COMMENTARY ON CURRICULUM:

I suppose that my first remark under this topic has to be, "It's the curriculum, stupid!"

Whatever else goes on in public schools these days, the vehicle that has allowed for the most dumbing down of our students has been the deterioration of the curriculum. 

Many who haven't made education their business sometimes fail to understand two terms:  curriculum and methodology.  Those two things are paramount when discussing the changes that have occurred in our schools.

The curriculum is the course of study--WHAT is taught.  Methodology is the manner in which the curriculum is presented to the student.

Our legislators have clearly outlined what they expect from our curriculum in the Texas Education Code 28.002(h): “...the primary purpose of the public school curriculum is to prepare thoughtful, active citizens who understand the importance of patriotism and can function productively in a free enterprise society with appreciation for the basic democratic values of our state and national heritage.”

In days gone by when I was a high school teacher of English, the curriculum was centered on the textbook.  American literature, for example, could be approached from a chronological standpoint or a thematic standpoint.  Within that framework, teaching individual literary works could proceed in many ways. For the most part, it was up to the teacher to decide how she/he was going to teach the subject.  Funny how that worked so well for hundreds of years!

The changes that have been wrought over the years (in the name of "education reform") have been subtle and sometimes not so subtle, but the accumulated effect has been to evoke drastic change.

Explaining those changes is very difficult and sometimes impossible. The difficulty stems from the terminology, the attitude of the education establishment, political pressure, and changing belief systems among other things.

Another factor that is often not mentioned is the intellectual ability of the teacher, the collegiate preparation of the teacher, and the ability of the teacher to teach.  In the current education world, the ability to teach is not the chief attribute of a person employed to impart knowledge to students.  In fact, "teaching" has given way to "facilitating" with the student being the loser in this trade-off.  Educationists are more into "training" than they are into "education" at this point in time.  The reader should make certain that he understands the difference between education and training.

I'm almost paranoid about the difference between training and education to the point of distraction.  My overzealous attitude was punctuated by a remark from my son.  This particular son was enrolled in the MBA program at Rice. I was pleased that he was getting another degree, but I often pointed out to him that an MBA is "training" not "education."  So as time passed, when he would begin a conversation about his school activities, he would preface it with "I know, Mom, I'm not getting an education, but..."  I tried to curtail my belief, but I couldn't!

The curriculum, and this is another one of those "The World According to Mary" things, must be of the "education" variety, and not the "training" variety.  Public schools traditionally and for hundreds of years, have provided students with a liberal arts education.  My dictionary defines "liberal arts" as "academic disciplines, such as languages, history, etc. that provide information of general cultural concern, as distinguished from more narrow practical training, as for a vocation or profession."

It is my opinion that this practice in our country for hundreds of years of providing a liberal arts education served all of us very well. As a society we progressed quite well over time--inventing, discovering, writing, producing all sorts of things that advanced our culture and our civilization.  Our pre-eminence in the world was undisputed.  Our dominance made the rest of the world's people either envious or wishing to join us when they were allowed.

Like most people, I was late to the party with regard to seeing the handwriting on the wall. It is only in the last twenty-four years that I realized what was afoot.  On a personal level I tried to stop what I recognized as being so deleterious to students while a member of the Katy ISD school board.  While others could grasp some of the problem, most never could see the total picture.  I cannot let it go, and believe me, I've tried.  If one understands what has happened and what continues to happen, one cannot just walk away.

Do I think there is guilt for those who have perpetrated this change?  Yes, I do think that.  But there are degrees of guilt.  For those who deliberately set out to dumb down students for financial gain like the National Governors' Council, the Business Roundtable, lobbyists like Thomas Ratliff, and the TBEC, there is lots of blame.  For those who are implementers of the agenda, it would depend on whether they understand what they are doing.  For those who lead the way and do so also for financial gain, there is abundant guilt.  I think all those people know who they are.  It's the students and their parents who are the innocents--the ones who have been tricked into believing that what happens at school every day is beneficial to them and their children.  These are the same people that the Obama Administration have tricked on Obamacare and other policies that have been implemented over the last six years. Those are the people for whom I try my best to explain the deal. It's not an easy task. And most of them are not interested in knowing the truth.