Saturday, October 18, 2008

Was anyone ever coddled to excellence?

Thomas Friedman in his famous book The World is Flat expresses over and over concern about our ability to ignore the very real and massive changes that are occurring in the global competitive arena. He points out that we are in a “quiet crisis” but a crisis nonetheless. The thesis of his book is that we face a confluence of three gaps that if not corrected will lead inevitably to a declining standard of living for Americans. The three are a manpower gap (shortage) of scientists and engineers to sustain the primary cause of our past economic success, an ambition gap because the competitors are willing to work harder and smarter than we are (we’ve grown self-satisfied and a bit lazy) and the third is the education gap. The biggest of the three and also having great impact on the other two is the education gap. One quote from the book that seems to best describe the crux of the problem follows.

“The sense of entitlement, the sense that because we once dominated global commerce and geopolitics . . . we always will . . . the sense that delayed gratification is a punishment worse than a spanking, the sense that our kids have to be swaddled in cotton wool so that nothing bad or disappointing or stressful ever happens to them at school is quite simply, a growing cancer on American society. And if we don’t start to reverse it, our kids are going to be in for a huge and socially disruptive shock from the flat world.”

I describe what he is talking about as a “kill them with kindness” approach that is all too common in schools. That is, the expectations are far too low of students and educators. Is there any excuse for American kids to score at or near the bottom in math and science when compared to their international peers? I refuse to believe the kids can’t meet the competition if given the right educational opportunities. What does that foretell about our ability to graduate enough scientists and engineers to replace the ones who are quickly reaching retirement age? If our kids are coddled in school does that contribute to the ambition gap?

Friedman tells of a finalist in Intel’s annual science competition, Andre Munteanu, whose parents had moved from Romania to the United States five years earlier. Munteanu started American school in the seventh grade, which he found a breeze compared to his Romanian school. “The math and science classes [covered the same subject matter] I was taking in Romania…when I was in the fourth grade,” he said. This is not an unusual occurrence. About three years ago I saw an interview on the local evening news with an exchange student from Hong Kong. When asked what surprised her most about her experience at Palmer HS, she said it was the math which was the same material she had learned three years earlier in Hong Kong.

How can we assume that we can continue with our low education standards and prepare our kids for the global competition they face for decent paying jobs? You know the answer. We must reset expectations for our education performance much higher. Will that cause consternation, “poor me” victimology, increased educator defensiveness, etc.? Of course, but is that pain small or large compared to a steady decline in American living standards because not enough of our kids could compete? Educators must realize that if living standards decline because we are uncompetitive they will be impacted as well. We are all in the same boat and need to get busy rowing in the right direction.

Now, a word about Colorado’s position with respect to the rigor of our education standards. On page 26 of Assessing the Role of K-12 Academic Standards in States: Workshop Summary available at http://www.nap.edu/catalog/12207.html are two charts. The first shows the 3rd grade reading cut scores (the level defining proficiency) for 27 states, including Colorado, California, etc. The second chart shows cut scores for 8th grade math in 23 states including Colorado, South Carolina, etc. In the reading chart Colorado is at the bottom with a cut score under 10 while California is highest with a cut score over 60. Now educators will tell you that the research says that if kids don’t read well by third grade it endangers their future ability to perform in the rest of their schooling if they even finish it. In the math chart Colorado has a cut score of 20 (third lowest) while South Carolina has a cut score of 75. This snaps into context the challenge (successfully ignored by our education establishment to date) that we face in Colorado.

Having observed how educators operate, their first reaction if confronted would be to appoint a blue ribbon panel to study the situation for years and then come up with a plan to slightly increase standards. That would be a waste of time. A good start would be to simply “lift” the standards from the state with the highest in each subject. That would be much quicker to do and would be a good start. Some will say we would be overreacting because we might set the standards too high. They will be concerned that schools that were defined as doing great compared to the low standards would be defined as doing poorly compared to the higher standards. It would really be no change only recognition of the true performance which is being masked by Colorado’s ridiculously low standards. When you realize the gap that exists between the state and national standards and the further gap that exists between our national standards and those of our leading competitor nations you will see that the initial step-up in standards would only get us part way to where we need to be. Believe me, more money is not the answer. We have lavished huge sums on the education sector for decades with no positive effect on performance compared to our international competition. More money only gives the anti-change forces in education tacit reinforcement and a license to continue their failed methods in the future. The choice is clear: short term pain for long-term gain or no pain short- term followed by excruciating long-term pain. I think it is an easy choice to make.

Copyright © Paul Richardson 2008

No comments: