Study Says U.S. Should Replace States' High School Standards

NY Times ^ | 10 February 2004 | By KAREN W. ARENSON

[shrinkermd]

A patchwork of state standards is failing to produce high school graduates who are prepared either for college or for work, three education policy organizations say in a new report. The solution, they say, is to adopt rigorous national standards that will turn the high school diploma into a "common national currency."

"For too many graduates, the American high school diploma signifies only a broken promise," the groups, which favor standardized testing to improve education, say.

Working through what they call the American Diploma Project, the organizations — Achieve Inc., the Education Trust and the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation — consulted with higher education officials and business executives in five states to develop standards they say will ensure that high school graduates are equipped to move into either college-level work or a decent-paying job.

"For many kids, the diploma is a ticket to nowhere," Kati Haycock, director of the Education Trust, said. "In this era, where some postsecondary education is essential, that's no good."

Ms. Haycock said half the students who went on to four-year colleges ended up taking some remedial course work because their preparation was inadequate.

The report charges that employers and postsecondary institutions "all but ignore the diploma, knowing that it often serves as little more than a certificate of attendance," because "what it takes to earn one is disconnected from what it takes for graduates to compete successfully beyond high school."

The diploma project comes as others are looking for ways to improve high schools. A commission appointed by the National Assessment Governing Board is studying whether national 12th grade tests should try to measure high school seniors' readiness for work and college. The board sets policy for the National Assessment of Educational Progress, or N.A.E.P., the nationwide examinations given in 4th, 8th and 12th grades and referred to as the "the nation's report card."

"We are considering looking beyond high school to be more predictive about how they would do in the workplace and in college," Charles E. Smith, executive director of the governing board, said.

The diploma project recommends that the N.A.E.P. tests be realigned based on standards in the report.

Some critics of high-stakes testing say the challenge is not determining what students ought to know, but in teaching them.

"They're saying that if we have one set of standards, students will meet them," said Monty Neill, executive director of the National Center for Fair and Open Testing in Cambridge, Mass. "But if you are not going to provide the resources to help students meet the standards, they're not going to meet them, whatever the standards are."

Mr. Neill said many states already had standards that were far beyond what their students were achieving. If some states have standards that are too low, he added, they should re-examine them, rather than impose a common national standard.

In English, the diploma project calls for mastery of spelling and grammar, communication skills, writing, research and logic, as well as the ability to read and interpret technical material, to view media critically and to understand and analyze literature. In math, it calls for mastery of numerical operations, algebra, geometry and data interpretation, statistics and probability, and provides sample problems.

[shrinkermd]

This is an interesting editorial on education. This is especially true since there has been bitter denunciation of the President's educational efforts both on the right and the left.

[livius]

It is interesting. Someone (conservative, I think, although the right is getting so close to the extreme left now that it's hard to tell) sent me a rant about this very thing the other day.

It was indeed a rant, and I couldn't figure out what there was not to like about higher standards. In fact, I couldn't figure out her point at all.

What exactly is it that "conservatives" don't like about this proposal?

[Glenn]

What exactly is it that "conservatives" don't like about this proposal?

Throw a rock, hit a proposal.

As the governments are lousy stewards of education, why allow them to continue in that role at all?

[Sam Cree]

"The solution, they say, is to adopt rigorous national standards that will turn the high school diploma into a "common national currency."

They may as well recommend trashing our Constitution and converting to a benevolent dictatorship. It would probably work better as long as the dictator remained both wise and benevolent. In other words, briefly, if at all.

[Sam Cree]

"I couldn't figure out what there was not to like about higher standards"

Higher standards are great. Putting the federal government in charge of them in this way is not. It requires an entirely new concept of what the country actually is. 'Course lots of Americans already have such a concept.

[sgtbono2002]

If you push for higher standards you are going to fail a lot of minorities. That just aint going to be permitted.

[sgtbono2002]

By the way I know someone will jump on my use of the word "Aint" as not having a Higher Standard. Thats why I used it.

[Just mythoughts]

My specific problem is waiting until "high school" to set higher standards. The little HUMANOIDs have already been trained with no standards before they ever reach "high school".

Majority of teachers are far more worried about what is in their "UNION" contract than actually teaching children. Parents are very well aware of what school was like for them and the majority of them have no respect for most teachers.

We have a TEACHING problem not a TESTING problem!

[livius]

Well, like it or not, the Federal Government is already in control of education, and I doubt that it's leaving anytime soon. States receive huge amounts of money from the Fed Govt, and yet they continue to crank out kids who can't even do simple math.

I'd rather see the Feds insist on academic standards than sex-ed, however, and I think this is a positive move.

Bush has also put considerable effort into trying to get voucher programs passed. I think this is where conservative efforts should go.

Personally, I think homeschooling is the best option, but I realize that many people can't do it, for one reason or another. Vouchers would solve the whole problem, but unfortunately, there's not enough support in Congress or at the state level to get this program past the teachers'unions and the entrenched education bureacracy on the massive scale that it needs.

I bet there's no need to "impose" higher standards on schools that have to compete for students!

[George W. Bush]

What exactly is it that "conservatives" don't like about this proposal?

Empowering the same groups who have caused the problems in the schools to implement their agenda and cement it into place forever.

Given the ignorance about the history of education 'reform' in this country, even among those of conservative tendencies, those of us who have successfully fought these educrats and social engineers in the public schools don't have much use for a bunch of latecomers who march in and promptly fall for the latest round of retreaded lies from the liberal education establishment.

Never mind. Education activists will defeat this again. The enemies of sound education will not win, no matter how many gullible people are taken in by their rhetoric and propaganda.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

Higher standards are great. Putting the federal government in charge of them in this way is not.

Uniformity of standards also has something to commend it; I was much taken by the C-Span-televised education testimony presented to the governors' conference some years back. That testimony made the point that although there is a standard corpus of knowledge to be learned--decimals and fractions, whatever--there is not only no uniformity between states but no uniformity even inside a single school in the prioritization of the teaching of those things.

Such schools perrenially prove the adage that "If everything is important then nothing is important." Demanding the teaching of everything all the time means the random selection of topics focused on--and without an extraordinary run of luck it means that students will be re-re-taught fractions and never ever taught percentages.

And the point was made that "women and minorities suffer most"--that whatever coherence might exist in a given school district did not avail people who moved repeatedly from one district to another, and that disproportionately happened to low-income kids.

So there is need for a settled way of sequencing things. There is such a thing as a "model law" for state regulation--something which is not mandatory but which is voluntarily adopted by states because it makes sense and there is no overriding rationale to do anything different. There is also such a thing as completely voluntary standards such as Windows, which provides advantages to its adoptees. And it would seem that in a libertarian world McSchools would arise with coherent curricula, perhaps in association with churches.

[George W. Bush]

Well, like it or not, the Federal Government is already in control of education, and I doubt that it's leaving anytime soon. States receive huge amounts of money from the Fed Govt, and yet they continue to crank out kids who can't even do simple math.

No, it's not in control. And the amounts of federal education dollars delivered to states and districts have been diminishing even as BushCo has thrown more money at the federal level. Perkins grants (STW): virtually dead. And this year, we kill the Eisenhower.

Naturally, there are myriad other programs still awaiting the legislative ax. But we are patient. One program at a time...

As a side note, it can be observed that Bush's failed nationalization objectives have actually been used by education activists to attack their states' standards programs as irrelevant. In the resulting confusion, both state and national standards efforts can be legislatively defunded and thereby defeated. This is the short-term objective.

Bush has also put considerable effort into trying to get voucher programs passed. I think this is where conservative efforts should go.

Actually, this is a myth. He has not done this. It might receive more attention in his second term. At present, this is mostly a talking point for the consumption of the gullible, not a serious WH policy objective. You can see much more forceful action in, for instance, the Colorado legislature's efforts. And there are others too.

[OXENinFLA]

I think they are leaving this out of the equation, just as they did when the DoE was formed.

---

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

[TaxRelief]

This proposal is based on flawed logic, and has several hidden motives, one of which is to hand over the control of homeschools, private schools, vouchers, charter schools and religious education in general, to the government.

The group is garnering support based on three unrealistic premises: 1) All teenagers can succeed academically; 2) A high school diploma is the only route to life success: And 3)the government should have sole control over the definition of "successful".

Fact that the government ignores number 1: Many teenagers do not have the interest in academics and/or are not academically inclined. All kids have an aptitude for something, but as long as a bunch of do-gooders believe that everyone should focus on academics, they are continuing to ignore both the individual and reality.

Fact that the government ignores number 2: Teenagers should be allowed to leave school at 14 so that they can begin apprenticeships. They should be pursuing careers that are consistent with their aptitudes. As long as these busy-bodies continue the rhetoric that implies that kids can only learn in government controlled institutions, many are doomed to failure.

Fact that the government ignores number 3: The argument for keeping kids in school (a real money-grab if there ever was one) that ranges from "even if they are a carpenter, they need to be able to add" to "death rates are higher for people without a diploma" does not give the government the right to define "achievement".

Arguments in favor of "lowering the drop-out rate" or "raising the standards" are bogus cover-ups for:
"We don't want unemployed kids on the streets during the day";
"We can't control what is happening inside a private enterprise";
"We can't cut the taxpayer allotment to public schools, because every kid needs to be at grade level";
"Somebody will make it seem like we are giving preferences to certain groups".

Meanwhile, the individual child and his aptitude is completely dismissed. Does this better explain the problem conservatives have with this kind of plan?

[Gritty]

They could solve most of the problem in these ways:

1. Vouchers

2. McGuffey's Readers

3. Saxon Math

4. Eliminate large teacher's Unions

5. Eliminate the Federal Department of Education

6. Merit based promotion of students

7. Eliminate "compulsory" education at age 12 while opening up the "minimum wage" and apprentice job market to teenagers

8. Eliminate today's awful Politically Correct study curriculums and student climate and replace with "American", not socialist, models (see #2,3 above)

... in other words, return to the things we used to do many years ago which made the American secondary education system one of the finest in the world, and add the benefits of technology.

[TaxRelief]

I like your no 8. See my post #16.

[BnBlFlag]

This is merely another excuse to continue the left's ongoing program of federalizing education.
Federal standards?.....We don't need no steeken federal standards!

[ladylib]

I'm sure the new standards will also reflect UN standards. We're already seeing it with the International Bacculaureatte programs being introduced in the public schools -- something that Bush has signed off on.