Last week, I attended a “Back to School Night” at my daughter’s High School. Parents were given the opportunity to meet their children’s teachers in ten minute class intervals. During this speed dating with teachers, more than half of the teachers that evening spent a portion of our precious time together addressing the HSAs – the state of Maryland’s High School Assessment tests. According to the State of Maryland’s webpage dedicated to the HSAs (2010), these tests are “four exams—one each in algebra/data analysis, biology, government, and English—that all students who entered 9th grade in or after 2005 must take and pass in order to graduate”(“What Are HSAs” section).
That evening, in one particular classroom – the biology lab, the teacher spent more than half of the time explaining the importance of the HSA. This was in sharp contrast to fond memories of my time spent in just such a laboratory in high school and college. Entering the room, I instantly recalled the joy of discovery in learning about the nature of life beyond my immediate sight and comprehension. Even now, I still marvel at the process of cyclosis – the continual movement of protoplasm around the nucleus of a microscopic cell. Later, in adulthood, I would, to my own amusement, equate this to the travel of commuters in the Washington, D.C. area around its beltway, feeding regional commerce while maintaining the integrity of the cell itself – the commuter.
With the recent world premiere of the provocative film, “Waiting for Superman,” – an examination of the state of education in America and all the media and political buzz that has surrounded it, I was struck at this moment on how far we have strayed from the true value of education, replacing it with performance management techniques borrowed from corporate America.
Although the State of Maryland (2010) is quick to note that its HSA’s were in development long before the insidious “No Child Left Behind” legislation was passed in Congress, it is the fundamental goal of these tests to “set the achievement bar higher” that may be misguided. (“History”, 2010)
According to the Random House Dictionary, achievement “connotes final accomplishment of something noteworthy, after much effort and often in spite of obstacles and discouragements” (“Achievement”, 2010). Doesn’t that fit with our memories of school, particularly high school? Some subjects came to us easily, while others were nothing less than torture. Add physiological and social development to these “obstacles” and we may agree that we did indeed “achieve” in school.
By the benefit of some extraordinary teachers and administrators who appreciated the joy of discovery within each student, I, myself, was shaped into a lifelong learner, who will, according to the Plano, Texas Independent School District:
§ accept and seek new challenges in learning.
§ identify purpose, define courses of action and follow through with a plan.
§ apply prior knowledge and processes to construct new knowledge.
§ access and utilize information from a variety of sources. (Plano, 2010)
Now, a bright light is being shined upon our failing school systems, locally and nationally. Upon harsh examination, within the cracks and crevices of neighborhood schools, we have come to realized what we secretly feared in the shadows – our educational system is broke and our children are not being well served.
In 2001, just three days after taking office, then President George W. Bush explained his vision for addressing our growing educational deficiencies by introducing his mandate that “no child be left behind” in America. This vision, according to the U.S. Department of Education (2004), became the framework for the now notorious NCLB Act of 2001 which promised to:
“Strengthen Title I accountability by requiring States to implement statewide accountability systems covering all public schools and students. These systems must be based on challenging State standards in reading and mathematics, annual testing for all students in grades 3-8, and annual statewide progress objectives ensuring that all groups of students reach proficiency within 12 years” (U.S. Department of Education [DOE], 2004)
Although Title I was enacted in 1965 to assure that disadvantaged communities and children would receive no less a better an education than their more affluent counterparts, it became about the money – federal dollars flowing into depressed communities and school systems. However, in deciding who exactly got the money, a metric needed to be established to award these substantial but finite Federal dollars. So, the government looked at the corporate model of performance management.
The U.S. Office of Personnel Management itself cites that, “Performance management is the systematic process by which an agency involves its employees, as individuals and members of a group, in improving organizational effectiveness in the accomplishment of agency mission and goals” (U.S. Office of Personnel Management [OPM], para 1). Later, OPM acknowledges that this process would “not conflict with the kinds of activities and actions practiced in effective organizations as a matter of course” (OPM, para 2).
Now let’s consider what makes an organization “effective” and the nature of corporate performance management itself. In his book, Field Guide to Consulting and Organizational Development, (2005) Carter McNamara, a leading authority in the field of Human and Organizational Development, offers that performance management “includes activities to ensure that goals are consistently being met in an effective and efficient manner” (McNamara, 2005) But, he also cautions that, “Although the practices and standards can be somewhat useful in getting some quick perspective on the quality of a particular function, you need to be careful about how you choose them and about how you draw conclusions from any comparisons”. Therein is the crux of the matter. What do we measure and how do we measure it?
No one will argue that a student in elementary school should know their X-tables, be able to subtract, multiply and divide numbers and be able to read at grade level prior to graduating to high school. These are easy metrics, done by rote “after much effort and often in spite of obstacles and discouragements” as the definition of achievement suggests. It’s what happens next that is our failing.
Higher learning, despite its definition truly begins in high school, prior to college. It should really begin in high school classrooms when teachers and administrators ask students to now use what they have learned previously and to now think critically. In its paper “Critical Thinking: Literary Review” (2006) produced by the Office of Outcomes Assessment at the University of Maryland, University College, the authors cite Richard Paul’s position that “Critical thinking is inherently linked to effective learning. Being able to think about what one is learning while interpreting and making relations is an important part of the learning process (University of Maryland, University College [UMUC], 2005 and Paul, 2005).
So, as I sat in my daughter’s biology lab, listening to her teacher explain the importance of the HSAs rather than inform us of the scientific journey of discovery that our children would embark that year; I couldn’t help but think, “We’ve got this all wrong”. We’re teaching to the test. Worse yet, we’re teaching to the test because that’s how the money is awarded, without considering our students in the equation.
Along the way, we’ve somehow forgotten that a passionate teacher + the critically thinking, inquiring mind of a student = true achievement.
If you don’t you agree, consider as a model for success, one of the America’s corporate giants, Google. You know Google. Perhaps you use their search engine or have a Gmail account – all of which are free of charge. And yet, despite giving these things away, Google posted a profit of nearly 14 billion dollars in 2009.
Google’s founders, Larry Page and Sergey Brin say that they didn’t accomplish this by embracing performance management techniques when they formed their company, just great ideas. They set out “to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful” (“Corporate”, para. 1, 2010).
Along the way, according to Google, Page and Brin conceded that, “We set ourselves goals we know we can't reach yet, because we know that by stretching to meet them we can get further than we expected. Through innovation and iteration, we aim to take things that work well and improve upon them in unexpected ways” (“Ten Things”, #10, 2010).
Sounds like a good model for educational excellence as well as corporate prosperity, doesn’t it?
Let’s stop “teaching to the test” and teach our students how to investigate ideas. In a 2004 study, conducted by William A. Firestone, Lora Monfils and Roberta Y. Schorr of Rutgers University, their research suggests that when we teach to the test, “teachers feel more pressure, they respond with short-term test preparation and focus on more didactic instructional strategies”(Firestone, Monfils and Schorr, p.1). Conversely, says Firestone, et al. (2004) when a teacher feels that they are not compelled to do so, “. . . they are inclined to use more inquiry-oriented approaches and integrate test preparation with regular instruction” (p.1).
Let’s stop teaching to the test. If we do, no child will be left behind and instead of the U.S. lagging behind in academic achievement throughout the world, our nation and our children might just achieve greatness.
No comments:
Post a Comment