-2018 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | michael-d-ballantine |
View: | 217 times |
Download: | 0 times |
of 12
8/3/2019 Educational Standards - An Analysis for America
1/12
CAMPAIGN TO ELECT MIKE BALLANTINE PRESIDENT 2012
Educational Standards
in AmericaAn analysis on current standards andrecommendations for changes to the
American Educational Model
Michael D. Ballantine Green Party
12/5/2011
This document provides a brief summary of the history of educational standards inthe US as well as some practical recommendations for improving educationaloutcomes.
8/3/2019 Educational Standards - An Analysis for America
2/12
8/3/2019 Educational Standards - An Analysis for America
3/12
Changing How We Teach Over the past 50 years, America has spent untold sums trying to findthe right formula to teach our youth. In essence, we are fitting square pegs into round holes. No one-size
fits all plan will meet the needs of a multi-cultural, multi-ethnic society. Further, with differing levels of
development, no one set of standards can meet the needs of students who mature at varying rates.
Hence, our proposal to move to Individual Educational Plans (IEP) for each student.
Prior to current computer capabilities, the idea that we could offer an IEP for each student would have
been crazy. However, we are in the 21st century and computer processing speed along with the
availability of wi-fi make offering this type of program affordable and accessible to nearly every student in
America. The current system of moving students through grade levels with expected standards for each
grade level bears little resemblance to how children actually learn. Some children learn faster and some
learn more slowly, whereas other children have personal difficulties that inhibit performance. Despite this,
teachers are expected to teach 40 students based on rigid standards with the expected outcome that all
40 students will master the material at the same timeand perform well on tests to determine if the teacher is
re-hired. That is just crazy. If a few students have
trouble, it slows down the class and all the students
fall behind. The solution by teachers has been to dumb
down the lessons and teach to the test. Can you blame
them? Our students fall behind each year despite
the fact that we continue to throw huge money at this
problem. It's time to break the paradigm. It's time for
IEPs. We should require all students to master a subjectbefore moving on to the next level. Watch Sir Ken
Robinson, a California educator, explain how our current system is failing students:
Long detailed version
Short, fun, interesting version
We propose changing our school system to be more European. We know that is a "bad" idea because
Europeans are not like us but their students are finishing school and are more successful in life. In fact,
the German economy is humming along because the Germans have invested in their students. Our
proposal is for an IEP plan for every student from the age of 3 until about 14 when a student normally
completes the eighth grade. All students will follow the same basic educational track although some
students could be advanced and some slower. At the end of eighth grade, every student would take a
national merit exam to determine which program he or she would attend. In high school, there would be
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mCbdS4hSa0shttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4Uhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4Uhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mCbdS4hSa0s8/3/2019 Educational Standards - An Analysis for America
4/12
three tracks. The first track is for students who do not perform well on the merit exam, the second for
moderate performance, and the third for high-achievement. Students who do not achieve well would be
offered a variety of vocational/trade programs with 50% class-time and 50% real-world apprenticeships.
Students would work in local companies at a sub-minimum wage and employers would receive tax credits
to support this program. Those students achieving moderate performance would be given opportunities
to study technical and professional programs which may or may not lead to college. Finally, the third-tier
students would attend college-preparatory programs with the intention of going on to university after
graduation.
Criticisms of this type of program are valid. Our intention of putting students into educational tracks is not
to deny students the opportunity to go to college but to insure that upon graduation, each student has
sufficient skills to earn a living. We believe that motivated students can overcome earlier difficulties and
eventually go on to college. We want to support those students as well but the current system of
emphasizing college over work makes no sense. Statistically, nearly 70% of high school graduates go onto college but only half will graduate. How many of
those students have to bear the expense of reeducating
themselves at night or accept employment below
what they might have achieved had they had the
opportunity to learn a trade or technical skill as a youth.
We consider the failure to adequately prepare
students for jobs upon graduation to be ethically
immoral.
We propose allocating $50 billion per year for 5 years in
block grants to local schools to help with transition to our "ABC" program. We do not believe that
Washington should tell local schools how to meet their goals. We believe local schools can best
determine how to educate their students for the 21st century. The current common-core standards are an
excellent start for determining acceptable educational outcomes. However, we believe that grade content
standards should be eliminated and replaced with content standards that determine mastery. Further, the
entire NCLB act should be annulled and neighborhood schools granted exceptions from compliance with
the many educational laws that current add costs instead of improve student performance.
Professionals like Sal Khan and his Khan Academy have proven that education can be delivered in a cost
effective fun way.
Sal Khan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gM95HHI4gLkhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gM95HHI4gLk8/3/2019 Educational Standards - An Analysis for America
5/12
Achieving Mastery
Other nations are moving beyond America:
South Korea replaces textbooks with notebooks
South Korea uses robots to teach English
How we deliver education is changing. We have to think beyond the traditional four walls and think
instead of unlimited possibilities. As long as we are stuck with a 19th century model of education, the
American public school system can never regain its former preeminence. We need to begin thinking of
virtual reality education and teachers as Avatars if we are going to prepare our students for the
competition of the 21st century.
Virtual classrooms
If, you think we cannot afford this, then you do not understand the problem. America cannot afford to be
number 20 in the world when it comes to education. We need to be either number one or number two.
Ceding educational leadership to any other nation is the same as ceding economic strength. Education is
not a cost, it is an investment. It is an investment in our citizens, in our future, and in our society. We
need to stop pointing fingers and start pointing to solutions. We believe our proposals are steps in the
right direction and we ask your support as well as for your ideas on how we can educate our students for
the 21st century. Let the past 50 years become a lesson not repeated.The Effectiveness of Standards
The civil rights legislation of the 1960s ushered in a new period of educational exploration. Educators
began to implement ideas developed during the previous decade to enhance the learning experience and
prepare students for a more diverse multi-cultural society. This led to organizing and institutionalizing
hidden curriculum, also known as critical pedagogy. Educators made a number of changes in curriculum
at the same time as implementing desegregation policies (Orfield, 2010, p. 337). Unfortunately, the
curriculum used lacked the relevant cultural comparatives necessary to educate minorities. When coupled
with new hidden curriculum designed to increase the secular nature of students, conflict developed within
the psyche of inner-city schools leading to poor performance among inner-city youth. This conflict resulted
in demanding students choose between a parents worldview and a teachers (Li, 2005). In the majority of
cases, students preferred their parents worldview classifying teachers as out of touch or teaching
useless stuff. This situation continued to deteriorate throughout the 1980s and eventually a decision was
made to create a standard for education to attempt to improve student performance.
http://www.fluency.org/Binder_Haughton_Bateman.pdfhttp://www.reuters.com/video/2011/07/29/south-korea-classrooms-to-go-fully-digit?videoId=217632480http://www.joannejacobs.com/2010/12/robots-teach-english-in-south-korea/http://www.educationworld.com/a_tech/tech010.shtmlhttp://www.fluency.org/Binder_Haughton_Bateman.pdfhttp://www.reuters.com/video/2011/07/29/south-korea-classrooms-to-go-fully-digit?videoId=217632480http://www.joannejacobs.com/2010/12/robots-teach-english-in-south-korea/http://www.educationworld.com/a_tech/tech010.shtml8/3/2019 Educational Standards - An Analysis for America
6/12
During the Clinton Administration, legislation requiring schools to implement a standards regime for both
content and assessment was passed (NAE, 2009). The intent of this legislation while well-meaning,
resulted in an emphasis on standards at the expense of curriculum and teaching. In effect, standards
became rigid forcing curriculum to adapt and fit within the constructed context instead of being used as
measurement of end result. Teaching in a standards driven environment created unintended
consequences of school districts trying to game the
results or teach to the test. This unhealthy focus on
meeting standards changed the objective of
education from one of learning, to one of meeting
standards. There is no room for excellence in this
type of program.
In response to the failure of the Clinton
Administrations reform efforts, President Bush
proposed the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act.
Many, including the author, consider the NCLB a
blatant attempt to abuse the standards process to
destroy the public teachers unions as well as
privatize public schools for the benefit of corporate
donors. Continuing the reform effort, President
Obama made several cosmetic modifications to the program to address the worst side effects of the
program but no one can show that the movement to standards has improved educational outcomes. One
might surmise that standards where never the problem. Some, like the author, believe that desegregation
was done without consideration of any potential negative side effects and was presumed to be inherently
the right thing to do. To gain better control over expected standards, a majority of states have banded
together to form what is better known as Common-core Standards to be applied throughout the United
States.
Objective of Standards
President Clintons legislation, the Educate America Act of 1994 attempted to prescribe standards of
content broadly in a variety of subjects without being too specific (NAE, 2009). The NCLB act focused on
implementing assessment standards to provide accountability to stakeholders and force public schools
into compliance or face closure. Whereas, the objective of the standards legislation was to improve
school performance, instead of the standard being seen as the minimum, it became the maximum (NAE,
2009). A second objective of the standards movement was to provide a measurement of school
improvement and reward teachers and schools that performed well. To encourage schools to continually
improve, each year the standard of measure increases. This had the unfortunate effect of creating a
8/3/2019 Educational Standards - An Analysis for America
7/12
moving target for failing schools to hit with little regard for the make-up of a schools student-body. Given
the continued poor performance by American students when compared to OECD countries, American
students continue to rank near the bottom in math and science (Alliance, 2008). It is still too early to say
whether the latest modifications will have a positive impact but many, including this author, believe it is
too little, too late.
Effectiveness of Standards
One of the primary criticisms is the efforts by
many teachers to teach to the test (NAE,
2009). With so much at stake, including
potential loss of employment, school closure,
and loss of students to Charter schools, many
administrators and teachers feel they mustperform well. Instead of continuing to teach a
broad range of subjects to their students,
teachers limit classes to mandatory curriculum
and test preparation reducing the time normally
devoted to Humanities and Social Sciences
(NAE, 2009). This distortion of purpose has
reduced the ability of students to critically think
or apply knowledge learned in class to future
problems (McClaren & Farahmandpur, 2006).However, in some areas, there is progress in
basic skills. Assuming the test results are not
inflated or cheating does not take place, overall
test scores have begun to rise (NAE, 2009).
The question remains are test scores really
going up, or has the standard been lowered to
improve student opportunities to make the
grade?
Criticism of Standards Like in mostdecisions, the effectiveness of standards
depends on the type or quality of students.
Students performing at expectation value the influence standards have brought to the classroom. Aligning
the curriculum to expected-standards resulted in improvements in teaching methods and the introduction
8/3/2019 Educational Standards - An Analysis for America
8/12
of rubrics throughout the system reducing subjectivity. This has resulted in a stronger program for a large
majority of students (NAE, 2009). For students with learning disabilities, slow-learners, non-English
speakers, and fast-learners, the rigidity of standards interferes with devising alternative curricula to meet
the needs of these students (McClaren & Farahmandpur, 2006). Obviously, school administrators need
the ability to either adapt standards to meet their specific requirements or schools must implement at least
three levels of standard. For many
slow-learners or special-needs-
students, modifications offer an
opportunity to provide a different
expected outcome without penalizing
the student (APA, 2011). For
advanced students, magnet schools
as well as gifted programs attempt to
fill this gap. However, many schoolsdesperate to bring slow-learners and
special-needs-students up to speed
sacrificing gifted programs to husband
scarce resources.
This author maintains that a National
Standard should be established for
three levels of performance. The chart above shows the model used in Switzerland, the author believes
we can learn a lot from our more successful neighbors. The first tier would be assigned to college and
university bound students and provide the guidelines necessary for successful entry into higher
education. The second tier would encompass students bound for professional or technical careers
necessitating a basic apprenticeship or two-year degree program. The third tier would be made up of
students attending traditional vocational training for trades such as brick laying, electricians, plumbers,
carpenters, and auto mechanics. These students would engage in formal apprenticeship programs that
meet the national standard to develop mastery in a trade as well as the expected related academic
requirements. To ascertain a students readiness for these programs, tests would be given at the end of
5th and 8th grade. To graduate, students would be required to pass a national high school examination
demonstrating competency in their completed course work.
To ascertain the best way to meet standards, local schools would adapt state curriculum for their own
circumstances. If necessary, school days could be lengthened as well as school years. Students would be
encouraged to participate in online as well as platform education providing the best mix of learning along
with differentiated instruction. Standards should be there much like guide-rails on a highway, keeping
teachers and schools from straying too far without locking them into specific speeds or outcomes.
8/3/2019 Educational Standards - An Analysis for America
9/12
Standards outside the US
Before committing to one or another level of standard, American educators must keep in mind standards
found in other countries. Americas inability to maintain a high quality education over the past 40 years
has led to a reduction in economic performance and ceiling on industries ability to respond to competitive
threats. Employees in shuttered industries lack the necessary skills immediate move to alternative
employment opportunities. Any standard adopted by the United States must consider the international
implications. One common refrain many people suggest is that America should adopt the Finnish or
Singapore models. Unfortunately, these are very small countries with the ability to tailor their programs to
specific needs or leverage the monoculture nature of their societies. One standard that bears
consideration is the German and Swiss standard employing what is referred to as the ABC track system.
In secondary school students are directed into one of three tracks, academic, professional, and vocational
(Just Landed, n.d.).
8/3/2019 Educational Standards - An Analysis for America
10/12
Recommendations
Absent from the discussion are methods to motivate and involve parents in student outcomes. Whereas,
teachers and administrators lament the seeming lack of involvement by parents, the standards movement
focusing squarely on the teacher who happens to have limited influence on a childs motivation (NAE,2009). To motivate children, the author
recommends that students be required to master
basic skills based on a standard before advancing
to the next level. Instead of following a class
system, students should follow an independent
educational plan. This plan ends the production
model of the modern public school developed
during the 1950s and replaces it with a flexible
model able to adapt to a students changingcircumstances and abilities (Robinson, 2010). A
second recommendation is to base acceptance on
entering any of the three alternatives for high
school on merit. Students decide which track to
follow based on their performance on the 5th and
8th exam. Parents and students understanding the
high stakes nature of the test will be encouraged to study more relieving teachers of much of the burden
for increasing student performance. To avoid the issue of racism, there would be alternative track for
promising minority students to supplement performance permitting schools to offset the historicalimbalance of minorities in college preparatory programs. This alternative track would be open to students
whose communities faced historical discrimination as well as talented non-native English speakers. The
final motivator to get students to remain in school and do well would be a bonus of $2,000 for graduation
and the possibility of a second bonus of $1,000 for students meeting a pre-defined score on the national
high school exam.
Wrap-Up
The movement towards more standards based education during the Clinton Administration has failed to
achieve its primary goal, improving the quality of education in America (NAE, 2009). Results have been
mixed and one must conclude that standards alone will not achieve the desired outcomes. President
Obamas recent changes are as stated previously to new to evaluate their influence. Stakeholders are
impatient and expect tangible results in a short time. With the implementation of Common-core
Standards between states, a national movement to impose a national standard has developed (NAE,
8/3/2019 Educational Standards - An Analysis for America
11/12
2009). The author believes this movement will have the opposite effect and reduce creativity and learning
in the classroom.
In the coming election of 2012, a number of issues will be presented. The author expects the general
publics attitude to support wholesale reform of what appears to be a broken system. During the
campaign, the author will be promoting the idea of the A, B, and C system, apprenticeship programs, and
bonuses for graduating to
improve the performance of
students. The adoption of a
National Standard with three
assessments based on
university entrance
requirements as well as
employers in the marketplace
will provide a general standard
for teachers and administrators
to prepare appropriate
pedagogy.
Valid Concerns
A valid criticism of the authors recommendations is that the ABC system results in pigeon-holing (Just
Landed, n.d.). Students are directed to one or another track early on in education limiting opportunities.The hope is that through well-managed curriculum, this particular problem could be avoided. A second
criticism will be the appearance of unequal outcomes because some students go to college and others do
not have the opportunity (McClaren & Farahmandpur, 2006). That situation exists today with many
students unable to go to college because they did not complete a proper educational program. Students
continue to have the opportunity to attend college through evening and weekend programs much like
many students do today. To reduce the negative impact, a one-year preparatory program could be offered
to high-performing vocational and professional students to offer college as an additional alternative.
References
Alliance. (2008, March). How does the United States stack up? International comparisons of academic
achievement. Retrieved from: http://www.all4ed.org/files/IntlComp_FactSheet.pdf
APA. (2011). Appropriate Use of High-Stakes Testing in Our Nation's Schools. Retrieved from:
8/3/2019 Educational Standards - An Analysis for America
12/12
http://www.apa.org/pubs/info/brochures/testing.aspx
Just Landed. (2010). The German school system. Retrieved from: http://www.justlanded.com/english/
Germany/Germany-Guide/Education/The-German-school-system
Li, G. (2005). Culturally Contested Pedagogy. Retrieved from: http://www.sunypress.edu/p-4188-
culturally-contested-pedagogy.aspx
McClaren, P. & Farahmandpur, R. (2006). The pedagogy of oppression: A brief look at No Child Left
Behind. Retrieved from: http://monthlyreview.org/2006/07/01/the-pedagogy-of-oppression-a-brief-
look-at-no-child-left-behind
NAE. (2009). Standards Assessments and Accountability. Retrieved from:
http://www.naeducation.org/Standards_Assessments_Accountability_White_Paper.pdf
Orefield, G. (2010). Lessons Forgotten. Retrieved from: http://www.pineforge.com/upm-data/40352_8.pdf
Robinson, K. (2010, February). Sir Ken Robinson: Changing paradigms. [video]. Retrieved from:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mCbdS4hSa0s