National news was made recently by a poll taken by the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs. They put questions to Oklahoma public high school students - the same questions from the immigration exam for citizenship. The results were horrible, and point to yet another failure of public education. Yet, as a public educator, I wish to beg for another chance to make the case for America's (or at least Washington's - where I teach) public school students.
First, here are the questions, and the results:
What is the supreme law of the land? 28%
What do we call the first ten amendments to the Constitution? 26%
What are the two parts of the U.S. Congress? 27%
How many justices are there on the Supreme Court? 10%
Who wrote the Declaration of Independence? 14%
What ocean is on the east coast of the United States? 61%
What are the two major political parties in the United States? 43%
We elect a U.S. senator for how many years? 11%
Who was the first President of the United States? 23%
Who is in charge of the executive branch? 29%
First, in full disclosure, let me say that I am a public school teacher that teaches civics and history (among other things), so I have a professional stake in the interpretation of these numbers.
Second, let me say, that if we are worrying about the ability of Oklahoma high school students, or any other Americans, to answer these questions in a high-stakes assessment, then we are in more trouble than is being asserted by the coverage of this story.
One problem with the above questions is that they are basically trivia. They require no high-level cognitive functioning. They are "first level" questions in Bloom's Taxonomy. We can easily train legions of Oklahoma's, or any other state's high school students to regurgitate history names and dates, and yet they will a have no clue as to what anything they said really means. I'll bet a poll of Teabaggers will yield much higher scores on the question "who was the first President of the United States?". So what? - they are still woefully misguided as to how our government functions, and how it benefits or hurts them.
My eighth grade students right now could not pass the test listed above. But come back in the spring, and they will pass a test that asks for much more academic rigor. They will not just be asked who wrote the Declaration of Independence, they will be asked to identify a key democratic ideal stated in the Declaration, and apply it to an issue in their lives today. This will require not only a deeper understanding of the document than its author, but an understanding of the truly American principals enshrined within. They will be able to do this at 85% proficiency, or I will have to re-teach it.
Another reason why the poll was so negative? No Child Left Behind. This conservative gem (which has, ironically, forced many school districts across the nation to pay attention to the achievement gap between white and non-white students), has virtually mandated an abandonment of social studies as a curriculum emphasis. Since math, reading, writing and science, are what gets measured, they are what get attention from administrators, school boards, principals and education reporters. As it was stated clearly in one of the many books I have been required to read as part of education reform: what gets measured, gets done.
Social studies - history, civics, economics and geography - are largely not being measured in the United States at this time. Consequently, meaningful social studies content is not being taught until at least the middle school level, if not being put off until high school entirely. Even with this reality, Washington State, where I teach, has demanded a rigorous course of critical thinking for its K-12 social studies students. It does not include the Jeopardy-like questions on this survey.
Finally, 21st century students deal with information differently than students of my generation (I am pushing 50). Information like names and dates can be accessed quickly, from multiple sources, maybe even from the phones in their pockets. They don't worry about who was first, or who wrote what, because they can find out quickly if they care. They also get the crap tested out of them, and have developed a good sense of which tests have meaning to their academic progress, and which ones don't. If these Oklahoma students, given the preview that immigrants got, and given a sense that this assessment was a high-stakes test for them, could not come back in an hour and pass the above test at 85% or better, then I would worry for America.
Can American schools improve? Hell yes, and my colleagues and I work towards that goal every day. But I am going to bring it strong now, go over the top: American public schools are the best in the world. Period. You don't want your kids in any other nation's school system, regardless of the results of a trivia quiz that was meaningless to the people who took it. This is because we take everyone. Migrant workers' kids? We send a bus to the fields. Homeless? We send a bus to the shelter. Downs syndrome? Autistic? Severe behavior disorder? We will send a bus. We send a bus for everyone, and put them on a track to attend a four-year university. No other public school system in the world does this on our scale, not even close. Do you think all of China's kids attend school? India's? Please! Do you think most of Europe's kids aren't tracked for trade school instead of University by 8th grade? Again - please!
Dummy kids? I say dummy test, and dummy reporting of most education issues. And for all the dummies? We'll send a bus!
Saturday, September 19, 2009
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Joe Wilson Shows Us the Hopelessness of No Change
Let me start by saying that Representative Joe Wilson is an asshole, and an embarrassment to South Carolina. Having said that, he illustrates the problem that Rahm Eman...oops, I mean Barack Obama's White House is having with health care.
Obama said that the challenge from the right that the health care plan included coverage for "illegals" was a falsehood. Joe Wilson screamed "You lie!" during an address from the President to a joint session of Congress. Something that has never happened to any white president in modern history. Several organizations have pored over the only bill to leave any House of Senate committee, and have found that the President was accurate in his assertion. Big surprise. And big surprise that Wilson yelled what he yelled. I mean, Newt was on NPR the morning of the speech asserting that death panels did exist in the President's health care plan.
The problem as I see it, is not that some inbred congressman has no sense of decorum. It is that our president has no sense of progressive values at all.
There should be a fight about covering undocumented workers in America! A truly progressive position would be that anyone within our borders should be given reasonable health care. We should strive, as a modern, forward-looking and moral democracy to make sure that basic needs are met for all humans within our sphere of responsibility, regardless of race, income or other status. This is a position that asserts social justice as a guiding principle. Progressives should fight for social justice.
This also happens to be an issue that could find common ground with fiscal conservatives. The fact is, we already pay for "illegals," every time they use the emergency room. In fact, the current system is much more expensive than if we gave every undocumented person insurance that would include preventative care. We pay for their serious illnesses, their accidents and their child births in emergency rooms - at the cost of about $1000 per year for every insured American. Granting medical care to all within our borders in a systematic, preventative way SAVES EVERY INSURED AMERICAN MONEY, and saves the government money too. True fiscal conservatives can find common ground here if they can get past racism and xenophobia.
THIS represents bipartisanship - progressives and conservatives get something that speaks to their core values AND benefits America, and can be sold at campaign time as a victory.
Instead, here's how Obama sees bipartisanship:
1. Do not even allow single payer "in the room" as part of serious health care discussion.
2. Insist on Republican input even when they say - clearly - that their goal is to defeat ANY health care legislation, no matter what it contains.
3. Tax credits as a means of paying for health care reform.
4. Limit a possible public option (certainly not promised public option) to about 5% of the population - the ones that no insurance company would touch with Joe Wilson's dick).
5. Direct immediate action on tort reform - a solidly Republican idea.
Oh, and for the "bi" part of the above bipartisanship...
1. He did actually mention a public option, but conceded that he was open to other options.
2. He told progressives to calm down and shut up.
3. He managed to do this with his tongue down the back of Republican senators' trousers.
No, no, no. Progressives must raise the threat level, and keep health care reform as our firewall. REAL progressive representatives must vote NO, and hand this president a defeat if a strong public option is not in the final bill.
Obama gives great speech, but the hope is gone, along with the real change. The change must come from real progressive ideas made manifest. Real change? How about changing Rahm for Howard Dean?
Obama said that the challenge from the right that the health care plan included coverage for "illegals" was a falsehood. Joe Wilson screamed "You lie!" during an address from the President to a joint session of Congress. Something that has never happened to any white president in modern history. Several organizations have pored over the only bill to leave any House of Senate committee, and have found that the President was accurate in his assertion. Big surprise. And big surprise that Wilson yelled what he yelled. I mean, Newt was on NPR the morning of the speech asserting that death panels did exist in the President's health care plan.
The problem as I see it, is not that some inbred congressman has no sense of decorum. It is that our president has no sense of progressive values at all.
There should be a fight about covering undocumented workers in America! A truly progressive position would be that anyone within our borders should be given reasonable health care. We should strive, as a modern, forward-looking and moral democracy to make sure that basic needs are met for all humans within our sphere of responsibility, regardless of race, income or other status. This is a position that asserts social justice as a guiding principle. Progressives should fight for social justice.
This also happens to be an issue that could find common ground with fiscal conservatives. The fact is, we already pay for "illegals," every time they use the emergency room. In fact, the current system is much more expensive than if we gave every undocumented person insurance that would include preventative care. We pay for their serious illnesses, their accidents and their child births in emergency rooms - at the cost of about $1000 per year for every insured American. Granting medical care to all within our borders in a systematic, preventative way SAVES EVERY INSURED AMERICAN MONEY, and saves the government money too. True fiscal conservatives can find common ground here if they can get past racism and xenophobia.
THIS represents bipartisanship - progressives and conservatives get something that speaks to their core values AND benefits America, and can be sold at campaign time as a victory.
Instead, here's how Obama sees bipartisanship:
1. Do not even allow single payer "in the room" as part of serious health care discussion.
2. Insist on Republican input even when they say - clearly - that their goal is to defeat ANY health care legislation, no matter what it contains.
3. Tax credits as a means of paying for health care reform.
4. Limit a possible public option (certainly not promised public option) to about 5% of the population - the ones that no insurance company would touch with Joe Wilson's dick).
5. Direct immediate action on tort reform - a solidly Republican idea.
Oh, and for the "bi" part of the above bipartisanship...
1. He did actually mention a public option, but conceded that he was open to other options.
2. He told progressives to calm down and shut up.
3. He managed to do this with his tongue down the back of Republican senators' trousers.
No, no, no. Progressives must raise the threat level, and keep health care reform as our firewall. REAL progressive representatives must vote NO, and hand this president a defeat if a strong public option is not in the final bill.
Obama gives great speech, but the hope is gone, along with the real change. The change must come from real progressive ideas made manifest. Real change? How about changing Rahm for Howard Dean?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)