I thought today's class was a lot of information thrown at us all at once. I liked how each group got to explore one section in depth to make sense of everything. It was difficult to sort each group on the scale of liberal and conservative, but made me think really carefully at the same time about how to interpret it in the context of the time period.
Specifically, I was in the group that discussed the Whigs. In comparison to the Jacksonian Democrats, the Whig-Democrat debate essentially reflected a "general concern about how schools should be controlled and whose values should be taught in a school's curriculum" (Spring 96). It really put into perspective how much the idea of education has been pulled in different directions over the past couple of centuries. It reflects how we interpret government involvement, who has control over schools, and what curriculum should entail. It's so difficult to regulate curriculum and what constitutes a college degree, high school diploma, and what it all means to emerge an educated person from the United States.
I definitely agree that there should be some sort of standard throughout the country. If a state like Texas has a proficiency rate on a test of 30% and Massachusetts at 85%, then Texas looks like it has a "smarter" state in terms of education. However, the standard that the students are being held to is much lower than that of Massachusetts. It doesn't make sense to me that a high school diploma might mean something different in one state than in another. However, I do not believe that teachers and schools should be held completely accountable (in terms of their job and pay) based on standardized tests that the students take. The teachers can be monitored by other standards, like observation. Their jobs should not rely completely on a standardized test that doesn't penalize the students for poor results.
I liked how the reading traced back to the beginning origins of this debate in terms of who determines what a school is, what standards it has, and how it's funded. It helps to show just how controversial this issue is and how much the educational system in this country is turned in circles every few years with attempts to reform it for the better. Maybe some day we'll get it right!
Special K, you bring up an excellent point with your post. That point is that in Education many states, and schools districts are changing or adjusting standards in their favor. The example you used about schools in Texas and Massachusetts validates that point. There needs to be something done to address this issue, before it becomes the 'norm' in America.
ReplyDeleteHaha!! I like the nickname Special K!! ANd your absolutely right, there was quite a bit of information today. I found that there was a lot of historical context thrown into the mixt today. I in particular was interested in the discussion by Horace Mann, but I wish that everyone had put their portion on the spectrum even more. This issue is quite controversial, and school funding is of course something that will be on peoples minds for some time to come!!
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with your conclusion that teachers' assessments shouldn't be completely reliant on a standardized test. I do, however, think teachers should be evaluated in some way.
ReplyDeleteIn my previous job we were evaluated on a yearly basis and our raise was determined entirely based on a subjective assessment of our performance. Our managers weighed their personal assessment of us with input from those who we worked with on a regular basis and then handed out our evaluation report.
I don't see why a similar approach can't be used in schools. Principals could weigh their own opinion with the test results and the input from parents and our fellow teachers to subjectively assess our performance.