In his letter (Feb. 19), Douglas Ludewig offered his concerns with standards-based education. As an educator, I would like to offer a voice in support of it.
As he pointed out, standards-based education will set aside "traditional methods of instruction" used to educate students since the late 1800s. That is exactly why it should be embraced.
Today's world requires a different skill set from that of 120 years ago, yet we continue to attempt to revise and amend an outdated educational model meant to prepare the best students for college while allowing for failure of a certain percentage of students who could subsequently find jobs in a growing industrial work force.
Standards-based education requires active student participation. Students must demonstrate understanding of real world concepts with creative thinking skills, not simply memorization of facts.
In a traditional educational setting, time is the constant. Students have a limited amount of time to "get" a concept because the curriculum requires that the teacher move on to cover everything in the syllabus.
Standards-based education requires mastery of concepts where learning becomes the constant, and time the variable. A student doesn't "move on" until he or she is ready to move on.
Standards-based education frees "industrial age teachers" to become professional "real world educators" in a constantly changing environment.
Students of today need to learn skills to cope with the issues of tomorrow. A standards-based education allows for that to happen.
Arthur Feeley, Auburn
Report a correction
Standards-based education
There is no question that "standards-based education will set aside 'traditional methods of instruction' used to educate students since the late 1800s". Neither is there any question that a change is desperately needed. The disturbing question remains: Is standard-based education the best model in existence to replace the century+ old industrial model?
I am anxious as I watch this change approach us like a Tsunami that seemingly cannot be stopped. My anxiety is increased when I read such articles as Teacher: One (maddening) day working with the Common Core, in the Washington Post.(http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/teacher-one-madden... commoncore/2012/03/15/gIQA8J4WUS_blog.html).
Simply because this system will replace an old worn out system is not sufficient reason that it should be embraced. Are there better models out there, which are being ignored (e.g., Finland, Singapore)? Are we racing headlong into this drastic change, thus possibly putting our students at risk, in a disguised attempt to acquire federal money (i.e., the Race to the Top)?
It is past time that we apply a little braking, not enough to stop, but enough to slow a bit and proceed cautiously. There are many wrinkles in the common cores; wrinkles big enough to wreck an already damaged system.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Sorry Arthur......
Kids graduating from high school nowadays have far, far less of an education than we had way back in the 1950s. Colleges have to teach remedial reading among other subjects because kids are "graduating" as dummies. No language skills, reading or writing skills, no hard science, geometry, trig and calculus. No Latin. And no civics. History is a joke as a subject in today's schools. I have grandchildren. I have seen the textbooks.
What kids today receive in school is a watered down version so as not to challenge the slow learners. The "feel good" and "politically correct" crowd have turned education in this country into a joke.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Kudos AwardedAgree (1)
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.