Comments on: Too many standards, too little time

By: Steven Weinberg

Steven Weinberg — Sun, 02 May 2010 01:41:32 +0000

Hi Lara,
The common core standards are pretty much as I expected them to be. There are still far too many, although fewer than California presently has. They might do some marginal good if they slow California’s wrong-headed pursuit of Algebra for all at 8th grade (which is not a national standard), but I wouldn’t count on it. I’m not even sure the common standards will lead to any revision of the CA standards. I expect a committee of bureaucrats will announce that the CA standards match the common standards well enough (include 80% of the common standards) and the state will proceed with business as usual.
In the April 21, 2010 issue of “Education Week” Robert Lerman and Arnold Packer, two experts on what is really required for success after high school, have written an article entitled “Will We Ever Learn?: What’s Wrong With the Common-Standard Project.” They point out that Algebra II standards are required even though only 9% of the workforce ever uses anything covered in those standards. Some quotes from their excellent article:
“All students should master a verifiable set of skills, but not necessarily the same skills.”
“States are piling on academic courses, removing the arts, and downplaying career and technical education to make way for a double portion of math.”
“Every study of employer needs made over the past 20 years…has come up with the same answers. Successful workers communicate effectively, orally and in writing, and have social and behavioral skills that make them responsible and good at teamwork. They are creative and techno-savy, have a good command of fractions and basic statistics, and can apply relatively simmple math to real-world problems.”
“All the recent work in cognitive science and adult success…stress the importance of having pride and interest in what you do.”
It’s never too late to stop moving in the wrong direction, but trends in state and national policies will have to be significantly altered before we get a set of standards we can all get on board with.

By: Lara

Lara — Sat, 01 May 2010 20:09:38 +0000

Hi Steve,
I really enjoyed your essay. A quick question: How do you feel about the common core standards now proposed? Given that states are due to adopt them by July and the Gov. has not yet appointed a committee, is there any chance we could get on board.

By: Karen

Karen — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 05:51:09 +0000

Thank you Steve. I will look at the CDE website for more guidance.

By: Steven Weinberg

Steven Weinberg — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 04:45:10 +0000

Hi Karen, My instinctive answer was that of the standards you listed, 8.2 was by far the most important. Before I replied, I looked at the Blueprint for the 8th grade test on the CDE website http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sr/documents/histgrade8.doc and it says the same thing. That document lists all the standards and gives an A to the most important (Monroe Doctrine, Mexican War, westward expansion), a B to those of medium importantce, and a * to the ones that are least important (the treaties with the Native Americans during the Washington, Adams, Jefferson, and Madison Administrations). The document also says that there will be two questions on the state test on the 8.5 section, which translates into 1 or 2 on 8.5.2, maybe one on 8.5.1, and probably none on 8.5.3.
There is no way to cover everything in most textbooks. Publishers stuff in everything that they think anyone involved with textbook selection in any state would want. In 40 years I never spent much time, if any, on the Barbary Pirates.
In general, I would follow the standards, except in cases where you think the information in the textbook is particularly important or meaningful to your students.

By: Karen

Karen — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 02:17:32 +0000

I have a question for Steven. I was trying to make up some lesson plans for 8th grade US history and wonder if it is better to just teach what is required in the standards or follow the textbook. The book is huge and has a lot of information the standards don’t ask for. If one teaches everything in the book they will get a lot of info but probably forget a lot of it too. An example is this standard:
8.5 Students analyze U.S. foreign policy in the early Republic.
1. Understand the political and economic causes and consequences of the War of 1812 and know the major battles, leaders, and events that led to a final peace.
2. Know the changing boundaries of the United States and describe the relationships the country had with its neighbors (current Mexico and Canada) and Europe, including the influence of the Monroe Doctrine, and how those relationships influenced westward expansion and the Mexican-American War.
3. Outline the major treaties with American Indian nations during the administrations of the first four presidents and the varying outcomes of those treaties.
Well, the textbook doesn’t have much about those Indian treaties but does have info on the Barbary Pirates. So which do you teach them?

By: localed

localed — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 21:10:28 +0000

Great essay, Steven Weinberg! I know you’re retired from OUSD, but the district could sure use your help and vision. We want all students to learn, and perhaps it makes more sense to design backward. Think about the products of OUSD, and let’s talk about those which do not meet standards, rather than analyze those who exceed benchmarks (we’ll acknowledge them, and continue to build on what works well). If we backward map, determining what we don’t want, would that offer a new perspective? Has anyone had the experience of hiring and OUSD HS Grad that can’t write a letter to save their life, on has no social skills whatsoever? I believe a grassroots effort to exact standards that make sense, and go deep when it is logical would improve the educational environment, so teachers aren’t bound by guidelines that curtail any real creativity or depth of instruction. The wraparound services that OUSD could offer include a strong Parenting Ed program, family outreach, inclusive and equitable PTAs, et al. As our new Superintendent espouses, “Community Schools” could build a real effort to improve equity and outcomes for all students. We can’t expect the schools to do everything, and we know that 50% of student learning is dependent on what happens at home.

By: Amy

Amy — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 02:31:01 +0000

This is so true. I know the standards. I pay attention to the standards. I can tell you every single day what standards I am teaching. Do I think my students are being well served by this? No. It has taken me years to come to this conclusion. I still think the idea of standards is a good thing. But we need fewer, better standards. We also need to recognize that deep understanding, the kind that stays with you, is not measured by multiple choice tests that students have no stake in doing well on.

By: Sharon

Sharon — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 19:30:28 +0000

Listen to yesterday’s radio documentary “Early Lessons,” an American RadioWorks production: http://americanradioworks.publicradio.org/features/preschool/index.html.

Nobel Prize-winning economist James Heckman talks about how schools today are too focused on cognitive skill testing, to the detriment of children. He is currently studying how active exploration during the pre-school years helps develop internal motivation. Heckman proposes that children who have not had an opportunity to engage in active exploration when young don’t develop the motivation to try to do well on tests later on.

More of Oakland’s parents need to be told that it’s perfectly okay for their three-year olds to poke their fingers in the mud.

By: Donna

Donna — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 19:06:53 +0000

Education especially seems to be subject to the pendulum approach. With so many *standards* to master, the most a student (and teacher) can accomplish is to be able to parrot them back and possibly to be able to manipulate them a bit (*contrast and compare*). True understanding? Critical thinking and actual grappling with concepts and their implications? Hah! Not a chance if the teacher has to march on to the the next thing.

I would not go so far as to say all or most of the standards are not worthwhile. But with a short school day and short school year (compared to many countries) and overcrowded classrooms, they are indeed impossible. Moreover, I question whether mastery of ALL standards at the only level possible — parroting — really produces an educated populace. But perhaps that isn’t the point?

By: Cranky Teacher

Cranky Teacher — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 05:08:03 +0000

I COMPLETELY agree with Mr. Weinberg.

I have a feeling that the standards were written with a “kitchen sink” mentality, where a whole mess of college professors put in everything they would ever want students to know.

They are all online. Go check out the middle school standards and see if you know half of the historical details they want eighth graders to memorize.

Of course, there are folks who argue that memorization of facts, formulas and rules IS an important skill — if you are going to have to do it to pass the Bar exam, say, or the medical boards, shouldn’t we force kids to learn how to cram?