Schoolteachers, professors differ on what students should know

Here are comments from readers on this article.

I am appalled at the general lack of knowledge by today's school-age youngsters in basic personal financial information. Money handling - especially the fundamentals of investing - are incredibly important and most have little or no knowledge about stocks, funds, bonds, annuities and other investment vehicles ...and how they work. Over one half of all U.S. households invest in mutual funds alone, yet few students seem to even know the difference between a stock and a bond ...or capital gains, dividends and interest. ###

Sounds to me like state officials, and therefore high school teachers, are concerned with teaching are mainly concerned that students test well, where college professors are more concerned that students know how to think. I'm with the professors. ###

As an old -- 67 years old -- college junior, I have seen both sides several times. I learned the basics long ago; taught English to students just learning the language for 15 years, both online and on sit; and am just now working on getting my bachelor's degree so I can begin to earn money teaching online (experience doesn't count without that piece of paper). I have helped ESOL students prepare for our state competency tests required for graduation from high school and found the tests (with the execption of the citizenship part) to expect quality learning at a third-grade level. Grammar and puncuation are not important. My grandson is now in sixth grade and could easily pass the graduation tests for our state. This is a sad comment on the state of our educational systems.

In high school ---back in the 1950s -- I learned algebra, but never understood it until I had to take remedial algebra in college. I learned English grammar, etc. in school, but also I practiced it over the years. I kept up with science and no trouble in college biology class. When I graduated, there were three levels of diplomas -- academic for those planning on continuing on to college, commercial for those planning on joining the work force in a white collar situation, and vocational for those planning on moving into apprenticeships in manual labor sections. The academic diploma told colleges that the student knew the basics required to become a freshman in college. The commercial diploma told an employer that the holder had learned typing, filing, accounting, etc. needed for that type of job. The vocational diploma said that person knew the ins and outs of using tools, machinery, blueprint reading, etc.

By the time our sons graduated (in the llate 1970s, only one, encompassing diploma was offered. Students took tests to prove their competency in various areas of academics. Vocational students -- the very ones we need to repair our cars, refrigerators, and televisions -- were denigrated. In fact, our school system planned to phase out the vocational part of our schools.

I also have been involved for nearly 50 years in a small family business and know the type of education that is needed by businesses. We have had high school graduates who could not make change, read manuals, or even file alphabetically.

State competency tests are fine, but they need to be realistic. Every student needs to know the basics of math, English, and science. Knowing the basics is as important as a properly built foundation of a house. Without it, the house may not stand long. Without the basics, a student may not do well in life, let alone college. Many teachers complain they have to "teach to the test," but if they taught just the basic skills, any student should be able to pass any state competency test.

Traditional college courses should prepare a student to begin life as well-rounded adult, ready to learn the knowledge they need to have success at their chosen careers. Many colleges are now providing non-traditional courses in the service areas. Once these would be considered vocational. Colleges are now expecting entering freshmen to know basic skills in math, English, and science? Gee, how unPC of them! ###

We continue to ignore the recommendations of such organizations as the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA) and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) who, in their K-12 standards and recommendations, stress the importance of understanding "how" science works rather than a huge laundry list of concepts and vocabulary.

As a former science teacher, science teaching consultant, and now secondary school principal, I have found it difficult to get science teachers to devote the time needed for students to experience science through complete, "soup to nuts" investigations. It is not because they don't want to have their students experience science like that in their classrooms. Most do, but they are faced with so many state standards and benchmarks on which their students may (or may not) be assessed, they feel compelled to cover the vocabulary and concepts in lieu of students gaining a deeper, longer-lasting understanding of science, in general, by actually doing it!

In Michigan, the ACT test is now being used as one of the main assessment tools at the high school level. Since the ACT test is designed to predict a student's college readiness, it is based more on what postsecondary teachers feel are important skills and concepts than on any particular state's curriculum. Maybe that will finally begin to turn the emphasis toward what the professional organizations have been proposing in science for years. ###

"States tend to have too many standards attempting to tackle too many content topics," the report says. The report examines science, math, reading and English."

I posted a comment saying the same thing recently: American Geometry students cover an average of a new topic each week. German students cover a new topic each month. German students score near the top on international tests. Sri Lanka saved America from finishing last.

"To date, more than 30 states have taken steps to align high school learning standards with college expectations."

But most of the time, it's not by changing their philosophies, it's by adding more, usually unqualified students to AP classes - which are considered college level classes but are becoming less so these days or by creating an expensive additional program like the "International Baccalaureate" (IB) program, which a relatively select few can attend. There are recent concerns because students who do the IB program have higher than normal college dropout rates! Duh! They're given courses coated in bad high school learning philosophies then expected to start in advanced places in college. But they still haven't been taught to think!

The problem is nationwide. My former science department chairman was hired to teach congressional pages in Washington. These high school upperclassmen, from all over the country, exhibit the same lack of basics our local kids do. My alma mater UMBC, recently one of Newsweek's "Hot Colleges", recently considered creating a freshman course in reasoning that occupied 18 of the 30 first year credit hours. And look at USAToday's "Quick Question" that accompanys this article, asking what you were least prepared in for college. Not one single choice is "thinking" or "reasoning" (college taught me how to think). Of course, the question was put together by a former journalism major so maybe thinking and reasoning don't come up often. But it is important in other fields.

Those running the high school systems are now numbers hungry, and they often use them to make themselves look better at the expense of the students. If you don't believe that, ask your local schools' guidance counselor if she/he has heard of schools that talk lower achieving kids out of taking tests like the SAT because they don't want those kids to pull the average score down and make the school look bad.

Schools look better if more students take physics, which I taught in an above-average suburban high school before retiring recently. On the first day of class, our other physics teacher and I gave our students an assessment exercise so we would know how low to start (the starting point has been continually dropping for over a decade). By last school year, 25% of physics students could not solve this problem for x: 2x = 5. Instead of dividing each side by 2, many subtracted 2 from each side. These students were obviously not ready for physics, but guidance counselors were pressured by the board to get the numbers up. And we couldn't get them reassigned to a physical science class where they would learn more. Otherwise the superintendents, etc. might not get their next jobs.

The perverse fixation on "numbers based outcomes" and "content standards" has progressed to the point where the daily lesson plan, in detail, is often preordained and the teacher has less and less opportunity to evaluate long-term retention or do anything about it.

When I was "free" to determine my chemistry and physics lab content, I included labs where the students had to determine the procedures then clear them with me for correctness and safety, forcing them to really think about the problems and to help them develop general problem solving skills. This was totally shelved when "content standards" was introduced.

The main reason is that ALL questions and scenarios posed to students have to be certifiably non-sexist, non-racist, multi-cultural, etc. Therefore lab procedures have to be inscribed in stone. And teachers can't be trusted to make up their own questions or outcomes without clearing it first with a committee that meets semi-annually at the county board of education.

A high school calculus student came to me, a high school physics teacher, wanting help on determining a "first derivative". Not knowing the calculus teacher had been forced to give the students an over-complicated method that allegedly gave the student a more advanced understanding of the process, I showed the student the simple method used world-wide in colleges. The student was amazed at how easy it was to do.

Considering that our middle and high schools are the laughing stock of the world and our colleges are the most admired in the world, wouldn't you think the powers that be would be pressing schools to adopt college standards more? Not when the high schools leaders know how to play with numbers! Not when the politicians look the other way! ###

I'm not so sure I agree with either side - both sides have merits and concerns. many college graduates are also poorly prepared for the work force, so there is a third element to be concerned about -- usable skills. But then a particular employer is only concerned about his industry, and a technician needs to be more broadly trained if he wants to protect his educational investment and be ready to move to a new or better job before the next layoff catches up with him. The government also has a concern, as displaced workers may need assisstance in retraining. There is no simple solution, but secondary school faculty, college faculty, industry executives, and government officials do need to talk to each other fairly often and make assessments.

I've seen first hand some of the educational facilities and systems in other countries, and I would not write off the American education system altogether. I agree with the writer below that parental involvment in the educational process is also important. ###

Math & Science, things the US is falling behind the rest of the world. Reading and Writing both provide the ability to obtain and understand subjects and to communicate to others in a simple, rational fashion. This also seems to be disappearing from the American scene. I wholeheartedly agree with the college instructors viewpoint as expressed in this article.

We have become too permissive a society and too concerned with material things. Both parents typically have to work in order to fund their lifestyle and the children suffer from inattention and neglect. Perhaps we will learn someday the importance of parental involvement in education .... I only hope it is before we become second-rate as an educated nation!

NCLB and standardized tests are bad, Bad, BAD! The high school teachers are "teaching for the test" not for the subject material. A student gets prepped for the tests, takes them, and scores very well on them. The school gives accolades to the student, his parents are proud, the school district receives more funds. BIG DEAL! All the poor kid is prepared for is to take the same test over again. Whatever became of truly learning the fundamentals? Once you have done that, you can use your mind (a novel concept these days) to work out the details needed to solve a problem. Or at least you know where to go to look up the answers you need. ###