Comment on the article "States Found to vary Widely on Education“, published in the New York Times on June 8, 2007.
Why do the United States need to adopt national standards on education?
There is no doubt that President Bush had a noble goal in mind when he introduced the No Child Left Behind initiative - on the other hand, it is well known that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Although the approach itself is right, the law seams to ignore that there is a crucial fact that our students have to face as soon as possible: Life is about competition. For this reason (which is even more significant for fringe groups), the discussion about the need for a common yardstick is not only a question of educational equality, but also an issue of social justice; studies have shown that ethnic minorities suffer most from the regional variations on education standards: "Between first and third grade 27% of black and 25% of Hispanic students change school three or more times (vs. 13% of whites)." 1
Changing school can cause a lot of problems, especially for non-white students: If both Joe White and José Blanco had to move from Tennessee to Massachusetts, it would be much easier for the former to keep pace with his new classmates (because his parents could easily afford extra lessons), while the latter would be more likely to fall behind.
Given the fact that Americans usually move a couple of times during their lives, uniform standards are a significant issue not only for students but even more for graduates. In today's global society, flexibility ranks as one of the most valued attributes that employers demand from potential employees. If schools are supposed to improve our students ability to meet this demand, it has to be ensured that everyone (independent from local or social origin) has the opportunity to reach the same academic level. To make this happen, the renewal of the No Child Left Behind law has to focus on plugging the regional leaks in order to keep the American student-ship from sinking.
1 www.robevans.org/Pages/articles/achievementgap.htm
Why do the United States need to adopt national standards on education?
There is no doubt that President Bush had a noble goal in mind when he introduced the No Child Left Behind initiative - on the other hand, it is well known that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Although the approach itself is right, the law seams to ignore that there is a crucial fact that our students have to face as soon as possible: Life is about competition. For this reason (which is even more significant for fringe groups), the discussion about the need for a common yardstick is not only a question of educational equality, but also an issue of social justice; studies have shown that ethnic minorities suffer most from the regional variations on education standards: "Between first and third grade 27% of black and 25% of Hispanic students change school three or more times (vs. 13% of whites)." 1
Changing school can cause a lot of problems, especially for non-white students: If both Joe White and José Blanco had to move from Tennessee to Massachusetts, it would be much easier for the former to keep pace with his new classmates (because his parents could easily afford extra lessons), while the latter would be more likely to fall behind.
Given the fact that Americans usually move a couple of times during their lives, uniform standards are a significant issue not only for students but even more for graduates. In today's global society, flexibility ranks as one of the most valued attributes that employers demand from potential employees. If schools are supposed to improve our students ability to meet this demand, it has to be ensured that everyone (independent from local or social origin) has the opportunity to reach the same academic level. To make this happen, the renewal of the No Child Left Behind law has to focus on plugging the regional leaks in order to keep the American student-ship from sinking.
1 www.robevans.org/Pages/articles/achievementgap.htm