If you've been reading this blog, you know that I've ranted and railed against No Child Left Behind. Now, I started teaching more than a decade before NCLB was implemented in 2002. From that perspective, I can say that I've seen an even more precipitous drop in my students' abilities to think through problems, sitauations and concepts that are abstract and ambiguous, and to wrestle with questions that can have more than one answer since NCLB took effect.
For the past decade, each class of freshmen and sophomores has spent an increasing proportion of its classroom time on tasks related to preparing for the tests mandated by NCLB. Students begin to take those tests in the third grade and every grade after that. So, the freshmen I have this year are the first to have taken all of the testing mandated by the law.
At least those students had two years of peace, I mean, schooling that wasn't just long, drawn-out test prep. Next year's freshmen will've had one year. The following year, in the Fall of 2014, entering college freshmen will be thorough products (educationally, anyway) of NCLB. That's when things could get really scary, according to Kenneth Bernstein, a recently-retired high school teacher of government and politics.
He warns professors that students' critical thinking, analytical and writing skills are only going to get worse. That's because, as schools and districts are under increasing pressure to improve scores, teachers will nudged into tailoring more of their teaching toward the tests. Even in the advanced placement classes he taught, students didn't learn the depth of analysis and argument necessary cogently discuss the issues raised.
It almost goes without saying that a lack of such skills will doom students in liberal-arts programs. However, he points out that such abilities are also increasingly necessary in majors and work areas related to business and technology, as problems become more complex and ambiguous.
Like many other teachers, he retired early because he felt that, in spite of his best efforts (though he admits he could have done more), he simply couldn't help to hold back, let alone reverse, the tide of test-centered curricula.
If you are considering a career in academia, please heed Mr. Bernstein's warnings. Even if you are the best of graduate students and get grants, you are still likely to spend more of your time teaching intro than elective courses. You will encounter even more difficulty than I've seen so far, and unless there are major changes, students' abilities to think critically and abstractly, and to write, will only continue to decline. And, even if you teach la creme de la creme, you are likely to see the drop in students' skills I've noticed, and of which Mr. Bernstein warns.
Dona, I definitely agree with your criticism of the NCLB education that children receive.
ReplyDeleteBut regarding students' poor cognitive and analytical skills, what do you think of mass media's role in the equation?
For folks who grew up before the 1980s, there was no cable TV, very limited home console video games, and no Internet or Youtube. There were fewer distractions for the developing mind.
Seems as though the phantasmagoria of entertainment is dulling our youngest generations.
That argument has always been made, but as far as western civilization, we can at least say, "since Socrates."
DeleteTrinkets in and of themselves are never the culprit; they're only a medium. Dona's blog on the internet, for example, portrays the use of critical thinking better than most postgraduate humanities hardbacks. Many, many console and computer games have more developed plots and characterization than the past 20 years of bestselling novels for adults and children.
Decades before that, however, young people were being bombarded with COINTELPRO Cold-War propaganda, soulless and brainless superhero comic books, radio westerns, and local TV dramas. Any "downfall" can't be blamed on media toys.
This helps explain why young law school lemmings are unable to make a cogent argument as to why "legal education" is still a wise choice, for most students. Of course, the facts directly oppose that case. However, these mental midgets are not even able to muster a viable argument.
ReplyDeleteTo be fair though, law school deans also have trouble making an argument as to why "legal education" is still a wise choice and they did not go through NCLB in their education.
Delete