If you reply to this long (8 kB) post please don't hit the reply
button unless you prune the copy of this post that may appear in your
reply down to a few relevant lines, otherwise the entire already
archived post may be needlessly resent to subscribers.
I thank Jerry Becker (2009) of the Math-Teach list for calling my
attention to the Maria Glod's (2009) Washington Post report "46
States, D.C. Plan to Draft Common Education Standards."
Glod wrote [bracketed by lines "GGGGG. . . . .":
GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG
Forty-six states and the District of Columbia today will announce an
effort to craft a single vision for what children should learn each
year from kindergarten through high school graduation, an
unprecedented step toward a uniform definition of success in American
schools.
The push for common reading and math standards marks a turning point
in a movement to judge U.S. children using one yardstick that
reflects expectations set for students in countries around the world
at a time of global competition. Today, each state decides what to
teach in third-grade reading, fifth-grade math and every other class.
Critics think some set a bar so that students can pass tests but,
ultimately, are ill-prepared.
Led by the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief
State School Officers, the states, including Maryland and Virginia,
are aiming to define a framework of content and skills that meet an
overarching goal. When students get their high school diplomas, the
coalition says, they should be ready to tackle college or a job. The
benchmarks would be "internationally competitive."
Once the organizers of the effort agree to a proposal, each state
would decide individually whether to adopt it.
The nearly complete support of governors for the effort -- LEADERS IN
TEXAS, Alaska, Missouri and South Carolina are the only ones that
HAVE NOT SIGNED ON -- is key. Many Republicans oppose nationally
mandated standards, saying schools should not be controlled by
Washington. But there is broad support for a voluntary effort that
bubbles up from the states. [My CAPS.]
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG
Judging from the state of science education in Texas [Hake
(2009a,b,c)] we can thank our lucky stars that leaders of the Lone
Star State have NOT signed on. For example, the abstract of "Science
Education in Texas #4" [Hake (2009c)] reads:
****************************************
ABSTRACT: The National Center for Science Education (NCSE
<http://ncseweb.org/>) reported that (a) "the Texas Senate voted NOT
to confirm Don McLeroy in his post as chair of the Texas state board
of education on May 28, 2009," and (b) according to the Houston
Chronicle "there is speculation in the Capitol and within the Texas
Education Agency that Gov. Rick Perry might elevate Cynthia Dunbar,
R-Richmond, to lead the board." Dunbar is the author of One Nation
Under God that advocates more religion in the public square.
According to a Dallas Morning News report by Christy Hoppe (2006),
Texas Gov. Rick Perry "believes that non-Christians are doomed."
****************************************
Glod, M. 2009. "46 States, D.C. Plan to Draft Common Education
Standards," Washington Post, 1 June; online at
<http://tinyurl.com/pwktx2>, and also "beckered" into the Math Teach
archives by Jerry Becker (2009) in accord with the "fair use"
provision of U.S. Copyright Law as provided for in Section 107, Title
17, according to which copyrighted material can be distributed, if
it's done so without profit, to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving the included information for research and
educational purposes. For more information see
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml> .
Hake, R.R. 2009a. "Science Education in Texas #2," online on the
OPEN! AERA-L archives at <http://tinyurl.com/nb3bem>. Post of 28 May
2009 21:01:29 -0700 to AERA-L, Net-Gold, & PhysLrnR. The abstract is
also online at
<http://hakesedstuff.blogspot.com/2009/05/science-education-in-texas-2.html>
with a provision for comments. As of 2 June 15:40:00-0700 the number
of AP-Physics responses had risen to 67 !! , not counting about 7
posts with slight changes in the subject line.]