When it comes to education in America, one need not be reminded of the numbers. The drop out rates, the math and language test scores compared to those of other nations, the amount of tax money spent per pupil in public schools; the numbers may be frightening but they are also futile when discussing where to take education in this country. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan’s new Race to the Top program is working to turn this discussion into action but is once again missing the mark and wasting time on the how and not the what in terms of changing education in this country.
Duncan’s Race seeks to directly attack two of the major strongholds of teacher’s unions, seniority based pay and permanent tenure, telling the New York Times’ Steven Brill “it’s all about talent.” The Race offers significant federal funding for states that present new laws and accountability standards that track performance of teachers instead of abilities of students. The Race represents the misallocated resources aimed at fighting unions and improving teacher performance without actually questioning what a proper education looks like. There is, however, a small movement of progressive thinkers working at just that. Sir Ken Robinson leads this quiet movement (the Sarah Palin of true educators if you will), which includes educators such as professor Lewis Minkin and Eric Bolton, politicians such as Valerie Hannon, and artists and actors like Lenny Henry. Known mostly for his two impressive TED talks on education and creativity, Robinson questions what something like Duncan’s Race is going to actually accomplish in the long run. “Reform no use anymore,” Robinson said during his latest speech in February in Long Beach, California, “[reform] is simply improving a broken model.” Robinson calls for a total revolution that needs to take place in the way we think about education. He is perhaps the only public face in the education debate still talking about education.
The problem with reform is that it keeps education on a linear track that promotes college degrees and 401(k) careers over innovation. Last month, the Common Core State Standard Initiative released the “standards” for kindergarten through secondary education in English and language arts, mathematics, science, and history skill sets. The standards, financed by the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) and the National Governors Association (NGA), are “aligned with college and work expectations…in the twenty-first-century, globally competitive society” according the CCSSI website. Never mind the misplaced hyphen on the English language arts standards website and think for a moment about the obtuseness and narrow-minded view these standards, which the Obama administration has said if adopted will increase a state’s ranking in Duncan’s Race, are taking. These standards presuppose that the challenges and demands of the twenty-first century marketplace are well known and understood when we are not even a full decade into the new century and close to the half the jobs that people will have in twenty years don’t exist yet. College degrees are becoming more specialized, negating the most important communication and critical thinking skills required in any job during any century and today’s economy is desperate for far more blue-collar workers than philosophy professors. Why do we assume that our schools are designed to get students to some other place? Understanding and communication of ideas, critical thinking, and the ability for each individual student to grow in their talents and areas of interest are what our schools should be focused on achieving. Education needs to be the goal of education.
So whether the teacher’s unions come to a crumbling fall, which is largely ambitious of reformers considering that ten percent of all the delegates at the 2008 Democratic Convention were union members according to Steven Brill, or the CCSSI standards take the place of SAT and ACT tests, what it appears is set to come from education reform is really nothing more than educational law reform. Ken Robinson may be equally as ambitious and idealist when imagining a public school system that tailors education to every individual students’ interests and talents, but he is merely the public face of what will hopefully grow into a movement of actual educators who question what is all too often overlooked or taken for granted and who can teach our children to do exactly the same.