Content With Not Knowing

by Robert Pondiscio
February 28th, 2008

The Common Core survey by Rick Hess of the American Enterprise Institute, which shows a troubling lack of historical background knowledge among American 17-year-olds, is enjoying a nice run this week, with stories in USA Today, the New York Times, and lots of broadcast coverage. But alas, the coverage has been all cause and no effect. At best, it irritates people that students are ill-informed. At worst, it’s seen as irrelevant. There’s a lot of “tsk-tsk” reporting. How embarassing! It would be nice to see a few journalists take the next step and look at the impact of a content-free education on outcomes.

The CBS Evening News did a piece on the Common Core report which started out as a standard issue “tsk-tsk” piece. In the words of correspondent Ben Tracy, “A lot of educators say all this talk about the ‘dumbest generation’ is quite stupid…students don’t need to know a litany of dates because they can just Google them.” The problem here is twofold: the continued absurd association of content knowledge with rote memorization of dates (does any school do that?) and the idea that content and critical thinking are mutually exclusive. One high school teacher in the CBS piece says, “I know that this generation is the smartest that we’ve had.” Based on what empirical evidence, exactly?

“Students are expected to analyze concepts rather than memorize dates,” Tracy reports knowingly. I continue to await an example of a concept that can be analyzed in the absence of content knowledge. This kind of thinking by educators (and uncritical reporting by journalists) implies a content-free education that infantilizes the learner. Some years ago, I was marched off to a social studies professional development session. The theme of the session was “No More Trivial Pursuit.” “It doesn’t matter if your students don’t know when the War of 1812 happened,” the staff developer said. “It’s more important to grapple with ‘essential questions’ like ‘Is war ever justifiable?’” Clearly no meaningful response would be possible without a solid grasp of history to bolster one’s point of view.

Linda Bevilacqua, the President of the Core Knowledge Foundation, was a guest on G. Gordon Liddy’s Radio America show yesterday to weigh in on the Common Core study. A caller described how he was taught in school that Martin Luther and Martin Luther King were the same person. It’s not merely embarrassing to not know the difference between Martin Luther and Martin Luther King. Even those—especially those—who believe that critical thinking is the purpose of school should be alarmed. How much critical thinking about the Reformation and the Civil Rights movement is a student capable of who doesn’t know that Martin Luther and Martin Luther King are two different people separated by 500 years, language, culture and the Atlantic Ocean?

Until and unless we start to make a connection between content knowledge, reading comprehension, and critical thinking, I fear we’re not going to move the level of concern above the level of “tsk-tsk…these kids today!”

A New Advocate for Core Curriculum

by Guest Blogger
February 27th, 2008

Common Core

by Diane Ravitch

Tuesday I went to the launch of a new organization called Common Core. Its primary goal is to advocate for a rich, coherent, content-based curriculum, one that includes the full range of liberal arts and sciences.Common Core will seek to fill the vacuum that was created by the demise several years ago of the Council for Basic Education. That organization, founded by giants like Clifton Fadiman, Arthur Bestor, and Jacques Barzun, was an eloquent voice for history, literature, mathematics, sciences, the arts, geography, and civics.

Common Core will seek to persuade states and school districts, as well as federal officials, that students will be better educated and perhaps even do better on tests if they have a broad education. We are betting that schools with curricula like Core Knowledge produce better educated students, and that they don’t need to spend a disproportionate amount of time preparing to take content-free standardized tests.

Toni Cortese, executive vice-president of the American Federation of Teachers, and I are co-chairs of Common Core. The board includes an outstanding array of practitioners and scholars (more about that later, as I want to be sure when I list their names that I didn’t leave anyone out). Our executive director is Lynne A. Munson, who has labored for over a year to bring the organization to life and get it off to a good start.

We hope to sponsor research, conduct conferences, publish reports, and do similar things to change the climate and to move our schools away from the current unhealthy obsession with testing. We are not opposed to testing, but don’t think that tests are the be-all and end-all of education.

I certainly hope that the efforts of Common Core will help to strengthen and promote Core Knowledge, as our goals are closely aligned. Core Knowledge, of course, differs from Common Core in that CK supports schools across the nation. Common Core won’t do that. Instead, it will advocate for the goals and mission that we all share: a richly educated student, a coherent and thoughtful content-based curriculum.

More about Common Core as it takes shape.

UFT Seeds of Knowledge TV Ad

by Robert Pondiscio
February 25th, 2008

United Federation of TeachersIf you watched the CBS Evening News tonight in New York City, you witnessed the debut of a new ad campaign from the United Federation of Teachers. The New York Sun and the Daily News took note of the campaign this morning, with the News characterizing the ad as UFT head Randi Weingarten’s payback for the NYC Department of Ed’s plan to evaluate teachers based on standardized test scores.

There’s no fiery rhetoric in the ad itself, however. It’s all warm fuzzy images of a child tending and drawing a small green plant under teacher’s watchful eye. “A child’s mind is a precious thing that’s growing every day,”says a voiceover. “Standardized school tests can measure her progress in certain subjects… but New York City teachers believe it takes a well-rounded curriculum — including science, civics, language, arts and sports — to help young imaginations thrive.”

No complaints about the message. Indeed, the UFT sought and received an endorsement of its message from Core Knowledge founder E.D. Hirsch for the press release announcing the campaign. I just wish it didn’t remind me so much of the UNorth ad in Michael Clayton.

<a href="http://youtube.com/watch?v=YEpTZcuNEoM">http://youtube.com/watch?v=YEpTZcuNEoM</a>

Romer on Curriculum Narrowing

by Robert Pondiscio
February 25th, 2008

ED in ‘08 / Strong American SchoolsEd in ’08 chairman Roy Romer weighs in helpfully (mostly) on the issue of curriculum narrowing and NCLB.

A report from the Center on Educational Policy last year showed 44% of school districts had increased instructional time spent on ELA and/or Math in elementary schools since the passage of No Child Left Behind, cutting time from science, social studies, art and music, physical education, recess, or lunch. According to a followup report this week, districts increasing time for ELA and Math had done so by an average of three hours each week. To make room for the added time, they’ve cut of about two and a half hours each week from one or more other subjects.

“I don’t believe that time should come at the expense of other academic areas like science, history, or the arts,” blogs Romer. “We at ED in ’08 have long advocated for more time for learning in America’s schools. States like Massachusetts have already followed the lead of many other developed nations and put in place a longer school day, and their students are proving all the more successful from it. That extra time is helping to balance out the school agenda so that students all receive the diverse range of subjects – and support – they deserve.”

All well and good, but it would be even more helpful in Governor Romer and others concerned about the narrowing of curriculum would look more closely at the link between content knowledge and reading comprehension, rather than continuing to treat reading as an independent academic subject.

Teaching content IS teaching reading.

Extra Points for Creativity

by Robert Pondiscio
February 23rd, 2008

The Boston Globe Schools should be graded not just by standardized test scores, but by the number of opportunities they provide students to be creative. That’s the argument from a Massachusetts state representative and an arts advocate in today’s Boston Globe. While taking care not to diminish the value of testing individual students, the authors wonder if the incentive to teach to the tests fails to adequately prepare kids for the future. The have drafted a bill to hold schools in the Bay State accountable for the number of “creative opportunities” children are offered.

We have moved into an economy driven by ideas and innovation,” write Dan Bosley and Dan Hunter. “Are we giving students the opportunity to develop creativity—the ability to generate ideas and then to critically evaluate potential?” Bosley is chairman of the Joint Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies; Hunter is executive director of the Massachusetts Advocates for the Arts, Sciences & Humanities.

“With the Creative Challenge Index, a commission—comprising legislators, and business and community leaders working with the Department of Education and education leaders—would establish an index to measure how many opportunities schools provide for students to engage in the practice of creative work — taking a project from inspiration to revision to fruition. Through the index, schools can be rewarded for creative opportunities,” write Bosley and Hunter.

Schools that provide opportunities for creative work in the arts, music, drama, and dance would rise in the Index. “So would schools that engage students in a broad range of creative activities, such as science fair projects, debate club, fashion design, filmmaking, or architecture. The Creative Challenge Index would establish incentives for schools to foster creative skills through arts education and other innovative educational opportunities.”

Are You Smarter Than a Boston Latin Student?

by Robert Pondiscio
February 22nd, 2008

On Sunday, the New York Times published a lovely, uplifting piece about how The Great Gatsby still resonates with striving immigrant students at the prestigious Boston Latin School. One recent immigrant featured in the story is “inspired by the green light at the end of the dock, which for Jay Gatsby, the self-made millionaire from North Dakota, symbolizes the upper-class woman he longs for.” Says the student: “My green light is Harvard.”

Seemingly in direct response to the Times own ed blogger Will Okun, who recently questioned the relevance of teaching classic literature to inner city youth, Sara Rimer writes: “Some educators say the best way to engage racially and ethnically diverse students in reading is with books that mirror their lives and culture. But others say that while a variety of literary voices is important, ‘Gatsby’ — still required reading at half the high schools in the country — resonates powerfully among urban adolescents, many of them first- and second-generation immigrants, who are striving to ascend in 21st-century America.”

Fordham’s Gadfly took note of the piece yesterday, hailing, “three cheers for dead, white men,” and remarking with approval how urban adolescents “still identify with the book’s main characters and its themes of aspiration and striving.”

Leave it to a pair of bright high schoolers to rain on the feel-good parade in letters to the Times. Robinson G. Meyer, a junior from Pennington, New Jersey wonders if those Boston Latin strivers, their teachers and the Times have missed the point of the novel. “The Great Gatsby is no Great American Fable of accomplished dreams, it is a cautionary tragedy. Its characters discard their morals to attain pleasure or to quench their ambitions, and, by the novel’s end, they all wind up hollow and disaffected.”

Nathaniel Eiseman, himself a Boston Latin student, pointedly writes, “If F. Scott Fitzgerald knew that today’s high school students would be comparing Jay Gatsby’s elusive green light to admission to Harvard he would be shaking his head in disdain.

“The Great Gatsby’ is not a novel that glorifies the rags-to-riches American dream. It is, in fact, the very opposite, and I find it most surprising that the students and faculty of the Boston Latin School featured in the article could be so misinformed,” says Eiseman. “The light does give Gatsby hope, but between West Egg, where Gatsby is, and East Egg, where his hope is, there lies an insuperable cultural divide. The green light represents all of what we want, but that we never can attain. Jay Gatsby would never reach that light, for the end of his American dream saw him face down in his swimming pool.”

Ouch! Well, thanks for clearing that up, gentlemen. Somewhere today, there are a couple a proud English teachers smiling quietly to themselves.

NAEP = Not An Entire Picture?

by Robert Pondiscio
February 21st, 2008

The National Assessment of Educational Progress test of students’ progress in elementary and secondary schools offers “a distorted picture of achievement” and fails to fully examine how well schools prepare students for adult life, according to a paper summarized in the Chronicle of Higher Education.  The report commissioned by the Campaign for Educational Equity at Teachers College of Columbia University argues that the NAEP focuses too narrowly on basic academic and critical thinking skills in measuring how well students are being educated.

“Moreover,” the report says, “the federal benchmarking test fails to gauge the long-term impact of education because it does not look at whether adults who were educated at elementary and secondary schools do things such as vote, read independently, or stay in shape physically.” 

Those expecting disagreement will not be disappointed.  The Chronicle’s report is followed by a reader comment:  “I don’t give a flip whether students in question (or you for that matter) vote, read independently, or stay in shape. However I do care very much whether students can read, write, and do basic math.” 

Math Instruction: An Inconvenient Truth

by Robert Pondiscio
February 21st, 2008

There’s almost no good idea in pedagogy that doesn’t become a bad idea the moment it hardens into orthodoxy. People’s exhibit 1A: Constructivist math. On the surface, the idea makes sense. It’s not enough to perform a math algorithm by rote. If you divide fractions by saying “Yours is not to reason why, just invert and multiply,” you’ll get the right answer, but you don’t really understand the math. Constructivist math values the why of math over the how. But somehow, in too many schools, this good idea—that children should actually understand the calculations they’re performing—transmogrified into “children should not be taught standard algorithms.”

<a href="http://youtube.com/watch?v=Tr1qee-bTZI">http://youtube.com/watch?v=Tr1qee-bTZI</a>

The video above, produced by a Washington State TV news personality M. J. McDermott, shows of examples of TERC and Everyday Math problems and how those programs expect students to solve them. Teachers may find it familiar, but it’s instructive for parents and policy types who might wonder why math scores continue to lag. Remember that this is not a fringe curriculum, but mainstream math as it’s taught in tens of thousands of classrooms every day. Meanwhile, parents in suburban Washington, DC are the latest to raise questions about the constructivist math instruction their kids are getting in school, even launching a dissenting parent web site.

As a teacher, I certainly want my students to understand the bigger concepts behind long division and two-digit multiplication. But I don’t want them to take 20 minutes to multiply 26×31. Truth be told, I went off the reservation and gave my students daily timed drills until they were all able to do 80 problems in five minutes. Watch the video and ask yourself how a student who doesn’t have automatic grasp of math facts can possible score well on a standardized test when calculators are forbidden.

The video, by the way, is from the Where’s the Math web site, which puts forth a reasonable position on math instruction: “Math education must be balanced, encouraging solid essential skills and understanding. It is time to stop blaming teachers— poor State math standards and curricula are failing our students. Well-meaning activists, pushing unsupported theories, have undermined our State’s educational system.”

The Four Loveliest Words

by Robert Pondiscio
February 20th, 2008

The four most beautiful words in the English language are “I told you so.”

Barack Obama’s campaign released a statement calling reports that he is open to vouchers “misleading.” The statement is on EdWeek’s website.

“Senator Obama has always been a critic of vouchers, and expressed his longstanding skepticism in that interview,” says the statement. “Throughout his career, he has voted against voucher proposals and voiced concern for siphoning off resources from our public schools. The misleading reports that have been circulated about Senator Obama’s position took excerpts of an interview out of context.”

EdWeek’s Michele McNeil says the Obama campaign is in damage-control mode “because vouchers are one of the most polarizing issues in education reform, and fiercely opposed by the teachers’ unions. After all, the National Education Association’s endorsement is still up for grabs.”

Just to be clear. Does this mean Obama is NOT in favor of what’s best for kids?

The High Cost of Not Knowing

by Robert Pondiscio
February 20th, 2008

It’s 1987 all over again! Susan Jacoby’s The Age of American Unreason has come out of nowhere to become a top ten bestseller on Amazon. Her message, that there are deadly and destructive consequences to ignorance, has clearly struck a chord.

PBS Bill Moyers JournalIn an interview with PBS lion Bill Moyers, Jacoby is unsparing in her criticism of America’s schools. “When one out of every five Americans still believes that the sun revolves around the earth [there's a problem]….You shouldn’t have to be an intellectual or a college graduate to know that the sun doesn’t revolve around the earth,” she tells Moyers.

Perhaps Jacoby hasn’t heard that content knowledge is mere data, and that critical thinking and problem solving are How We Learn Now. Jacoby points out what ought to be obvious—you can’t divorce content knowledge from understanding and critical thinking. “People getting out of high school should know how many Supreme Court justices there are. Most Americans don’t. Well, now this feeds back into our current political process,” says Jacoby. “If you don’t know that there are nine judges then you don’t know that George W. Bush’s last two judicial appointments, Samuel Alito and John Roberts, have put us one vote away from having a Supreme Court which really believes that religion should have a much more active role in public life, that’s likely to overturn Roe v. Wade. But you have to know there are nine justices before you know that we’re up to a five out of nine sure votes.”

She also sounds a theme that will ring familiar to Core Knowledge adherents. “I think that schools over the last 40 years instead of just adding things, for example—African-American history, women’s history, these are all great additions, and necessary—they really have placed less emphasis on the overall culture– cultural things that everybody should know,” says Jacoby.