NationStates Jolt Archive

Well, sort of.

It seems that Senator Chris Dodd (CT-D) and Representative Vernon Ehlers (R-MI) have proposed the Standards to Provide Educational Achievement for Kids (SPEAK) act. This act would create challenging, but voluntary, national standards. States that accept these standards would be entitled to incentives (This functions similar to NCLB. States will not be required, perse, to adhere to these standards, but will not recieve some funds if they do not use them.)
These standards would be k-12, math and science.

I'm personally torn on this issue. I support increasing demands on students. It has been shown that some states currently outperform most countries, including those of Europe. However, some other states underperform many developing nations. A national curriculum would level these glaring differences.

On the other hand, it does trample on states rights. Under the current system, states are free to choose how to handle their education systems, and, it is argued, that local and state governments know how to serve their people better than the federal government. The risk of abuse is a bit glaring, such as requiring a bible study class (the chances of this, while slim, are there). In many ways, SPEAK addresses this by making it voluntary. In many ways, however, no bill tied to education funding is voluntary (NCLB is "voluntary", too). 7-10% of education funding comes from the federal government. That sounds small, but it is, in fact, a large ammount of money, and a state would struggle to make it up on its own.


The question here is three-fold. For the US citizens out there, do you support a national curriculum? If so, what should be on it? If not, why not?
For the others out there, does your country have a national curriculum? How does it seem to be working?

Source (http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2007/01/17/19standards.h26.html)

I really wish I had gone to school in a different decade..

Every god damn year, new standards..

I'm not happy with the idea. There would be too much room for political tampering with the curriculum for whatever cause was in vouge at the time, but instead of affecting just one state, it would effect all of them (imagine Kansas's rejection of evolution on a nation-wide scale).

Japan, which does have such a national curricula, is going through the same problem right now. The right-wing faction of the LDP managed to push through a change in the fundamental law of education making it compulsatory to teach patriotism and a love of "the country and homeland" to kids.

It also overrules the local control of education, where the state and local boards make decisions based upon what is good for that state and wanted by the parents for their own childen. In other words, parents would lose what little say they have in terms of their own child's education unless they elect for home schooling or for private schools (which have their own issues or problems).

No, I can see where the idea comes from, and like NCLB, it comes with good heart and good intentions, but I don't see it being a good thing.

I really wish I had gone to school in a different decade..

Every god damn year, new standards..
higher standards=good
I'm not happy with the idea. There would be too much room for political tampering with the curriculum for whatever cause was in vouge at the time, but instead of affecting just one state, it would effect all of them (imagine Kansas's rejection of evolution on a nation-wide scale).that's my worry

Japan, which does have such a national curricula, is going through the same problem right now. The right-wing faction of the LDP managed to push through a change in the fundamental law of education making it compulsatory to teach patriotism and a love of "the country and homeland" to kids.blah.

It also overrules the local control of education, where the state and local boards make decisions based upon what is good for that state and wanted by the parents for their own childen. In other words, parents would lose what little say they have in terms of their own child's education unless they elect for home schooling or for private schools (which have their own issues or problems).ditto that for being another worry

No, I can see where the idea comes from, and like NCLB, it comes with good heart and good intentions, but I don't see it being a good thing.yeah

I really wish I had gone to school in a different decade..

Every god damn year, new standards..

This is, in my opinion, actually the problem.

Since I've been teaching, its a new miracle cure every year. They trained us in this program called "Ramp-Up." They trained us at $1000 bucks a head to take a weeklong course in the summer. They spent MILLIONS on books.

A year later, the program's scrapped in the name of "raising standards". Now there was NOTHING WRONG with this program... it actually had a lot to recommend it. Why the change?

Because someone else's pet project or kickback got selected as the next miracle cure.

For God's sake, give it three years before you replace a program... it takes a year for those teaching it to work out all the kinks!

This is, in my opinion, actually the problem.

Since I've been teaching, its a new miracle cure every year. They trained us in this program called "Ramp-Up." They trained us at $1000 bucks a head to take a weeklong course in the summer. They spent MILLIONS on books.

A year later, the program's scrapped in the name of "raising standards". Now there was NOTHING WRONG with this program... it actually had a lot to recommend it. Why the change?

Because someone else's pet project or kickback got selected as the next miracle cure.

For God's sake, give it three years before you replace a program... it takes a year for those teaching it to work out all the kinks!

yep, they kept changing the graduation requirements when I was in highschool, I never could get it straight, freshman year we needed 19, sophomore first semester 18, second semester 21, junior year 31, senior year 27...... then they (last semester of senior year) decide that two of my higher math credits would only count as general math because they weren't offering those exact courses anymore and then they had previously said that I could trade my PE credit for show choir and told me a week before school was out that they decided that we couldn't do that, which left me 3 days from the end of the year and 6 credits short..........:headbang: they said I had to come back the next year full schedule to make up the classes.

I didn't.

EDIT: I forgot to mention that I was Valedictorian until they decided that I was short credits, and that as of the end of the first semester of senior year I only needed 2 more credits to graduate.

This is, in my opinion, actually the problem.

Since I've been teaching, its a new miracle cure every year. They trained us in this program called "Ramp-Up." They trained us at $1000 bucks a head to take a weeklong course in the summer. They spent MILLIONS on books.

A year later, the program's scrapped in the name of "raising standards". Now there was NOTHING WRONG with this program... it actually had a lot to recommend it. Why the change?

Because someone else's pet project or kickback got selected as the next miracle cure.

For God's sake, give it three years before you replace a program... it takes a year for those teaching it to work out all the kinks!
see, I'm all for higher standards if, and only if, they are improvements. For example, my high school has always had base requirements: 4 english, 3 math, 2 humanities, 2 language, 2 lab science, 2 world and people, .5 civics, 3.5 gym, .5 health.
About 15 years ago, they added a writing portfolio. Last year, they made passing CAPT tests mandatory. Soon, they'll require a math portfolio. They increase the standards, while not shifting what they used to demand. Also, the new standards apply only to the freshmen. In other words, if you are a freshman when there was no CAPT test requirement, you don't have to pass it. If you stay back, and they make it mandatory, then you are required. This prevents the confusion as well as allowing for new and higher standards.

there are no "miracle cures"...when we all realize that, the system can work. Education doesn't have the instant responses...it takes time, not only to make something work, but also for its value to be visable.

There are alot of things the US does right in education. There are many states and districts that out perform even the top school systems. We clearly have some of the answers...we just need to use them.
yep, they kept changing the graduation requirements when I was in highschool, I never could get it straight, freshman year we needed 19, sophomore first semester 18, second semester 21, junior year 31, senior year 27...... then they (last semester of senior year) decide that two of my higher math credits would only count as general math because they weren't offering those exact courses anymore and then they had previously said that I could trade my PE credit for show choir and told me a week before school was out that they decided that we couldn't do that, which left me 3 days from the end of the year and 6 credits short..........:headbang: they said I had to come back the next year full schedule to make up the classes.

I didn't.

EDIT: I forgot to mention that I was Valedictorian until they decided that I was short credits, and that as of the end of the first semester of senior year I only needed 2 more credits to graduate.
thats insane.

This is, in my opinion, actually the problem.

Since I've been teaching, its a new miracle cure every year. They trained us in this program called "Ramp-Up." They trained us at $1000 bucks a head to take a weeklong course in the summer. They spent MILLIONS on books.

A year later, the program's scrapped in the name of "raising standards". Now there was NOTHING WRONG with this program... it actually had a lot to recommend it. Why the change?

Because someone else's pet project or kickback got selected as the next miracle cure.

For God's sake, give it three years before you replace a program... it takes a year for those teaching it to work out all the kinks!
*Bump,* especially since I aim to be a teacher just as soon as I find a new college to take the intro programs at. The politicization's getting so bad that, in fact, as my Senior History and homeroom class rep I had to fend off an actual coup against my own office. :rolleyes: (only semi-sarcastic people: this actually happened...) It was ineptly done and more than a little of a joke, from one of those "alienated and proud of it" types, but clearly also the symptom of a system that keeps trying to reinvent istelf every year and carries out the fool drama before the students' knowing eyes to boot. If the class offices are taken as a joke, then IMO it's probably because the school itself gives the impression of being a joke, which your experience illustrates being done in spades.

As long as it makes the teaching of the ToE mandatory, I don't care. But it probably doesn't, so I don't like this.

YES! Enough of this "states rights" crap...We're the United States, not the Confederated states...I think that was tried once and it failed.

Well, sort of.

It seems that Senator Chris Dodd (CT-D) and Representative Vernon Ehlers (R-MI) have proposed the Standards to Provide Educational Achievement for Kids (SPEAK) act. This act would create challenging, but voluntary, national standards. States that accept these standards would be entitled to incentives (This functions similar to NCLB. States will not be required, perse, to adhere to these standards, but will not recieve some funds if they do not use them.)
These standards would be k-12, math and science.

I'm personally torn on this issue. I support increasing demands on students. It has been shown that some states currently outperform most countries, including those of Europe. However, some other states underperform many developing nations. A national curriculum would level these glaring differences.

On the other hand, it does trample on states rights. Under the current system, states are free to choose how to handle their education systems, and, it is argued, that local and state governments know how to serve their people better than the federal government. The risk of abuse is a bit glaring, such as requiring a bible study class (the chances of this, while slim, are there). In many ways, SPEAK addresses this by making it voluntary. In many ways, however, no bill tied to education funding is voluntary (NCLB is "voluntary", too). 7-10% of education funding comes from the federal government. That sounds small, but it is, in fact, a large ammount of money, and a state would struggle to make it up on its own.


The question here is three-fold. For the US citizens out there, do you support a national curriculum? If so, what should be on it? If not, why not?
For the others out there, does your country have a national curriculum? How does it seem to be working?

Source (http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2007/01/17/19standards.h26.html)

Definitely tramples states rights but I can't get over the voluntary part. If you want a national standard, making it voluntary defeats the purpose of a "national standard."

Definitely tramples states rights but I can't get over the voluntary part. If you want a national standard, making it voluntary defeats the purpose of a "national standard."

you would think so, but attaching money to it almost makes it mandatory, why else would all of the schools around here bend over backwards to the point of cheating to meet the standards of NCLB (which is also voluntary) but because they don't get the cash without it, and they are so broke they need the federal dollars to keep the doors open to the free daycare they call school for the parents of the community.