SubscribeThe Teacher Union Bait and Switch
How often do the ACLU and NAACP get duped into supporting an organization with a racist agenda? Not too often, but the nation's largest teachers' union managed to pull it off.
Earlier this year, planning for No Child Left Behind reauthorization, the National Education Association (NEA) formed a group called the Forum on Education Accountability (FEA). The FEA released this joint statement, signed by over 100 other organizing groups, many of which are liberal and focused on civil rights. Most notably, the ACLU and the NAACP signed the statement.
So, to gain an air of legitimacy, they got all these groups to sign onto a foofy statement with broad, overarching language that doesn't amount to much in the form of real recommendations for NCLB reauthorization.
Then today they released this report, which was compiled mainly by the NEA itself. It's mostly the same old we-hate-school-accountability nonsense, except for one section: "Assessment and Accountability for Diverse Populations."
In the "Diverse Populations" section you find this recommendation:
When developing assessments, consider the specific characteristics of each subgroup, in conjunction with standards. Assessments must be sensitive to various forms of diversity, including cultural, both within and across subgroups. It cannot be assumed that assessments or accommodations developed or adapted for one subgroup will be effective and valid for other subgroups.
In other words, the NEA and FEA thinks that black and Latino kids should be held to different (read: lower) standards than white kids, poor kids should be held to different standards than affluent kids, etc. It's inherently a racist proposition, all in the name of watering down accountability for teachers that can't hack it.
One can only hope that the civil rights organizations that signed the FEA statement take a serious look at what they've signed up for and rescind their support.
Comments
So, I support NCLB desire to uncover subgroups that are underperforming because it highlights very clearly an achievement gap for minorities. And I believe minority students should work towards the same standards as white and/or affluent students. However, if you think about it in a different context, I can understand the argument. Take, for example, a difference in learning style. If a child learns best visually, but if asked to demonstrate that she knows spelling words by hearing them and then saying them, she's not going to be as successful as she would had she been able to write them down.
I think about this a lot with our students. Just from observation alone (though there is research to back it up) I know that African-American males tend to retain knowledge better when it is taught with movement. Not all, but I do believe in cultural learning styles. There are differences in the way English Language Learners best retain knowledge. So when you assess a group of students that learn in a different way, you have to take into account their different learning style. The content should be the same, but the assessment shouldn't necessarily be.
I think eventually all children should be assessed the same way on the same content, but if they aren't all learning the same content the same way, how can we hold them accountable to the same test? It's illogical. When the educational playing field is leveled, we can begin to universalize assessments, but while it's as uneven as it is, I think accommodations are absolutely necessary.
Posted by: Brianna | June 23, 2007 8:35 AM
I definitely agree that different populations can have different learning styles, but that does not mean that the end assessment should differ between groups.
You equivocate between learning styles and assessment of content. You can teach a student content any number of ways (audio, visual, textual, kinesthetic, etc). But at the end of the day, the student should be able to take the content s/he has learned (whatever the pedagogic technique), read questions, and come up with an answer.
In other words, pedagogy is separate from assessment. It doesn't logically follow that differing pedagogical approaches necessitate differing assessments.
Go LSAT skillz.
On a side note, there's the utilitarian argument that this standard assessment prepares students for real world skills. Also, you can't see achievement gaps at all with differing exams, even if the underlying content is the same, because they aren't statistically comparable. Hence the unions' push for them.
Posted by: Ryan | June 23, 2007 8:59 AM