Bush's No Child Left Behind movement destroys the “common school” experience, one of the strongest and far-seeing foundations for our democracy.
(EUGENE, Ore.) - Built on the commonsense concept that the local residents would naturally know best what their children really needed for education, “local control” was part of the original, then radical, concept for republican democracy.
It is at least as important today as when it was first set up to provide the steady flow of workers and entrepreneurs demanded in our earlier days.
NCLB was the Bush neocon-cabal opening, their destructive first-shot to deny and defeat that long-standing basic principle in our American educational system.
The intent remains to impose extremely rigid and demanding test-situations to force system failures, even as NCLB’s own obvious flaws force systematic change.
That strengthens and will perpetuate the cabal demonstration, in education, of actions taken in other areas, devastating morale and function in far too many.
The Hughes-S/J (9/4) column claiming “fraud” for the test requirements of NCLB is right, on one detail; but on examination turns out to be Far Right, in both observation and philosophy; and thoroughly disconnected from the realities of education easily observed by any professional seeking solid background on our system.
What that column does do, by happenstance or otherwise, is to distort educational realities and pervert the resulting public understandings involved in complex and difficult choice; such as has been forced upon us all by the Bush cabal eight-year “regime of radical redetermination for our democracy.”
It also reflects precisely the corporatist philosophy and activities we’ve learned to expect from the Gannettoid publication still operating in Salem.
States DO provide their own tests, annual or more frequent, as now demanded in modern learning methods.
That is and has always been an essential end-result of the Constitutionally-mandated state function to establish, maintain and extend state control of education, strongly established in our early national development; covering what is taught, how it is taught, by whom, and under what physical situations.
Those basic elements of any educational system, always under state control, are fundamentally more essential and important even than state-level funding efforts, since they establish the types, levels and application of final impacts on the learnings and the attitudes of most of our children.
Curriculum control --both choice of content and required proving-metrics-- differs widely among all the states --as it indubitably and surely should.
That’s an unavoidable consequence of our very-natural 150-year-long national educational development.
As basic function within and for every state, that in turn shapes whatever the testing situation to prove up the learning product may need to be; at whatever level, in whatever subject areas so chosen for measurement.
Thus “reading is reading is reading; math is math is math” becomes misleading misinformation when used for persuasive example without due check vs “the system”.
But it does serve to conceal the actualities of specific concept-level placement, areas of special concern, specific needs-met in various areas; and other differences from state to state, and even region to region within states; which demonstrate, remorselessly and irrevocably, the conceptual and applicational sure-failure of any system of national testing.
In fact, via easy-check with authorities, it is simple to show up striking examples of precisely this very large stumbling-block, naturally-grown in education over all those decades.
But even more revealing is the absolute lack of any understanding of modern teaching methods and of their overall application, these days, of the information-age technologies so widely applied, now, across every area of modern life --definitely including education, albeit with less-than-cost/effective number-and-volume.
ANY “national testing system” --by definition-- must begin-and-end with choice of precisely and in very minute detail every aspect of the curriculum function so wisely placed with each and every state.
Common sense demands one must know WHAT is to be taught, HOW, by WHOM, and under WHAT conditions --if one is to devise adequate and reliable metrics to make sure the product is produced as demanded.
Which is, of course, to re-state why such consolidating, coordinating, forced-cooperation operation of the educational system is sought: in short, “corporatizing” the outcomes.
THAT is precisely what we DO NOT NEED or WANT to now occur in our American educational system, just as we enter the 21st Century.
What we DO need is further development of many new methods and approaches; extension and adaptation of tried-and-proven older ones, with required additions of learning-system media; and close application of new methods for evaluation and, in some cases and situations, precise new techniques for actual cognitive-measurements of learning outcomes.
Many new and intriguing teaching/learning approaches are already on hand; with multiple others under rigorous and rapid development, in both academic and in-field situations.
These --with careful adaptation, strengthening, and skillful use of learning media via computer-delivery never before possible, make the sure death of any concept now available for a national testing system entirely superfluous and even somewhat silly.
What is really at stake here --perhaps explaining this close corporate attention-- is the kind and extent of relationship with teacher and teaching materials which, in truth, is by far the most essential and also the most demanding of components in ANY learning situation --at ANY level, for ANY purpose-- as tons of educational research has proven and taught us ever since the early 18th Century.
Decisions for sweeping further developments and much more effective national funding in their support is what is demanded NOW from our national government.
That is what will provide us with students learning democratic values and the levels and kinds of skills and thinking-abilities demanded for this coming Century.
Any emphasis on further testing is simply that much more motivation for all teachers to teach-to-the test, for local districts to fund-and-staff for the test; and finally, for the state to alter, adapt and decimate true and honest demands for learning results -- all to avoid the heavy capital and school-reputation punishment which, by proven result, shows the intent and the future of NCLB.
Any capitol-city daily newspaper intent on its Constitutional responsibilities to inform and teach its community and its state should be able to determine that demand --and react responsibly and honestly.
What we do not need, sure to be rejected by those who study and learn for themselves, is more corporate-interest distortion and perversion of easily-determined fact-and-system.
***********************************
Henry Clay Ruark is the one of, if not the most experienced, working reporter in the state of Oregon, and possibly the entire Northwest. Hank has been at it since the 1930's, working as a newspaper staff writer, reporter and photographer for organizations on the east coast like the Bangor Maine Daily News.Today he writes Op-Ed's for Salem-News.com with words that deliver his message with much consideration for the youngest, underprivileged and otherwise unrepresented people.
Op Ed: National Testing KillsSalem-News.com