What do students really need to learn?

With the announcement that states can submit waiver requests, it would appear that the No Child Left Behind legislation is for all intents and purposes coming to an end a year early. Most educators are NOT sad about this. In fact, they are relieved. It’s not that educators are opposed to accountability and certainly most aren’t opposed to high standards, but the idea that 100% of students will reach an arbitrary (yes, I really mean arbitrary) score on the same day flies in the face of efforts to differentiate instructional practices based on the needs of the learner.

First let me defend my use of the word, ‘arbitrary.’ I’m not suggesting that the ‘powers that be’ grabbed a random number and decided this was the target score that every student should achieve. I recognize that a lot more thought went into deciding what the ‘cut’ score should be–(i.e. the minimum score every student would be expected to achieve.) However, I am suggesting that the ‘cut’ scores varied greatly from one state to the next as did the content being measured etc. In my mind, the variation between the knowledge students were expected to master coupled with the variation in acceptable scores from one state to the next points to a somewhat random and arbitrary determination.

This brings me to the question at hand…. “What do ALL students really need to learn and be able to do IF they are going to graduate from our K-12 schools and become productive members of society?” I want to emphasize the word ALL in this question, because I believe we REQUIRE kids to do many things that may not support their individual path in life. Oh sure, ‘those things’ may be important for another student, but does it make sense to ‘standardize’ learning to the point that all students are expected to complete the same requirements even though elements of it don’t meet their needs?

OK… I’m sure you’re ready for me to tell you at this point what I believe all kids MUST know and be able to do. As much as I hate to disappoint you, the purpose of this post was not to define the minimum ‘curriculum’ but rather to draw attention to the need for us to work together and redefine it. I would suggest that high stakes tests should measure what we really believe ALL kids must know and be able to do. I would also suggest if these tests really measure important knowledge and skills, successful adults should be able to pass them.

States across the country are preparing their waiver requests from elements in the NCLB legislation. Many have adopted Common Core Standards and most of those have joined one of the consortiums charged with writing assessments to measure the standards. I’m just wondering if we’ll get closer to getting it right. It seems we should measure the outcome which we desire, and I’m wondering if we are committed to preparing kids for success in their life or to take assessments that measure content knowledge?