Two links to pass along. The first was about the movement to create common standards in the United States. The second is called "Building a Better Teacher." This morning is was the most emailed story on the NY Times, and now it is 6th (by 8pm). I haven't finished the latter article, but I made it halfway and am intrigued.
The first article is interesting as well. I read it during lunch today, and still feel the same way: common standards are good. I have never really understood why we have 50 different sets of education standards. If you could explain that to me that would be great. I believe the 2 main ideas I've heard were: 1) there are regional differences that need to be accounted for in standards and 2) each state should have the right to do what is best for its kids. I get both thoughts, but find each to be flawed. There are differences between Washington and Arkansas, but not enough for us to have different standards for reading (or math, or science, etc). Doesn't everyone need to be able to able to comprehend text (summarize, ask q's, make connections, etc)? Why should each state invest money into developing standards? Wouldn't we better served pooling our resources, and pushing the savings into instruction?
No comments:
Post a Comment