Repudiating the Obama Vision for Higher Education

American Thinker.com ^ | April 17, 2017 | E. Jeffrey Ludwig

[Kaslin]

Statistics, systems, and social engineering threaten our liberty in the USA and throughout the world. There has been an ongoing attempt for decades to shift the focus in our society away from faith, family, and freedom, to an agenda where individual rights are suppressed or altogether obliterated in the name of “collective rights.”

The shift in focus has been especially evident in the field of education. We are all aware of the undue influence the federal government has had on local control of K-12 education. This began with No Child Left Behind under President George W. Bush, and moved to new levels of federal control under Common Core. No Child Left Behind was at least a legislative initiative, passed by Congress. But Common Core was initiated through the Executive Branch and was developed and implemented through state departments of education – composed of appointed, not elected, officials -- that got on board because of Race To The Top moneys being used as an inducement for participation.

All of this was unconstitutional because the Tenth Amendment relegates control of all powers not enumerated in the U.S. Constitution to the several states. Common Core got around this by saying the federal government is not telling the states what to teach, but if the states would get on board (they all got on board), the federal government would supply the standardized tests that would give the states greater feedback about whether they were meeting “standards.” Thus, states would begin teaching to the tests, the tests would be controlling, but the federal government on a technicality would not be literally “in control” of state education.

[exDemMom]

Although, in general, I think that common core is a bad idea, I do not understand this opposition to “teaching to the test.”

If the student is learning, for example, algebra, they should be able to take and pass any standardized test that measures skill level in algebra. As far as I can tell, the catchphrase “teaching to the test” is a rationalization of the pushback against actually teaching students to master academic subjects. It’s an excuse for incompetent teachers.

[knarf]

Mr D (DiPasquale), my algebra teacher answered a student's statement (I don't understand this, Mr D) thusly;

"Don't understand Algebra ... learn the rules, apply them correctly and you'll pass my class."

I never forgot that and I'm 69

[stonehouse01]

“...collective rights...”

Here in New York State we are now offering free tuition no thanks to socialist Cuomo for students whose families make $125,000.00 or less at the SUNYs.

We paid for one of our daughter’s tuition there and my husband’s - so why should we have to subsidize other people’s children?

The system will dumb down the SUNYs instantly - there is a GPA (I think it is around 3.2) that must be sustained or the free tuition goes away - in order to provide a “success” for the liberals so Cuomo can run in 2020, the curriculum will be watered down so this is “achievable”.

[rstrahan]

In teaching to the test you are not teaching the subject, the rules and theories. You are teaching how to successfully answer the test with no basis for understanding.

[ViLaLuz]

Math might not be the best example if teaching to the test because it’s fairly objective. A better example might be under science, where the “right” answers assume anthropogenuc global warming is real.

[Da Coyote]

Dorkbama the Muslim eunuch quota baby has never had a real higher education, so what does he think he knows about it?

[trebb]

Although, in general, I think that common core is a bad idea, I do not understand this opposition to “teaching to the test.”

Teaching to the test inhibits deeper thinking and actual problem solving abilities. Some subjects, such as history, etc., require test material to be covered but the philosophies that arise and evolved throughout history require an ability to think if one is to be able to apply them usefully. When we stop teaching the art of deeper thinking, we get to steer students to mob mentality by "teaching" them the specifics of a certain slant/angle w/o allowing them to figure out the actual why and what-for of the events. Those who opt to "rewrite history and ignore salient events get to control the minds of the studentssubjects.

[exDemMom]

I will be honest: the reasoning used to counter the idea of “teaching to the test” sounds specious, much like the reasoning used against voter ID laws. How in the world is a teacher *not* teaching the rules and theories underlying a subject if they are preparing their students to pass a standardized English or math exam? Both English and math have rules; both require some amount of deductive reasoning. A student who masters those skills should be able to pass any standardized test easily.

What it sounds like to me when teachers complain about “teaching to the test” is that they are *not* teaching the basic skills required, so their students *cannot* pass a standardized skills test. What are they doing, getting a copy of the test beforehand and having their students memorize the correct answers? Is that what they really mean when they complain about having to “teach to the test”?

Here is an example 12th grade common core English question:

3. Which of the following choices best completes the sentence?

When at last Amber was able to _____________ the numerous difficulties associated with the task, she concluded the wisdom of her grandfather was not only desirable, but absolutely necessary.

a. perceive
b. perception
c. perceptive
d. perceived

---

In this example, the student probably knows the word “perceive,” but a student who has never seen the word before but has a grasp on basic word forms should be able to answer the question correctly.

It is more difficult to paste an example math question here, because math requires pictures and special symbols, but the principle is the same. The student who understands the basic skills will be able to pass the test.

[exDemMom]

Math might not be the best example if teaching to the test because it’s fairly objective. A better example might be under science, where the “right” answers assume anthropogenuc global warming is real.

That's a very bad example. Science is based on a rule set that is as rigid as that governing mathematics. In fact, every scientific discipline is rooted in physics, and physics relies heavily upon math in order to describe the world.

AGW is an example of the misuse of the scientific method to validate (preconceived) conclusions that are not supported by the evidence. I'm not going to get into a detailed discussion of the subject here, because that belongs in another thread.

The bottom line is that if a student is studying the basics of (for example) chemistry, they should be able to balance a chemical equation that they have never seen before. It's just like math--if you know the rules, you can do it.

[okie 54]

Considering 0bama sealed his college transcripts one can be sure they are either phony (most likely) or barely passing, what does the moron have to offer. Cheat and lie?