Comments on: National Standards http://www.eduwonk.com/2009/02/national-standards.html Education News, Analysis, and Commentary Sat, 20 Mar 2010 02:54:28 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2 hourly 1 By: Tim http://www.eduwonk.com/2009/02/national-standards.html/comment-page-1#comment-54848 Tim Wed, 18 Feb 2009 14:25:32 +0000 http://www.eduwonk.com/?p=3804#comment-54848 Both of the above comments share in the most dangerous assumption regarding national curricula or standards: that the "core knowledge" to be developed is the culture of those in the "higher socio-economic status." True enough, there is a correlation between education-levels and socio-economic status, but that does not mean there is an inverse correlation between socio-economic status and levels of education. If we develop a national "core knowledge" curriculum based on that assumption, and test it, we will widen the achievement gap, not narrow it. The simple fact of the matter is that, in our increasingly global economy, those students who have gained the presumptive core-knowledge in their privileged homes have much to learn from those who purportedly lack the cultural capital to succeed. Immigrants and other highly mobile students fluent in two or more languages and sensitive to other cultures should be validated for what they offer as a model to American students isolated in their sub-divided economically segre-gated communities. If there are to be national standards, they should offer multiple pathways to "success," pathways defined more by skills acquisition than a singular definition based on historic cultural privileges. Both of the above comments share in the most dangerous assumption regarding national curricula or standards: that the “core knowledge” to be developed is the culture of those in the “higher socio-economic status.” True enough, there is a correlation between education-levels and socio-economic status, but that does not mean there is an inverse correlation between socio-economic status and levels of education. If we develop a national “core knowledge” curriculum based on that assumption, and test it, we will widen the achievement gap, not narrow it.

The simple fact of the matter is that, in our increasingly global economy, those students who have gained the presumptive core-knowledge in their privileged homes have much to learn from those who purportedly lack the cultural capital to succeed. Immigrants and other highly mobile students fluent in two or more languages and sensitive to other cultures should be validated for what they offer as a model to American students isolated in their sub-divided economically segre-gated communities.

If there are to be national standards, they should offer multiple pathways to “success,” pathways defined more by skills acquisition than a singular definition based on historic cultural privileges.

]]> By: Robert Pondiscio http://www.eduwonk.com/2009/02/national-standards.html/comment-page-1#comment-54538 Robert Pondiscio Tue, 17 Feb 2009 13:20:30 +0000 http://www.eduwonk.com/?p=3804#comment-54538 Jason anticipates much of my argument on student mobility, but I would also note that even more important is established connection between content knowledge and reading achievement. That means content standards should be most important to anyone concerned with closing the achievement gap. The need for a coherent curriculum is critical for all learners, but it's most lacking in low-SES schools. I responded in greater length on the Core Knowledge blog: http://www.coreknowledge.org/blog/2009/02/17/national-standards-critical-to-low-ses-schools/ Jason anticipates much of my argument on student mobility, but I would also note that even more important is established connection between content knowledge and reading achievement. That means content standards should be most important to anyone concerned with closing the achievement gap. The need for a coherent curriculum is critical for all learners, but it’s most lacking in low-SES schools. I responded in greater length on the Core Knowledge blog: http://www.coreknowledge.org/blog/2009/02/17/national-standards-critical-to-low-ses-schools/

]]> By: Jason http://www.eduwonk.com/2009/02/national-standards.html/comment-page-1#comment-54221 Jason Mon, 16 Feb 2009 15:29:58 +0000 http://www.eduwonk.com/?p=3804#comment-54221 What about arguments put forward by "Core Knowledge people" that due to migration inside the US and the lack of cultural capital low-income students and students of color gain in the home (that is, cultural capital that is translatable to success in school and the marketplace) that state a national curriculum based on content is a necessary precursor to success across various groups. Without a national curriculum, how do we create a consistent learning environment (expectations and prerequisites) for inner city students where schools often have greater than 40% turn over in student population? How do we deal with the different information students of higher socio-economic status gain in the home whether we teach it in school or not when we are derelict in providing that information in the schools themselves? I'm not sure where I fall on the national curriculum issues, but I'm surprised that you would point out that the system is "dramatically and dangerously under-serve[ing] low-income students" as a separate issue, when a fair amount of evidence leads to the conclusion that they are inextricably connected. What about arguments put forward by “Core Knowledge people” that due to migration inside the US and the lack of cultural capital low-income students and students of color gain in the home (that is, cultural capital that is translatable to success in school and the marketplace) that state a national curriculum based on content is a necessary precursor to success across various groups. Without a national curriculum, how do we create a consistent learning environment (expectations and prerequisites) for inner city students where schools often have greater than 40% turn over in student population? How do we deal with the different information students of higher socio-economic status gain in the home whether we teach it in school or not when we are derelict in providing that information in the schools themselves?

I’m not sure where I fall on the national curriculum issues, but I’m surprised that you would point out that the system is “dramatically and dangerously under-serve[ing] low-income students” as a separate issue, when a fair amount of evidence leads to the conclusion that they are inextricably connected.

]]>