// April 28th, 2010 // 4 Comments » // Comments
By a friend who happens to be an excellent science teacher:
The global view, philosophical foundations of, and complexity within the concept towards educating exceptional students fills volumes of texts, has generated lengthy legislation, consumes courts attention at every level, yet is fleshed out each and every day in this countries classrooms, in spite of this perplexing and ineffective bureaucracy.
Are students really kept from receiving services to decrease a districts costs? Is there really a problem with the fox watching the hens? Are districts filled with, what designers and overseers of policy claim, individuals whose first tendency is to shirk, subvert, and steal, rather than educate children? What gain does an individual obtain in the field of education through shirking, subverting, and stealing?
Education cannot be based on capitalistic models. There is no limiting factor one can use to trim the fat. Every product has to be edited and polished, there is no waste, no sub par reduced price category. Humans are not products in the first place.
Dogs chase their tails trying to assess learning. Reducing learning to a stimulus response measurement cheapens the entire evolved human adaptation labeled intelligence. Limiting learning to a change of behavior places our abilities well below other species on this earth. So much of learning is below the water, only the tip of the iceberg is actually observed, or measured, yet this tiny piece of learning is what the entire accountability piece is based on. Grades are subjective in the first place.
Riding a bike can be observed. You can measure the distance one rides a bike. You can tell a human to use both hands, pedal with both feet, etc. You can observe changes in the student’s behavior during each attempt at riding the bike, but this only scratches the surface of assessing learning I feel. The total learning within the student cannot be measured. Possibly you can measure the new neurological connections made within the brain, but this still cheapens this experience. There is so much more to riding a bike than what you or I can see when watching someone ride a bike. Riding a bike comes from within the learner, beyond even what the learner is conscious of themselves. This is not entirely measurable.
So lets stick to what we can measure, distance. It’s such a small portion of what one needs to learn to ride a bike, though since it can be measured, we will go with this standard. Seems acceptable, until humans enter the picture. Each of us is unique, and therefore will perform uniquely. So what is acceptable? Lets test Lance Armstrong and Stephen Hawking. Don’t they both need to be proficient by the end of grade X? We can measure distance, so lets hold all individuals accountable to this subjective criterion. Are there points available for flair? Who will decide acceptable stylish criteria for flair? Your tastes or mine, which is more important, or does it fall on the persons desk with the largest paycheck?
What’s wrong with districts reporting on their ability to educate all of their students? Why are districts the fox? Though I am not remembering my history, am I. Society once felt, or someone once felt, that it was an inefficient use of funds to educate exceptional students. This is where the civil rights come into the picture, as all students deserve a free appropriate education in the least restrictive environment. So, back in the day, districts were the fox.
Alas, like a dog chasing its tail, I return to questions, how can districts effectively report accountability other than using standardized tests? Is there even an answer to this question?
What am I going to do tomorrow to ensure every student learns in the 48 minutes we will share together?
How will I know if the students have learned? How will I know what they have learned?
Do I control their learning to specifically only what I want them to learn? Could I, even if I tried?
Should they be allowed to learn what they feel is important?
