Comments on: The National Standards Sausage-Making

By: Nationalizing Public Schools - monstermom’s Diary - RedState

Nationalizing Public Schools - monstermom’s Diary - RedState — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 22:10:44 +0000

[...] You may think that that’s not such a bad thing, considering the relatively poor job the states are doing at teaching our nation’s children. That those developing the standards must be wise and gifted in their respective fields. Thus far only one name has been leaked. The individual is supposed to be leading the effort to draft mathematics standards and he’s an English Major. [...]

By: allen

allen — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 23:56:59 +0000

Hmmph, I thought you were channeling Mark Twain:

“Those that respect the law and love sausage should watch neither being made.”

Seems to work pretty well in this situation since I suspect the process wherein national standards are hammered out will cause sausage-making to seem quite a delicately aesthetic pastime by comparison.

By: Standards and sausage at Joanne Jacobs

Standards and sausage at Joanne Jacobs — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 13:14:30 +0000

[...] Creating national standards is like making sausage, writes Jay Greene. Only harder to do well. . . . when everyone gets into the sausage-making that characterizes policy formulation, it generally becomes clear that no one is going to get what they want out of national standards. What’s worse is that the resulting mess would be imposed on everyone. There’d be no more laboratory of the states, just uniform banality. Of course, some people always hope that they’ll somehow manage to sneak their preferred vision into place without having to go through the meat grinder. That’s what is happening now with the National Governor’s Association effort at “voluntary” national standards. In a process completely lacking in transparency and open-debate, some are rushing to announce a national standards fait accompli. [...]

By: Tattatu

Tattatu — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 02:12:50 +0000

Dr. Greene, you are too kind to these pompous jacks.

The pocket committee selected to write national standards reminds me of a similiar committee that made the recommendations for the DOE’s exemplary and promising math programs in 1997. The results of ‘sink or swim’ math in public schools have been catastrophic, yet no one in authority has ever apologized for the mess that was made or tried to correct it.

I will be honest and say that the US has a two-tier educational system that fails about 40% of its students. Some would even call this a fascist society for that very fact. Would you believe I observed and taught in an alternative program that had a 6% graduation rate. In LAUSD, nearly half of the graduates will fail to meet graduation requirements next year. For the majority of our students, high school academics is a waste of time.

More than half of the students who do attend college take remedial math courses. The dumbing down of American demographics will become our biggest obstacle for a successful economic recovery.

I’m all for having one textbook with one world-class standard. Lets matriculate students instead of promoting them, especially when they haven’t mastered the material. But lets make the math relevant, practical, and standard. When people take algebra, they expect to learn algebra, not counting. Creating more schools, will not improve the curriculum of this country and the colleges of miseducation that support it.

By: Carla Albers

Carla Albers — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 18:58:53 +0000

I absolutely agreed with Sandy’s comments. Without transparency as to whom is involved with the writing of these standards, I suspect the safe assumption is that they will be weak and content-light. I also suspect that if we are made aware of the principals involved, we will find that they are the same players who are called in, time and again, when states write standards, or when parents push for reforms. Why is it that some expect the same people who get us the same results, time and again, to give us something different?

By: Jay P. Greene

Jay P. Greene — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 18:37:31 +0000

Catherine, how would you feel if we had some unnamed national committeee pick what your child should learn?

By: Catherine Johnson

Catherine Johnson — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 17:13:39 +0000

At this point I take a fairly strong libertarian position on the subject of parents choosing content: I’m perfectly happy to sign off on parents choosing biology courses that don’t teach the theory of evolution if I get to choose biology courses that do.

By: Catherine Johnson

Catherine Johnson — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 17:04:11 +0000

I spend a fair amount of time mulling over what role parents can or, in theory, should play in schools.

I haven’t gotten very far.

The one idea I’ve settled on is that parents absolutely need choice when it comes to what their children are going to be taught at school.

Case in point: my district adopted the Open Court reading program a couple of years ago.

Now we’re dropping Open Court and adopting Fountas & Pinnell.

Parents should have a right to choose a synthetic phonics program for early reading instruction.

Ditto for Core Knowledge and liberal education in general.

By: National Standards Sausage Making « PWC Education Reform Blog

National Standards Sausage Making « PWC Education Reform Blog — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 15:31:02 +0000

[...] You can find the article here. [...]

By: Laws, Sausages, and National Standards at The Core Knowledge Blog

Laws, Sausages, and National Standards at The Core Knowledge Blog — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 14:46:01 +0000

[...] Greene has a smart, sobering piece on national standards. “People tend to be in favor of them when they imagine that they are [...]