About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unread


Sanction: 29, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 29, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 29, No Sanction: 0
Post 0

Wednesday, October 16, 2013 - 9:35amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Here is what I think about Common Core:

1. It further federalizes our k-12 educational system. It is put together as if it were a product of the states coming together, but having a consensus of state governments building a program that is run from the Federal Department of Education is totally the wrong way to go in terms of structure. It is touted as 'voluntary' but they are talking about adoption at the state level. Parents get no choice - it isn't voluntary for them. Education should have no government involvement, and adding a new, unifying layer is going the wrong direction.

2. There will be some aspects of student performance in some states that will improve from the application of Common Core, but that will just obscure the fact that major improvement requires getting government out of education so that free enterprise and competition can provide massive improvement.

3. The political argument for Common Core is like a mostly empty Trojan Horse. "Look inside," say the proponents. "See, nothing bad there." But later, after everyone signs up, it can be tweaked, changed, shifted from voluntary to the states to mandatory, and it will achieve what the Progressive are seeking: Centralized control of education by elites in Washington.

Remember, the assessments are published by the federal government (through the test publishing cronys) and if the students haven't studied for the 'right' content, they won't pass. And even if it were a consensus of states that drove the approved curriculum, it still misses the point of real competition.

4. The main drive for this is a partnership between Progressive policy wonks and big business cronys (the College Board - a testing service, ACT - a testing service, ETS - a testing service, Pearson and Pearson Evaluation Systems - a scoring service, McGraw Hill - a publisher and testing service, and several other testing and scoring companies).

5. The tests that measure success or failure of Common Core are produced by Common Core. NY & Kentucky found that their students did well on the Common Core tests at the end of a year of following Common Core standards, but scored poorly when using the traditional tests. We already have too much 'teaching to the test' going on. And here the people who make the Common Core standards, make the tests, and the test publishers look better if the students do well on their tests. How long before the tests give better grades to the students who best parrot the Progressive views on things?

6. All of these schemes are a one size fits all, centralized control that offers a promise to the progressives of a sweet path for indoctrination. But even if were to remain innocent of Progressive political indoctrination forever (which would never happen), it's worse fault is that implies that government can participate in a way that will cure whatever ails our educational system. And that obscures the fact that what ails the system IS government intervention.

There are, no doubt, some good ideas in Common Core and the very idea of a standard available to measure educational success that works across state borders could be a good thing. But the market place, given economic liberty for education, would provide that as well as a rapid evolution of educational techniques.

A sensible Objectivist approach to education would be to eliminate all federal programs and legislation on education. Then the states should start voucher systems to directly convert tax revenues used to fund education into vouchers given to the parents. Let all of the schools that fail to get enough from vouchers to cover expenses go out of business (public and private). Then phase out the voucher program by reducing both the taxes and the size of the vouchers (maybe by 10% per year) till the program can be ended. No more taxes for education, no more subsidies. All private. Then eliminate all laws regarding education at state and local level.

Sanction: 18, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 18, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 18, No Sanction: 0
Post 1

Wednesday, October 16, 2013 - 11:26amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
What Steve said.

regards,
Fred

Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Post 2

Wednesday, October 16, 2013 - 6:19pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I agree with Fred wholeheartedly.

Ed


Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Post 3

Wednesday, October 16, 2013 - 10:05pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Ed, that was an Excellent post! :p

Steve, thanks well said.

If these standards have merit, then individuals and private organizations can give them good reviews and use them themselves. It would be outside the scope of a capitalist government to be involved with the development and review/acceptance of education standards. Anything outside the scope of a capitalist government should not be part of government, unless overwhelmingly economically practical. Education is definitely out of scope, there is nothing different about it than any other private business, and its absolutely not economically practical for education to be regulated/funded by government.

Post 4

Wednesday, October 16, 2013 - 10:13pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Thanks, Fred, Ed, Dean.

Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Post 5

Thursday, October 17, 2013 - 6:57amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
The Common Core State Standards Initiative is nothing new. It is an attempt to retrench, to regain the lost "happy days" that never really existed, albeit by including computers in the curriculum. It is an example of cultural conservatism. The standards themselves are largely unarguable. Feel free to argue them if you have a specific point to make.

In the 19th century before John Dewey and Karl Marx took over public education, teachers were beaten up by bullies - but of course teachers themselves beat children. We thought it was cute: "School days, school days, good old golden rule days. Reading and writing and 'rithmetic taught to the tune of a hickory stick." John Adams's younger son (John; not Quincy) was expelled from Harvard for taking part in a student riot.

In the classic movie, Blackboard Jungle, a student attempts to rape a teacher. Do you think they just made that up? In my high school (1963), a teacher caught a kid cutting school and the kid beat up the teacher. Sure, we were all shocked. But these were the days of Lassie and Leave it to Beaver and Father Knows Best.

Private education was no better. If you read any biographies of great thinkers, while some benefited from school, most suffered - and not because of John Dewey and Karl Marx. It is true that most people in most times and place mostly benefited from whatever education was commonly available. Mostly. That is what public education attempts.

It is not "government" education, though it is managed in a public mode. We vote for millages for education and they are separate funding, just for the schools. We elect the school board. You can run for election to the school board. (In fact, in America - Kentucky, I believe was first - even in the 1830s, women (unmarried) who were property owners voted in local school elections. They were politically and legally separate from the other public institutions.) The mayor and other officials generally have no say and would be barred from interfering. Public education stands on its own as a separate institution in America.

Historically, schools were empowered to act in loco parentis. This especially applied to colleges when the age of majority was 21. But it applied to all schools. If need be, it was a protection for the child against the parents. And the situation had its parallels in private education, also, especially where children were boarded away from home. And children were abused in those private schools, also, as we all know.

No lost golden age ever existed.
DMG: "If these standards have merit, then individuals and private organizations can give them good reviews and use them themselves."
And when they do, libertarians denounce them as "crony capitalists." See Wolfer's Point 4 in Post 0 above.

In fact, such private standards have long existed, long been endorsed, and long been taught to. That is what the Advanced Placement tests are all about, but also the SATs, PSAT/National Merit Scholarship Qualifying Test, and the ACTs. The SATs also come with non-AP "achievement tests" (now called "Subject Tests"). If a school's kids get As in class and then do poorly on these tests, the parents who care to join the PTA let the school know about it rather plainly. In fact, that rarely happens because schools teach what is tested and tests measure how well that was learned.

And radicals have long complained. Leftists know The Little Red Schoolhouse, but Objectivist also know the scathing condemnation of common education from Banesh Hoffman's The Tyranny of Testing.

Public schools are to education what fast food is to nutrition. And, yes, in response to market demands, McDonald's serves salads. And Common Core is an attempt to meet a public demand.

The problems in public education are deep and wide. Teachers invest precious hours in needless administration, especially of problem children (from problem parents). Whether a single private school or a huge public system, someone above the teacher decides what will be taught and when and sometimes even how.

One size cannot fit all - it might not even fit most. Generally speaking, in America today, in most states, you cannot take the law bar examination unless you hold a juris doctorate from an accredited school. That would disqualify half of the US Supreme Court today and 90% of those who ever served. We are a nation of autodidacts.

But education is a specialization no different from thoracic surgery or golf course landscaping. Not every parent can learn how, do it well, or make the time for those. Our post-industrial, information-age society has deep roots in the mass education of young people. The Common Core State Standards Intiative is nothing more or less than an attempt by those who lead the field intellectually and administratively to agree on what most children will probably need to have learned when they get wherever they will be 20 years from now. It ain't easy...


Post 6

Thursday, October 17, 2013 - 8:38amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
That is an interesting take, thanks, MEM.

Post 7

Thursday, October 17, 2013 - 9:43amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Marotta,
It is not "government" education, though it is managed in a public mode. We vote for millages for education and they are separate funding, just for the schools. We elect the school board. You can run for election to the school board.
Is the funding voluntary? No, it is a tax. Are the people who run it elected, as for example, mayors, state governors, and other government administrators? Yes. Is it a monopoly by law? Yes? How could anyone but Marotta not think that public schools are government schools?
---------
... Common Core is an attempt to meet a public demand.
Right... like ObamaCare is an attempt to meet a public demand.
---------
One size cannot fit all - it might not even fit most. Generally speaking, in America today, in most states, you cannot take the law bar examination unless you hold a juris doctorate from an accredited school. That would disqualify half of the US Supreme Court today and 90% of those who ever served. We are a nation of autodidacts.
But education is a specialization no different from thoracic surgery or golf course landscaping. Not every parent can learn how, do it well, or make the time for those. Our post-industrial, information-age society has deep roots in the mass education of young people. The Common Core State Standards Intiative(sic) is nothing more or less than an attempt by those who lead the field intellectually and administratively to agree on what most children will probably need to have learned when they get wherever they will be 20 years from now.
One size cannot fit all? Then what exactly is Common Core but a common standard for all schools?

Marotta says that we are a nation of the self-taught, but education is a specialization, like thoracic surgery... so why then should we should turn it over to government administration?

"Common Core State Standards Intiative(sic) is nothing more or less than an attempt by those who lead the field intellectually and administratively..." Whoa, let's be a bit more specific. These leaders are politicians and large corporations (who we all know Marotta is so fond of) that make their money in the testing and test publishing business (no conflict of interest here).

A group of "experts" agree on what most children will probably need to learn... and then the government forces that to be the common standard to which we all must accept. If that isn't just a perfect example of far-left progressive application of centralized control by elites, I don't know what is.
---------

I hope that everyone who took the time to read my post on Common Core will notice how many times I mentioned the need for competition in a free market as the answer to the problems in education. By its nature Common Core is another layer of uniform, government administered control. Notice that Marotta mentions me, mentions my post, but never makes a comment about my arguments for free enterprise. Never. So, is there such a thing as an Objectivist who believes that education should be administered by the government. I don't think so.

Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Post 8

Friday, October 18, 2013 - 10:07amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Have you read this?

http://www.oftwominds.com/blogoct13/education-revolution10-13.html
The model that fails is the state granted monopoly in education - public and private. Eliminate that, and education becomes cheaper, better, and more effective for everyone.

Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Post 9

Sunday, October 20, 2013 - 7:16amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I am not advocating for the Common Core State Standards Initiatve. If it has flaws, they will be in the actual standards. 

The deeper problem of centralized education only reflects a very basic problem in centralized anything.  Our capitalist economy depends on a tension between individual initiative and the efficient allocation of resources. Innovators do not profit as much as "early adopters."  Innovators often fail. Early adopters take up innovations that have potential, but only after they have survived incubation.  Late comers accept even lower profits for the benefit of even lower risks.

From the first days of the personal computer revolution, the trend was always for smaller and smaller computers (smarter and smarter handheld calculators).  The Adam and the Palm Pilot both failed.  Blackberry is in serious danger. The iPod, the iPhone, the Droid, and others meet those needs successfully. 

But three nerds in a garage could not meet that demand. That takes large corporations. Their internal structures lower transaction costs and rationalize the allocation of resources.  So, too, with public education which is only the grocery store superchain of learning.  Not everyone wants or needs a gourmet restaurant or their own farm.

I noted that it is deep in American culture that we educate ourselves. The creation of Microsoft and the history of the Supreme Court are testimony to that.  However, I also pointed to a story from Richard Feynman who as a child discovered some cool trigonometry on his own.  He had a hard time explaining it to his friend because he also developed his own symbols.  Once his friend got him to understand everyone else's symbols, Feynman found out that everyone else already knew these things about angles and sides.  Public education has a place in the world.  Not all education was, is, or needs to be one-on-one tutoring or one-alone discovery and invention.

The other side of the problem is that the Feynmans and millions of others in their own ways all suffer from collective engagements. To continue the analogy to supermarkets, even there, you are not forced to buy an apple: you can choose the apple you want... or pass it up for bananas.  We have no way to do that in public education.  Even so-called private schools have not offered much innovation in education. 

We seem conceptually stuck.

My original post was in contrast to the conservative complaint from Glenn Beck and many, many along the right wing denouncing Common Core.  I just see it as part of the anti-intellectual (and anti-individualst) tradition on the American right.  See Prof. Machan's essay here and the comments.

(Edited by Michael E. Marotta on 10/20, 7:30am)


Post 10

Sunday, October 20, 2013 - 9:52amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I am not advocating for the Common Core State Standards Initiatve.
Marotta, you held it up as something that has positive values that should be looked at for its strengths and weaknesses. And you pointed out what you see as positives, and never even mentioned that it is an imposition by a government (at the state level) of a one-size-fits-all methodology of teaching.
The deeper problem of centralized education only reflects a very basic problem in centralized anything.
Then you make some strange reference to economic issues... those related to innovators, early adopters, and efficient allocation of resources. (By the way, do you know that "early adopters" is a term for a particular type of consumer, not a producer?) Anyway, you are totally wrong about the extent of the problems caused by centralizing education. Centralized education reflects far deeper problems than your strange example. It goes much deeper than the fact that government's centralized production is economically inefficient, it goes far beyond the fact that centralizing production of anything under government will have the effect of severely stunting future growth and improvement, it even goes far beyond the fact that you can't engage in the centralized government intervention into the economies without violating rights of those that are blocked from competing, those who will not be able to make choices between competitors that would have been there, and those forced to pay the taxes supporting the government schools.

It goes to the dangers in handing over the control of ideas being fed to the young to the state.
----------------
My original post was in contrast to the conservative complaint from Glenn Beck and many, many along the right wing denouncing Common Core. I just see it as part of the anti-intellectual (and anti-individualst)(sic) tradition on the American right.
I got that. It was quite clear that you see centralized government standards created by an elite, enforce by state governments as intellectual and individualistic. That is the what the far left keeps on saying. I can't begin to understand how their insistence of centralized control is intellectual and everyone who opposes it is anti-intellectual. And how the elimination of real competition is supposed to be individualistic is just as nonsensical. If a person is secretly, or even subconsciously, in favor of an elite controlling everything, then they can't really argue their case, and are left with only one thing they can do. Find examples of undesirable characteristics (or make them up) regarding their opposition, and engage in smear tactics and misdirection.

Marotta links to Professor Machan's article from his post. Maybe he didn't notice that it starts with this sentence: "Just to keep matters in balance, let me point out that although it is mostly the Left that hates individualism—remember, socialism means that we, humanity, are all just one organism..." Or, as Marotta defends Common Core, he should have notices this sentence about anti-individualism: "It is the one-size-fits-all mentality, that’s what lies behind it. Individualism is notoriously eclectic in the sort of human lives it regards as perfectly legitimate, acceptable, capable of being lived properly, virtuously."

Post 11

Monday, November 17, 2014 - 5:03amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Meet Common Core's Critics

 

 

 

Marsha Familaro Enright
Author

Tim Slekar
Author

Kirsten Lombard
Editor

 

 

Common Ground on Common Core:
Voices from across the political spectrum expose
the realities of Common Core State Standards

When an ideologically diverse array of the nation’s top education activists and experts comes together within the pages of a single volume to speak out against the Common Core State Standards and related initiatives in education, the magnitude of the issue couldn’t be more clear.

An engineer, a social worker, a local school board member, an education blogger, moms, lawyers, and academic researchers — each of the contributors to this book’s 18 essays sheds light on a different aspect of Common Core. Together the essays offer a highly informed and troubling picture of the dangers this controversial reform package poses to students, families, education, and society.

They also demonstrate that real dialogue and cooperation across political lines are not only possible but, in fact, crucial, both in defeating false reforms and establishing true education pathways that honor students, parents, and teachers alike.

Date:

Thursday, December 11, 2014

Time:

5:30 pm - 7:30 pm

Location:

The Cotillion, 360 South Creekside Drive, Palatine, IL 60074

Price:

Suggested contribution $10.00

Food:

Hot & cold hors d'oeuvres and cash bar.

Books:

Special price of $20.00 for a copy of Common Ground on Common Core at the event. If you can't make the event but would like to purchase a book, please  click here.

Registration:

Register at this secure online site or contact Tonya Houston at 312/377-4000 or THouston@heartland.org

We hope to see you in Palatine on Thursday, December 11!
 

The Heartland Institute
One South Wacker Drive #2740 Chicago, IL 60606
312/377-4000      
www.heartland.org

 



Post to this thread


User ID Password or create a free account.