If you reply to this long (8 kB) post please don't hit the reply button unless you prune the copy of this post that may appear in your reply down to a few relevant lines, otherwise the entire already archived post may be needlessly resent to subscribers.
I thank Jerry Becker (2009) of the Math-Teach list for calling my attention to the Maria Glod's (2009) Washington Post report "46 States, D.C. Plan to Draft Common Education Standards." Will the National Education Standards recognize the importance of psychology? Glod wrote [bracketed by lines "GGGGG. . . . .": GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG Forty-six states and the District of Columbia today will announce an effort to craft a single vision for what children should learn each year from kindergarten through high school graduation, an unprecedented step toward a uniform definition of success in American schools. The push for common reading and math standards marks a turning point in a movement to judge U.S. children using one yardstick that reflects expectations set for students in countries around the world at a time of global competition. Today, each state decides what to teach in third-grade reading, fifth-grade math and every other class. Critics think some set a bar so that students can pass tests but, ultimately, are ill-prepared. Led by the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers, the states, including Maryland and Virginia, are aiming to define a framework of content and skills that meet an overarching goal. When students get their high school diplomas, the coalition says, they should be ready to tackle college or a job. The benchmarks would be "internationally competitive." Once the organizers of the effort agree to a proposal, each state would decide individually whether to adopt it. The nearly complete support of governors for the effort -- LEADERS IN TEXAS, Alaska, Missouri and South Carolina are the only ones that HAVE NOT SIGNED ON -- is key. Many Republicans oppose nationally mandated standards, saying schools should not be controlled by Washington. But there is broad support for a voluntary effort that bubbles up from the states. [My CAPS.] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG Judging from the state of science education in Texas [Hake (2009a,b,c)] we can thank our lucky stars that leaders of the Lone Star State have NOT signed on. For example, the abstract of "Science Education in Texas #4" [Hake (2009c)] reads: **************************************** ABSTRACT: The National Center for Science Education (NCSE <http://ncseweb.org/>) reported that (a) "the Texas Senate voted NOT to confirm Don McLeroy in his post as chair of the Texas state board of education on May 28, 2009," and (b) according to the Houston Chronicle "there is speculation in the Capitol and within the Texas Education Agency that Gov. Rick Perry might elevate Cynthia Dunbar, R-Richmond, to lead the board." Dunbar is the author of One Nation Under God that advocates more religion in the public square. According to a Dallas Morning News report by Christy Hoppe (2006), Texas Gov. Rick Perry "believes that non-Christians are doomed." **************************************** To access the 7 kB complete post, please click on <http://tinyurl.com/ph4qzz>. Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University 24245 Hatteras Street, Woodland Hills, CA 91367 Honorary Member, Curmudgeon Lodge of Deventer, The Netherlands. <[email protected]> <http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake/> <http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi/> <http://HakesEdStuff.blogspot.com/> REFERENCES Becker, J. 2009. "46 States, D.C. Plan to Draft Comm Educ Stds," Math Teach post of 2 Jun 2, 2009 1:14 PM (what time zone?), online on the OPEN Math-Teach archives at <http://mathforum.org/kb/thread.jspa?threadID=1946718&tstart=0>. Glod, M. 2009. "46 States, D.C. Plan to Draft Common Education Standards," Washington Post, 1 June; online at <http://tinyurl.com/pwktx2>, and also "beckered" into the Math Teach archives by Jerry Becker (2009) in accord with the "fair use" provision of U.S. Copyright Law as provided for in Section 107, Title 17, according to which copyrighted material can be distributed, if it's done so without profit, to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information see <http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml> . Hake, R.R. 2009a. "Science Education in Texas #2," online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at <http://tinyurl.com/nb3bem>. Post of 28 May 2009 21:01:29 -0700 to AERA-L, Net-Gold, & PhysLrnR. The abstract is also online at <http://hakesedstuff.blogspot.com/2009/05/science-education-in-texas-2.html> with a provision for comments. As of 2 June 15:40:00-0700 the number of AP-Physics responses had risen to 67 !! , not counting about 7 posts with slight changes in the subject line.] Hake, R.R. 2009b. "Science Education in Texas #3," online at <http://hakesedstuff.blogspot.com/2009/06/science-education-in-texas-3.html> with a provision for comments. Post of 31 May 2009 09:57:22-0700 to AP-Bio (evidently rejected), Biopi-L, Physhare, PhysLrnR, & Physoc. Hake, R.R. 2009c. "Science Education in Texas #4," online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at <http://tinyurl.com/ph4qzz>. Post of 2 Jun 2009 12:58:43-0700 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract is also online at <http://hakesedstuff.blogspot.com/2009/06/science-education-in-texas-4.html> with a provision for comments. --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([email protected])
