CAMPAIGN TO ELECT MIKE BALLANTINE PRESIDENT 2012

Educational Standards in America

An analysis on current standards and recommendations 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 in the US as well as some practical recommendations for improving educational outcomes.

Changing How We Teach Over the past 50 years, America has spent untold sums trying to find
the 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 and perform well on tests to re-hired. That is just crazy. trouble, it slows down the fall behind. The solution by down the lessons and teach them? Our students fall the fact that we continue to problem. It's time to break IEPs. We should require all before moving on to the material at the same time determine if the teacher is If a few students have class and all the students teachers has been to dumb to the test. Can you blame behind each year despite throw huge money at this the paradigm. It's time for students to master a subject 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

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 on to college but only half will those students have to bear themselves at night or what they might have opportunity to learn a trade We consider the failure to students for jobs upon immoral. We propose allocating $50 billion per year for 5 years in graduate. How many of the expense of reeducating accept employment below achieved had they had the or technical skill as a youth. adequately prepare graduation to be ethically

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

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.

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

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 must perform 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 most

decisions, 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

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-needsstudents, 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 schools desperate 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.

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.).

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 changing circumstances 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 historical imbalance 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,

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:

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-4188culturally-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-brieflook-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