MY LETTER TO THE EDITOR EXPLAINING RESTRUCTURED EDUCATION TWENTY ONE YEARS AGO!

 

LETTER TO THE NEW KATY NEWS WRITTEN ON JUNE 14, 1993

(I can't remember if they printed it!)  I put it here on this web site because I want the reader to know that 21 years ago, I was on to this stuff; I was right about what I was saying, and no one wanted to listen to me!

Dear Editor:

Thank you for your excellent coverage of several curriculum issues in your last issue and for allowing me the opportunity to express my views on the proposed use of an alternative Algebra I textbook.

The healthy discussion in your paper was hopefully to be continued at what was announced as a "workshop" on the KISD math proposal to institute Algebra in the 7th and 8th grades and on the requested use of the University of Chicago School Math Project algebra text. [See http://www.city-journal.org/html/eon_3_7_03mc.html ] Although we heard a nice presentation by one of our district's better math teachers, the last time I checked my dictionary, presentation is not synonymous with workshop. One has to wonder why no one is willing to hold an open discussion on this matter in public.  As a board member, I really appreciate those patrons who took time off from their work to attend a meeting in the middle of the day (and when did the Board ever hold such a meeting in the middle of the day?).  When it was over, I had to ask myself, as I'm sure those in attendance did also, "Why am I here?"

Cutting to the chase and saying what no one else seems willing to say, this small episode is emblematic of a much larger problem that doesn't just exist in Katy Texas.  All over America parents, mostly, and some teachers who haven't been brainwashed by staff development sessions directed by colleges of education, are in a fire fight to stop the steam roller progress of an idea that's been around for thirty years or more.  I refer, of course, to socialistic Outcome Based Education or Mastery Learning.  The idea has been tried for years all over our country under one name or another, and it has failed miserably.  State leaders, school board members and school administrations have been summarily dumped when parents realize how they've been duped.  Unfortunately the movement enjoys great popularity because it is now being funded by large untaxed foundations like the Carnegie Foundation (which by itself has assets of 950 million dollars), the Ford Foundation and in Texas the Sid Richardson Foundation; it has captured the fancy of schools of education that were about to be dismantled until this issue breathed new life into them (see Texas Monthly, "Would You Buy a Used Car from This Woman"); certain businesses, which have their own agenda, are advocating it; and an unsuspecting public that believes that in America no one would deliberately try to undermine the principles of democracy right under their noses, allows it.

Six months ago I was greatly concerned about the "hidden" agenda of the fundamentalist Christian groups whose activities were receiving much attention.  ""Stealth" candidates are not big on my hit parade.  Having been too often shot for being the messenger, I have, however, always tried to keep an open mind to everyone's thoughts, and so I listened.  What I heard was not religious fanaticism, but some very logical thought on a movement that seeks to establish some ideas and practices that are very antithetical to mainstream Americans' beliefs.  Apparently the religious right had the kind of networking in place nationwide which allowed them to get a wider perspective of these activities before the rest of us even had an inkling of what was in the works.

My first thought when I began reading some of the documentation was, "Haven't these backers of OBE (Outcome Based Education) heard of the fall of communism or the failure of socialism in Europe and Asia?  Don't they listen to the news?" Apparently they don't care about history; they are attempting to create their own "new world order."

"Someone" has said that any "Tom, Dick or Harry (maybe that's supposed to be Mary) can run for the school board, but they don't know anything about curriculum."  I would add that perhaps it also doesn't take a genius to see what is happening here with regard to the curriculum!

As patrons, parents, and teachers, we all need to be conscientious and give some thought and study to ideas that possibly are undermining the education of our children.  I am a traditionalist when it comes to education.  Education was traditional in its approach for centuries until the late 1960's, and that is exactly when all the problems started.  Johnny can't read because no one is teaching him how!  Test scores decline because the curriculum as we knew it has been ditched or is non-existent.  Traditional education never failed anyone; I will match my traditional Texas public elementary, secondary and college education against all comers.

Contrary to popular opinion, most school board members spend a lot of time during their tenure attending seminars, conventions and such where they listen to the latest educational theories.  In my opinion however, this OBE approach is not what most parents are being led to believe.  And what may seem innocuous at first glance, could be someone experimenting on your children.  OBE is also sometimes called Mastery Learning.  (Perhaps parents have seen this Total Quality Management stuff (which is a similar approach to student learning) on charts where they work or in the lingo of the corporate world.  It's the underlying movement to get rid of managers, work in teams so that nothing much is accomplished, and get rid of older workers.  Consulting companies exist that sell this stuff, and they make megabucks decimating our businesses!)  Businesses have embraced this philosophy, and they too are urging public schools to try it.  Their hidden agenda, obviously not so hidden, is to acquire mindless, complacent workers who won't question authority. Is this situation what we have in mind when we send our children to public schools?  I think not. [ It is notable, when looking at the list of corporations that belong to the Business Roundtable (one of the chief perpetrators of Outcome Based Education's implementation in our public schools) that many of them on the list ten or so years ago have vanished!  Could it be that their corporate leaders weren't so wise after all?]

For these reasons it is incumbent upon parents to be wary of this trend.  Within the realm of education these are the ideas that should send up a red flag:  improving teaching through testing; teaching to the state mandated tests; establishing behavioral  objectives; doing away with the Carnegie unit, i.e., non-structured, non-timed instructional units such as block scheduling; statements like "all children can learn" or "success breeds success"; instituting affective education (prescribing values for our children); making community service a requirement for graduation; building self-esteem for its own sake; "building adaptability for change"; establishing "life-role competencies'; creating life-long learning; using portfolio assessment; advocating behavior changing techniques, achieving political correctness; presenting drug and sex ed programs that strive to establish "no-fault" responsibility; using computer technology to circumvent the local teacher and/or the local curriculum; mastering "attitudes"; team teaching; team test taking; using problem solving (not to be confused with word problems); advocating peer tutoring; using group based mastery learning; using "formative and summative anything"; using remediation to circumvent real learning; abolishing letter grades; suing S, N, and U as grading standards (what happened to E?); re-taking tests until the student gets the grade he wants; advocating non-graded homework or student graded homework that is never collected; having way too much homework so that students have no time at home to play or be with their families; having too much time spent by students copying notes from the board or an overhead projector; providing no continuity in curriculum between grade levels; re-teaching until 90% of the class knows the material while the 50% that got it the first time around just sits and waits; asking the brighter students to become aides in teaching the slower students; taking students out of one core subject to remediate another; using criterion referenced tests instead of norm referenced tests; attempting to force children to believe all cultures are acceptable (the ones where they devour each other or shoot each other aren't acceptable to me!); integrating math and science curricula; attempting to teach children "how" to think as opposed to "what" to think; attempting to subvert the authority of the elected local school board; eliminating traditional services to students in order to fund the lower pupil teacher ratio necessary for the implementation of these ides; teaching children that they can make their own decisions without input from their parents; using "pods"; changing to heterogeneous grouping except for the intellectually elite; abandoning spelling books; attempting to "restructure" schools; placing emphasis on learning "experiences"; using calculators before students have mastered math facts; using strategies that talk about "effective communication";  attempting to get students up to "world class levels"; giving straight "A's" to most of the students in elementary school; participating in standardized testing without their being comparative scores; attempting to control what students will be able to do as adults or what their attitudes and beliefs will be as adults; using psychological testing in the schools without parental permission; abandoning of objective, academic performance standards; using anything that looks like someone is experimenting on students or their beliefs; requesting parent involvement where parents don't do anything but become mindless advocates for programs they don't understand; down-playing competition or getting rid of it altogether; attempting to promote "appreciation" of diversity (one can be tolerant without being appreciative); excessively using worksheets; watering down curriculum in regular education classes; thwarting students' individualism; using "corrective feedback"; simplifying the standardized tests if the students can't pass them; moving to subvert the power of state elected officials by giving education leaders appointed positions; advocating writing techniques that ignore punctuation, grammar, and mechanics; posing questions that ask parents "What do kids really need to know?" or "What is really worth learning?" which implies that the schools know and parents do not; acquiring learning that is "transferable"; de-emphasizing rote memorization; teaching and "modeling" cooperative techniques; "empowering students"; deciding to allow children to "plan their own educations"; touting parental involvement by establishing committees that have on them one parent, one teacher, five administrators and ten businessmen; referring to students as "workers" and so on ad nauseam!

These activities constitute social engineering at best and are ridiculous in the extreme.  They already exist in Katy schools to some degree depending on the school and its principal.  No good evidence exists to support the use of these methods.  A lot of evidence does exist that they do not work.  Perhaps the TAAS math test scores at Memorial Parkway Junior High say it best.  Two tests were given to the same kids; once at the beginning of the 7th grade year and then again at the end of their 8th grade year (Fall 1991 Spring 1993).  It is of note that the approach at this school was that of the University of Chicago School Math Project (sans the text but using its methodology) and the per cent increase in two years of this stuff only increased by four points --from 72 to 76 per cent meeting minimum expectations. That means 24 per cent or one fourth of the students in the eighth grade cannot meet minimum expectations of the math section of the TAAS test, and in two years these students only improved four percentage points!  [What we know in 2011 is that the TAAS tests were dumbed down or the minimum scores required were lowered as needed, so no telling how bad these scores really were.)

These theorists would have us believe that all this junk will help our students, but I think it is erroneous to believe that this is the "real world."  In fact in my opinion no one in the real world is going to tell their employees that they can do a task over and over until they get it right or that mistakes can be overlooked since there's always next time or that the employee gets to set his own pace for work and decide on his level of productivity.  I would be remiss if I allowed students to believe such things.

When 85% of Katy students say they want to go to college, then I believe we should be preparing them for that eventuality, not telling them that "Hey, you might not make it, so you'd better be ready to get a job."  Why can't they make it"  Why can't we teach them the fundamental skills of math and English so they can proceed with their educations?

But less than 15% of our students actually graduate from college, and too many of them flunk out of college after the first semester.  Thank goodness for HCC because that's the fail-safe net a great many Katy ISD students are using.  And when they do get into a college,  far too many of them have to major in meaningless fields because they have had inadequate preparation in math and science.

I don't believe in this approach to education; I don't think it works;  I don't think most educators really understand what it is they are advocating.  I'm inconsequential in the scheme of things, but I will never believe that public education should abandon content and knowledge.

Sincerely,

Mary McGarr