THIS PAGE
TO A FRIEND
International Education Standards
January 27, 2006
By Julie M. Quist
A column out of Britain (Melanie Phillips, “The real education scandal,” The Daily Mail, 1/18/06) described their education system in shambles. The article had a familiar ring. By the sound of it, England’s education system suffers from the same troubles as our own. And that raises some disturbing questions.
Phillips describes employers and universities providing remedial math and English, for example. Students have lost a knowledge of their nation’s history, while hard sciences are losing their appeal, and 25% of the country’s 11 year-olds “still can’t read, write or count properly.” Teachers themselves have lost a knowledge of the basics.
Two destructive ideas have gained prominence in England, according to Phillips: requiring the same achievement for all and ‘child-centred’ education, which rejects the idea that teachers are the transmitters of knowledge. Is it pure coincidence that American education suffers under the same orthodoxies? Education philosophy in the states for at least 15 years has been replacing “Sage on the stage” with “Guide on the side.”
Our own nation’s No Child Left Behind law, and its precursor, Goals 2000: Education America Act, directs us to “close the gap,” that is, eliminate differences in achievement outcomes. Rather than raising achievement across the board, all students are to perform at the about the same level. Is it any wonder that schools don’t push the high to middle performers to achieve their max? Is it a surprise that passing grades are lower?
This “equal outcomes” approach runs counter to America’s “equal opportunity” philosophy. Equal opportunity drives us to compete for excellence, because success won’t be handed out on a silver platter. We reap the rewards of our labor. “Equal outcomes,” on the other hand, is entitlement. It demands equal rewards for all. The British phrase is, “‘all must have prizes.” We’re now seeing where this forced equality leads.
In 1990, a UN conference on Education for All set forth an international agreement that was signed by most countries of the world, including the U.S. and Britain. In it, countries agreed to establish a system of measuring and enforcing equal education outcomes. In 1994, Congress passed its version of that – “Goals 2000.” Britain’s system has been in place for at least 8 years.
Is this what reformers mean by “international standards?”
Julie Quist is an education researcher and analyst, Vice-President and Political Director of EdWatch and Editor of EdWatch Newsletter.
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For further information please refer to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
