Voluntary National Standards

[dcho]

So, as a discussion board, I figured it would be good to... you know.. actually start some discussion. Now that Spring Break is over, I figure we could do some of that.

I was wondering if anyone actually could define for me, concretely, what the heck are voluntary national standards? Are they just standards that individual states are supposed to propose?

[klycke]

Dear dcho,
Thanks for getting us started. I've been trying to find a space in my day today to post . I don't know if I can provide THE definition for voluntary national standards, but I'll talk about what I think I know and hope that others will chime in. My short answer is "it's complicated."

We have not had an official set of national standards until Common Core (see ed.gov and search Common Core for more information)--and those are still coming. The national disciplinary groups (e.g., National Council for Teachers of English, National Council for Teachers of Math, etc.) and many states have had curricular standards, but they are differently paid attention to and adhered to. That is, they are sometimes voluntary. Schools and states may not have consistently attached school funding or teacher pay to meeting the standards, whichever set they have determined to use. Some states and schools have experimented with those rewards/punishments policies, which I'd love to hear others talk about. The consensus among the publications I read is that incentive programs don't work to raise achievement or make kids smarter.

Here are a few links to resources about voluntary standards that might provide more insight:
www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2010/01/14/17ravitch-comm.h29.html

www.schoolsmatter.info/2007/01/using-nclb-to-incentivize-voluntary.html

Schools Matter says the following:

WHY AMERICAN EDUCATION STANDARDS?

To ensure that all American students are given the same opportunity to learn to a high standard no matter where they reside.

To allow for meaningful comparisons of student academic achievement across states.

To ensure American students are academically qualified to enter college, or training for the civilian or military workforce.

To ensure that students are better prepared for the global marketplace and, consequently, maintain America's competitive edge.

But are we doing these things? How can applying national standards address issues of equity in schools and the need for quality teachers?

[dcho]

I asked one of my professors about this in class and it seems that voluntary national standards is a fairly simple concept. They are national standards that states adopt willingly opposed to standards that are imposed by the federal government. I guess the part that was kinda tripping me up was the "voluntary" portion.

As for your questions at the end.... holy cow. Where do I even begin? Well... let me take a step back to the list of reasons why we should have standards. I think it's very funny to think that somehow if we implement standards, students will have equal opportunity, particularly when it comes to entering colleges. And I think it's REALLY funny to think that standards will somehow make America more competitive in the global marketplace.

Now, I will say that I think that standards are a PIECE of the solution toward these things and that I do believe that standards are necessary for the aforementioned reasons. But I believe that state standards are far removed from the source of real impact on student achievement: schools. Standards are only goals, but goals are only attainable with plans to achieve them. What good does it do for a coach to tell his athlete to reach for gold if he does not help him train his body, his mind, or technique? In the Olympics, athletes compete for the gold, their standard. But they get there with the support of their coaches, teammates, family, etc.

So to answer the first part of your question, I don't think national standards address what the SPEAK Act claims it addresses. It does not give the same opportunity for all students to learn at a high standard. The attempt to educate all children to the same level ultimately falls in the responsibility of first the students themselves, and then the teachers. In my analogy, the primary coaches to the athletes would represent the teachers. Within the educational system, teachers have the greatest influence on how students will perform. Please, do note that I do say WITHIN THE SYSTEM so that excludes students, parents, and environmental factors. So, this addresses the second issue. We need quality teachers because they are probably the most important PIECE of the solution toward a highly educated American population.

Once again, standards are only the goals. They are not the means by which we will get any real results form our students.

I will also say that this idea of implementing national standards. Who does this? Isn't it the policymakers? The politicians? Why do politicians make such a big deal about national standards? Well, I think it's because they really can't do much to directly enhance education but want to give the appearance of being able. It just seems so silly to me. I see this as a separate discussion but a huge problem nonetheless: education has become widely politicized and is at the mercy of bipartisan bickering. As mentioned in Diane Ravitch's book, ANAR's attempts to push for rigid voluntary national standards fell apart due to politics. That's what Ms. Ravitch says anyway.