Thus far, I have heard some people being very, very, afraid of the Common Core standards. More so that the push for No Child Left Behind. The biggest difference between these two education reforms seems to be the political party behind them. This bespeaks motivated reasoning to me. Motivated reasoning would be exactly what Johnathan has warned about in his book. To quote Sherlock:
In fact, people become so pigheadedly stuck in their initial assumptions that I become almost physically sick. If someone were to be extremely far to the left, I would find them just as annoying as someone dead set in the deep right field. Both are errors in judgement.'It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.'Sherlock Holmes Quote-A Scandal in Bohemia
No Child Left Behind is, essentially, a very important reason why I am homeschooling. Too much time out of the school day seems to be spent on testing or preparing for testing and I can't help but feel this makes school a terrible chore for children. I believe, in order to educate children, you have to find their love and their passion and work with that. In essence, No Child Left Behind created a need for a new business niche consisting of standardized test creation, preparation, and administration. I cannot help but think that the politicos in charge of putting this test-heavy practice in place also helped their friends gain lucrative contracts.
At least, my mind is prepared to see this as true. That would be a bias and I should both admit it to my readers as well as admit it to myself before continuing. It is only by knowing my biases that I can endeavor to resist them or accommodate for them.
As to Common Core, I have different goals or priorities for my education than learning to take tests. I'd like people to be able to use what they've learned later on in life. So, if Common Core somehow also allowed the schools to leave behind the crazy testing, then Common Core would have some of my support for that alone. However, I do not immediately see that as likely. Common Core would, perhaps, standardize what is taught. This might allow the students to do better on Standardized Testing because they would all be working from the same basic starting point.
So, if Common Core isn't going to lesson the burden of test taking, what else am I prepared to believe about it? I like standards. I work in the field of medicine. I run a room with a camera and there are a list of procedures and rules for what to do and what to record. I like order. I like guidelines. I would certainly worry about the safety of other labs if this record keeping were not necessary. So, the idea of uniformity in education doesn't seem all that bad.
I am prepared to believe, however, that some.. motivated groups.. might find this intimidating. For example, if I lived down south a ways and I really thought Intelligent Design was a theory of equal value with Evolution, I might worry that my child would have to learn science that I don't understand and that I feel invalidates my religion. This might make me afraid. If Intelligent Design and Evolution were more equal in merits, I wouldn't have to worry so much. However, if I really can't provide a rational support for my aversion to Evolution, I might really be afraid that my children might hear evidence I don't want them to know. They might question their religion. They might question my authority over them, which I derive in part from my religion. They might change family traditions. My father and mother, brothers and sisters, friends and church acquaintances might look at me and speak ill of how my children have "strayed from the path."
Now, as far as these two theories go.. one of them allows for testing and prediction while the other does not. That doesn't mean the truth may be otherwise than the evidence laid out before us in the physical world. That might be a perfectly valid truth from a religious perspective and God might just tell me that at the End Times. But, all this aside, I stand ready to ask (most politely) of God why he'd create a world with so many innumerable bits of evidence implying something that wasn't true. As every question is supposed to be answered, I think I'll get my explanation and it will all make sense. For the time being, however, Evolution gives us a way to organize and understand the web of life upon the world and the extensive fossil record. Advances in understanding become possible by understanding Evolution, it generates results. If Evolution is not literally true (which may be) it is still, certainly, useful for scientists. It may well be that an Almighty God made the world look as it did to give Scientists a means and mechanism by which to make sense of the world.
So, while I support the right of parents to teach their children religion and religious values, I do not think that understanding evolution accurately in anyway inhibits religious freedom. One can understand evolution and still believe, from a religious perspective, that the world was really created in seven days and just looks different for some, unknown, reason.
So, on the issue of Standardized Education, I can see how some particularly motivated perspectives might generate a great deal of fear and loathing. I can even understand and respect that from a perspective of freedom of religion. That would be a point that we could discuss. But we should wait to cross that bridge when we come to it.
The other gut instinct I recognize about Standardized Education is a suspicious doubt that one size really does fit all. For the democratic process to work, it is vitally important that we have a well-educated citizenry. People who know how to reason and how to think instead of just accepting what is told to them. Standards are a checklist to try to make sure no obvious gaps are overlooked in providing a well-rounded education. The same might be said, however, of Standardized Testing. Here, I recognize some uncertainty or hesitation in my opinions.
I like checklists, so Standardization might be good. However, I also like flexibility and think an education that can be individualized for the child might well be of more value to that child down the road. A boring one-size-fits all approach might cause a child to detest education. I want to awaken in children a love of learning that lasts their whole life long. How much wonderful learning could one accomplish if they were inspired, like to tortoise more than the hare, to keep learning all life long?
As you can see, I have a lot of overhead even before I start investigating. I have to be aware of my biases and set them quietly aside. I must be searching for the truth underlying reality instead of confirmation of reality as I would like to see it.
Let's start with a Google Search.
At the top of the page, I see a sponsored add. I first ask Dr. Web to check the link for viruses and then continue. This page is a commercial one and states, "Implementing the Common Core State Standards The Goal: Every Child College and Career Ready!" This sounds like a noble enough goal, but this particular website sounds like a consulting group trying to secure business opportunities assisting schools implement the new standards. This reminds me of the businesses that sprung up offering Standardize Testing subsequent to "No Child Left Behind." They include a video:
http://beta.schoolimprovement.com/docs/common-core-standards-video.mp4
Understandably, they are trying to earn revenue providing a service to teachers and administrations who may be fearful or anxious about the new standards. The video does, however, provide one perspective on what Common Core means for students in the public school system.
Returning to our web search, I next notice several links from a website called "Dailycaller.com." I believe that I have read articles from there before and I'm initially suspicious. Trying to keep an open mind, I begin listening to the video. Will Estrada starts talking. He is, apparently, affiliated with Home School Legal Defense Association. We do pay a small fee to HSLDA to represent us in case we need any help with homeschooling our daughter. That is to say, in case the State comes knocking. However, I have followed these people and they do not seem to keep their focus on what they've promised to be their primary interest. For example, they recently lobbied against ratification of the UN Disabilities Treaty. I had done some research on this Treaty, what it meant, and why the HSLDA opposed it. The treaty had nothing directly to do with homeschooling. Some people thought that they may be unable to home-school their children with disabilities if the guarantee of the opportunity for an inclusive education somehow infringed on their option to home-school. That is, a gaurantee of the right for an inclusive education was feared to be a mandate for an inclusive education. Instead of seeking confirmation that homeschooling opportunities for children with disabilities would not be infringed, HSLDA campaigned to prevent rights and protections being extended for people with disabilities. This treaty is not the topic immediately under discussion, but the reader can read more about the extreme right agenda of the HSLDA in order to form their own assessment.
( http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/organizations/home-school-legal-defense-association )
My assessment of the HSLDA is that they are extremely conservative and, I'm afraid, nearly as paranoid as the NRA. And if you would ask me why I pay them to represent me if we run into any trouble with homeschooling my daughter, I would say you have a good point. I find it troubling to give money to any organization that fights against extending rights and protections to people with disabilities. I have a hard time wrapping my head around that.
Listening to the video and Will Estrada to about 1:11 seconds in, I have uncovered what seems to be a strong theory about why HSLDA is opposing Common Core. A hard-set core of conservative politicians have dug a deep trench to oppose pretty much literally anything Obama has chosen to support. Right here, we have the rhetoric being built up in a traditional narrative. People do not like Obama. Use his name in connection with something you don't like and people will transfer their dislike of the man to the issue. Strictly speaking, this is not an ad hominem logical fallacy, but it is skirting the territory. If there are reasons to dislike and mistrust the Common Core, you should be able to address the point instead of relying on Obamaphobia. Just like how the first person to loose their cool and start yelling in an argument is most often the one with the weaker position, any person who motivates with emotion before facts should be treated with suspicion.
As the video moves along, somewhere about 2:03, you come to the fear of Federalism argument. Ever since the Southern States wanted to keep their slaves and feared the Northern Abolitionists, you've had this sentiment brewing in the background of American politics. If you can keep the Federal Government out of your business, you can amass enough local support to oppress some interest:
- Owning slaves,
- portraying the Civil War as the "War of Northern Aggression,"
- not having your kids mix with "coloreds,"
- establishing various Jim Crow laws.
- teaching Intelligent Design instead of Evolution,
- thwarting marriage equality efforts,
- blocking access to abortion services,
- preventing sex education,
- and limiting access to birth control.
Will Estrada continues: "I think you lose the incentive for parents to be engaged in their child's education.." Ok, I realize I haven't gotten very far into this video, but Will keeps saying entirely unfounded things and making unsubstantiated claims. I know the type of person who would listen to him and agree with every fearful suspicion that issues forth from his lips. I will, however, try to give him a little credit.
Homeschooling parents don't just fear Federal involvement in their child's education. Home-schooling parents home school for one reason or another: fear of bullying, religious motivations, or special educational needs for children with disabilities. As a homeschooling parent, I do believe that I can do right by my child with her education. I don't want the State coming to my door with a complicated list of requirements. I want to tailor my education of my child to what I perceive to be her needs. To teach to her strengths or to take time to shore up her weaknesses.
What we still need and are not getting from Will is any concrete reason at all to feel that Common Core standards are going to somehow complicate or obfuscate the process of homeschooling our children. Obamaphobia, anti-federalism, fear... but no credible reasons to ground that fear to as of yet.
Will continues, "It never stops at State Standards.." He proceeds into what is clearly a slippery slope logical fallacy. If Common Core is bad, then we oppose Common Core. If what may come next from Common Core is bad ... we oppose what comes next! I think it is foolish to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Figure out if there are good things in Common Core standards and identify what may not be so good or even outright bad. Then address those issues directly.
Will asserts, "I mean, you have the classics being abandoned for instead reading executive orders from President Obama." Asserts... he doesn't back this up. He doesn't give any reason to believe this. What do you think happened? Perform your own web search on the terms, "abandon classics to read executive orders." What do you find? Well, what I found was a barrage of sites referring to Will saying this. This is important. Will may be right (I don't know, he doesn't cite a source I can check.) However, everyone else is picking this up and echoing it. Repeat a lie often enough and people will begin to believe it. If you wanted to "really" know if what Will has said is true, you can't find any critical analysis because it is drowned out from all the bloggers and message boards mindlessly repeated what Will said without any apparent effort to verify this information.
I feel as if I am watching a Nazi propaganda machine operating in the Internet age. Truth requires skepticism and a willingness to withhold judgement until facts can be weighed. There are no facts being employed here at all. But, with some effort, we can continue looking for a "Common Core Reading List."
Here's a link to the list: Common Core Reading List
Can you locate the executive orders?
There may be reasons to oppose the Common Core material, but the people who are frantically opposing the standards are not well-reasoned, deeply-researched, critical thinkers. The fears evidenced by these people should not become your own no matter how many times they repeated or how widely their fears propagate across the Internet. The dissemination of a fear is not the truth and we must be highly critical of any side of an issue who's primary tool of promoting their interests shares so many striking similarities with the Nazi Propaganda machine. Demand evidence. Ask for facts. Engage in skeptical analysis. Please, for the love of God and Country, think for yourselves.
Will wonders if a homeschool or privately educated student might be disadvantage from having not learned from the Common Core curriculum. (4:28) This would be something to take seriously. We want our homeschool kids to have the opportunity to go to college. Doing so means they have to take various tests like the ACT or the SAT. In this way, however, Common Core works for you. It helps you understand what sorts of material would be found on these tests and you can prepare your child. With Common Core or without it, you should still be gearing your child for taking the ACT/SAT and buying books to help ascertain their readiness for doing so. As a homeschool parent, your life hasn't changed. You are still going to have to read, review, buy, and teach from these ACT and SAT test prep materials. Common Core standards would simply help you align your child's homeschool education from the beginning with the path needed to prepare for these potentially very important tests. The advantage of time is like the length of a lever multiplying force if used appropriately. I see nothing to fear here.
7:04 Gina (the interviewer) says, "science based on political thought instead of the scientific method." She is talking about a perceived change in education. These aren't even her words, she's reading from some statement made by the "Constitutional Coalition in St. Louis." Now a critique of Common Core would be fair game. Does Common Core under-perform the type of education "Constitutional Coalition" favors? Again, all we have is a statement by someone that Common Core does something. Previously, we've seen Will's comment about kids being made to read Executive Orders disseminating across the blogosphere without any effort at fact checking. Further, we checked the facts and see that Will is talking without basis. We've linked to the actual reading list and we don't have to wonder or say might and maybe. We know that we should require some support for statements and not simply accept them at face value. At best, Will did not think critically about his own statement. At worse, he is intentionally spreading what he knows to be a lie.
But, back to Constitutional Coalition. They are advocating an approach to learning. "The classical education of seeking truth in an orderly way with chronological history, facts, and sequential mathematic exercises has been replaced ..." The continue into a critique of Common Core which conclude with "science based on political thought instead of the scientific method." This type of discussion might be profitable. However, Common Core exactly intends to have evidenced-based education. This seems to be the pot calling the kettle black. Some States have tried to teach Intelligent Design in class as a Scientific Theory of equal value to Evolution. That is science based on political (and religious) thought and not on the scientific method. You can believe in Intelligent Design. You can believe a literal reading of the bible. But so did people in Galileo's time. The quoted passages of the bible which they deemed proved the earth was immovable and therefore could not rotate around the sun. Except that these beliefs were not based on the Scientific Method. Nor is Intelligent Design. No application of the Scientific Method to the study of life results in believing the story of Genesis is literally true. You can believe that as an element of faith, that's your choice. But that is not Science, that is motivate reasoning. (Other Reading: The Story Behind Those Creationist Test Papers. Short version, not a public school but rather Blue Ridge Christian Academy, which is more understandable)
At 8:06, Will seems to be criticizing Common Core by illustrating an inadequacy in the current education system. A 5th grader that has not yet been taught the Constitution and Declaration of Independence has homework depicting the UN Declaration of Human Rights and the linchpin for freedom. Now, first, this could be called the logical fallacy of cherry picking your data. If you look far enough and hard enough across the country, you will find some example of lunacy. See also The Story Behind Those Creationist Test Papers, (above) which would also be cherry picking of data. But back to the linchpin comment, this is another echoing of anti-federalism and anti-UN sentiment. It is a fear-based argument as opposed to a reasoned one.
At around 8:35, he mentions "buzzwords" and then he uses his own set. In particular, he talks about "universal healthcare" which anyone who is Obamaphobic has already rejected. Probably effective for those who are afraid of Obamacare. Because somehow people having access to medical care is frightening and people having no access to medical care is comforting to some people. You know, like Jesus said, "When I was sick, you told me to get a job..." I might not be remembering that correctly.
I will pause in my deliberations at 9:45 into this video. The video is highly political, not evidence-based, doesn't cite resources, and seems to be very poorly reasoned. If I really want to understand Common Core, I suppose I will have to be more selective about what resources I invest time in listening to. I will set aside the conversation at this time and hope to pick it up again in a latter post with a more analytical source. Perhaps, something coming from professional teachers if I can find one.
No comments:
Post a Comment