In today’s New York Times, Charles Murray of the American Enterprise Institute wrote an op-ed piece titled: Why Charter Schools Fail the Test.
Mr. Murray makes a great case for the shortcomings of standardized tests (ELA and Math) as the singular measure of student achievement and school environment. In particular he sites the longitudinal study of charters and vouchers in Milwaukee, that was a disappointment to most charter school proponents, as being an unfair and misguided way of measuring success.
Sound good so far, don’t you think?
But then Murray goes on to talk about a charter school being created in Maryland, near where he lives, which is a perfect example of a school program that he finds appealing, and would certainly send his children too, recognizing that the program is not designed to be a testing mill and therefore would possibly fall short on standardized tests.
Here’s an illustration. The day after the Milwaukee results were
released, I learned that parents in the Maryland county where I live are
trying to start a charter school that will offer a highly traditional
curriculum long on history, science, foreign languages, classic
literature, mathematics and English composition, taught with structure
and discipline. This would give parents a choice radically different
from the progressive curriculum used in the county’s other public
schools.
Anything missing? Hum. It looks like the humanities, but wait, it’s missing the arts! Very Platonian, minus the arts and sports. Oversight or an intentional list of core subjects according to those seeking to establish this particular charter school?
I guess the students and parents shouldn’t be forced to have the arts if they don’t want them.
What do you think? Am I being too sensitive?
To close this entry, I offer a tease on a future topic: many people tell me the charter schools have great arts programs. I hear it all the time. “The arts are big in the Zone.” “KIPP has great arts programs.” I can go on and on. Is it really true? Does anyone have even the slightest idea about what is really going on? Certainly, reading Mr. Murray’s comments, one would have to wonder.
tr.v. snook•ered, snook•er•ing, snook•ers
1. Slang
a. To lead (another) into a situation in which all possible choices are undesirable; trap.
b. To fool; dupe
I don’t think you are being too sensitive. I also think that those of us in arts education thought we had accomplished a huge victory when the arts were listed as core in NCLB. We all know what happened there when testing for reading, math and eventually science kicked in. From where I sit now it feels like we were snookered.
As state’s look at the Common Core State Standards Initiative (CCSSI) I have a prickly feeling on the back of my neck. I have been assured from many arenas that I am being paranoid. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck . . . .