The Case Against Tougher Standards, Kohn

This weeks reading is “The Case Against ‘Tougher Standards’” by Alfie Kohn.  Kohn’s argument is that both a horizontal instructional shift and a vertical “tougher standards” shift are not the only conversations we should be having (“we” being teachers, politicians, parents, students, etc.) regarding how best to educate kids.  Part of me just wants to say, “Yup, I agree” and end my blog post here.  But, that would not be fair and it would not allow an open dialogue to occur.   I also want to go against Kohn, for the hell of it, just to see where it leads me.  I can’t do that either.  So here I am on another Sunday morning trying to decide just where to begin. 

I hear all the voices of the authors ringing in my ear that we have studied so far.  When Kohn says, “the Tougher Standards contingent is big on back–to-basics, and more generally, the sort of instruction that treats kids as though they were inert objects, that prepares a concoction called ‘basic skills’ or ‘core knowledge’ and then tries to pour it down their throats”, Wesch would be screaming in agreement (in his soft tone) that what students need is more inquiry, more thinking, less memorizing, more connection to the world.  We all know, this type of teaching is what keeps kids interested, it is what motivates kids to get up and go to school in the morning.  When Kohn says, “in practice, ‘excellence’, ‘higher standards’, and ‘raising the bar’ all refer to scores on standardized tests, many of them multiple-choice, norm-referenced, and otherwise flawed”, I can hear Delpit agreeing and asking difficult questions such as:  Where are my disadvantaged kids?  Where are the black kids in all this?  Can the test reach them in any way or is it simply geared toward the kids with skills to play the culture of power game?

I looked at one of Kohn’s hyperlinks in the article, “Standardized Testing and Its Victims” and read about many facts Kohn finds “indisputable”.  One in particular struck me hard, which was “our children are tested to an extent that is unprecedented in our history and unparalleled anywhere else in the world”.  I’m not sure when this article was written but it made me wonder what Kohn would think of the new Common Core Standards and the PARCC assessments that will test kids a number of times throughout the year.  It is expected that the teacher will test kids three times per year and then adjust his or her instruction based on what the kids know.  These tests are in essay form, at least that is the last I heard.   There would still be end of year accountability type tests as well.  Here is an interview with Kohn regarding Common Core.  I’m sure you know where he stands but thought I would share anyway.   So, in Rhode Island, high school students were tested once in 11^th grade (Wrting, Reading, Math, Science) under the NECAP standardized testing structure.  Now, high school students will be tested about 16 times (4 years x 3 tests=12 + 4 end of year tests).  But wait, that's just in English class.  Wait, that's just at the high school level.  What about K-8?  Hmmmm.  I also wonder, how much money the PARCC folks make on this?  It has to be enormous.

http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/living-in-dialogue/2012/05/alfie_kohn_interview_here_is_t.html

The following link has some good information on what PARCC is.  Keep in mind, this article is focused on California but the philosophy is applicable to all states.

http://toped.svefoundation.org/2011/03/11/big-promises-for-new-tests/

As always, I am looking forward to our discussion this week.  I am really at a loss for words because part of me was looking forward to CCSS when I first heard about it and actually I was thinking PARCC would be good as well.  Now, I just don't know what to think and it has nothing to do with Kohn, actually.  I have been kind of in a funk about all this new stuff and then add our new Teacher Evaluation System on top of it all and I feel I am in a state of constant fogginess (not even sure if that's a word but I like it).