Ideas For Democracy:  Goal #8

Improve public education and assure that public education is dedicated to educating citizens and not to employee training programs.  Require that employers pay for specific employment skills training, not the taxpayers.  Measure learning with national system of developmental grading. 

 

Citizens who want real democracy will actively support this policy and vote for trustworthy candidates who actively support this policy.

 

IFD - policy:  In the U.S.A., everyone is a parent, a teacher, and an economist.  The endless debates about how best to educate children in the school setting spills over into congressional grandstanding and destructive educational policies.  The decision to have parents and pundits make national educational policy is an extremely expensive exercise in enabling amateurs to manage the national program that is more important than the Department of Defense.  The first power and responsibility of government is to protect the public health and public welfare.  A people who want to live in a stable and scientific society, a safe and secure society, must have an effective system of public education.  Education of children is the most creative act that human beings perform.  All other technology is creation of things.  Education is creation of the next generation of adults.  What could be more important?  It is the primary task to which we apply ourselves that is intended to preserve and protect the human species.  If we produce defective children, then we produce defective adults who will become a defective civilization.  If you believe in a strong military force and a strong defense, then just strain your brain and ask a general or an admiral what kind of people they want to recruit for the armed forces, and what kind they don't want.

 

Firstly, since we usually opt to have experts manage an important enterprise, such as national defense, or medical care, or manufacture of automobiles, we need to do the same for public education.  That means that our schools should be run by teachers, not by preachers and not by neurotic parents who hated school when they were children or who disliked a teacher who told them they were either mediocre or lazy, which they most likely were.  Many children are, but some of those who dislike school later become curious, self-educated, and very productive as adults.  In a sense all children are academically mediocre.  Children do want to learn, but they have their own agenda for their day.  Grades are neither more nor less than comparisons of current learning tasks -- assigned by the adults -- among a specific group of children.  If a child wants to learn something, there is nothing we can do to stop them.  That principle is proven true whenever it is scientifically tested.  Most of the time the reason some children don't learn something during any given week of school is because they are not interested, and not because they are slow to learn.  They have other things on their mind, like play, friends, food, sexuality, their social status and the difficult lives of their parents.  Some of them worry about being shot at night, the police coming to their home, or the world turning to hell because adults don't know what they are doing.  It is generally true that adults do not know what they are doing, which is why we spend so much time and money to correct the mistakes of the recent past.  That is why some children lose interest in school learning, because it seems to them that conforming and getting good grades means you will be chosen to play a big role in the next disastrous mistakes that will accelerate the destruction of the life-supporting environment.  It is not easy to make children interested in their own learning, but it can be done by those who are willing to be honest and respectful of the children and the real challenges in their lives.  People who assume the lives of children are easy and that children should just do what they are told should never be entrusted with the design of a school or a system of education. 

 

The best way to run schools and our systems of public education is to begin with a clear and rational focus on what are the legitimate goals of the group that is paying for them.  The public education system should serve the needs of the students in the community first, and then the taxpayers, all of the adults in the community.  The traditional system of paying for the public education of children through property taxes is blatantly unfair, unreasonable, and inefficient.

 

Development Grading:

Another major change in public education that I recommend is to change from our deeply entrenched comparative grading system to Developmental Grading.  Our persistence use of comparative grading, often called by educators the "normal curve," is contrived or false statistical science that distorts the meaning of the word "normal" and it is strictly a practice of comparing one student's learning pace with the learning pace of other students.  The difference in developmental grading might seem subtle or minor at first, but it is actually a profound difference and developmental grading is far more useful to everyone concerned:  the student, the teacher, the school, the community and everyone who is interested in knowing the performance level, knowledge level and pace of learning of a particular student (prospective employee) including the measures of the student's pace of learning for each separate field of knowledge and each type of learning objective.

 

 The Difference in Developmental Grading:

Traditional comparative grading and the so-called "normal curve":

The way that public schools have graded (tested or measured learning) students for more than a hundred years is not really meaningful information and it has the disastrous effect of discouraging a high percentage of students, possible as high as 50% of all public school students.  Every time there is a quiz or test in class, the grades that students get, either A, B, C, D, F letter grades, or percentage grades such as 95, 90, 85, 70, 60, 55 and so forth, are nothing more than a COMPARISON of the test performance of all of the students in the class.  In other words, in a class of 20 students, all the test grade really measures is a comparison of how well you (the student) has learned the assigned task IN COMPARISON to the other 19 students.  If the grades are marked on a graph, we get the "normal curve" that looks something like an inverted "U" with horizontal tails at the left and the right.  All this means is that there are more "average" grades clustering around the "C" grade and a few Bs and a few Ds and even fewer As and Fs.   Big deal.  What does it prove?  Nothing.  What value is it?  It is of little value, because all this set of grades and the normal curve shows is that individuals learn the subject matter (math or reading or history, of chemistry or biology or French or Spanish or civics) at a different pace.  People -- taxpayers -- from all walks of life, INCLUDING EDUCATORS, NEED TO RECOGNIZE THAT THE TRADITIONAL NORMAL CURVE GRADING IS POOR INFORMATION ABOUT A STUDENT'S ABILITY TO LEARN AND IS DESTRUCTIVE OF STUDENT MOTIVATION TO LEARN.  All that is measured by this traditional "normal curve" grading system is that some students accomplished the assigned learning task faster than others.  So what?  That is not a measure of anything truly important or valuable.  Truly important (to all concerned) and valuable information would be: 

            1) how fast does this student learn in this field of knowledge; and

            2) who selected this particular learning objective for the student?

                        A)  the student himself or herself?  (of any age, K to Phd)

                        B)  the parents of the student?

                        C)  the classroom teacher?

                        D)  the local education community?

                        E)  the state government?

                        F)  the federal government?

                        G)  a corporation that hires people?

 

The answers to these questions are truly valuable to the student and to all of the persons involved, the taxpayers and educators, in public education.  Comparison with other students is not information that qualifies as a meaningful measure of INTELLECT.  But DEVELOPMENTAL GRADING is a meaningful measure of INTELLECT, because it shows how fast a student learns in a particular field and how the student's pace of learning is affected by WHO selects the learning objective.  Developmental grading requires a different type of measurement, measurements of time and measurements of the DEVELOPMENTAL LEVEL that a student has MASTERED in a particular field of knowledge or skill set.

 

What is DEVELOPMENTAL GRADING specifically?

The system of developmental grading would seem difficult or challenging at first, as does anything new, but it is simple in practice once it is set up, and it is definitely not any harder to execute and track as the student's record of learning, or academic record.

 

Instead of giving tests to a group of students and measuring the comparison of how the students performed, we give a test to students and we advise each student whether or not they have MASTERED a named developmental level in that field of knowledge.  For example, the test results are indications of a level of mastery, and even that function of developmental grading can be adjustable.  For example, mastery can be deemed to be a grade level of "A" or between "A" and "A-" or the selected mastery level can be more specifically "95 to 100" or "90 to 100" or "85 to 100" percent.  In the field of mathematics, the test measure could show mastery of long division, or exponents, or calculus, or trigonometric functions.  In the field of history the divisions or levels to be mastered might be harder to define:  early American history, the history of transportation, technological history of Europe, history of science in China, and so on.  The group of students in a particular class DO NOT MOVE FORWARD AT THE SAME PACE.  Each student's next learning project or learning exercises are based on the level they have already mastered and the new level, or new learning objective that has been selected for them or by them.  In a high-functioning system of developmental grading, the question of who selected the current learning objective, or objectives, would be carefully measured and recorded, because it is valuable information to know how quickly a student learns when the learning objective is selected by the student themselves and when the learning objective is selected by someone else.  Students should be exposed early in life to the practice of identifying who has selected the learning goals for them.  THIS PRACTICE STIMULATES THE MOTIVATION TO LEARN AND OVER THE LONG TERM OF A STUDENT'S SCHOOL LIFE INCREASES THE SELF-MOTIVATION TO LEARN.

 

FURTHER, AND OF THE GREATEST IMPORTANCE, DEVELOPMENTAL GRADING CONSISTENTLY REINFORCES LEARNING BY THE CONTINUOUS EXPERIENCE OF MASTERY OF SUBJECT MATTER AND THE ABSENCE OF FAILURE IN THE ENTIRE PATH OF LEARNING EXPERIENCE OVER TIME.  FURTHER STILL, THE RECORD OF THE STUDENT'S PACE OF LEARNING IN DIFFERENT FIELDS OF KNOWLEDGE AND THE RECORD OF LEARNING PACE SORTED BY WHO SELECTED THE LEARNING GOAL IS THE MOST VALUABLE INFORMATION FOR ANYONE WHO WANTS A MEASUREMENT OF THE INTELIGENCE OF THE STUDENT AND THE STUDENT'S CAPACITY TO ADOPT NEW SKILLS.

 

Setting up a developmental grading system:

A common spreadsheet format can be used to set up the learning record of any student, and any classroom of students.  It simply entails recording the date when a student mastered a developmental level in the field of knowledge, and the time it took that particular student to reach that level of mastery.  The only new challenge to educators would be to create useful and accepted outlines of the levels of development in each field of knowledge.  This should not be that difficult.  Like word definitions or technological developments, there will be some major differences from place to place at first, but the outlines that are formulated could be compared and refined over a period of time and known and labeled systems could be used until there is widespread agreement on a more or less universal outline for the logical developmental progression of a student in each field of knowledge.  Think of how an infant learns to spell "CAT" and at age 30 writes a mystery novel, or a history text, or a description of how to replace the air filter in an automobile.  We learn in steps, developmental steps.  If we practice DEVELOPMENTAL GRADING we measure the time it takes you to progress from mastery of one step (developmental level) to the next step (developmental level).  This is a far more meaningful measure of how fast you learn (in each field of knowledge) and how smart you are, and what level of knowledge you do possess in each field.  The record of your progress shows all of your success in what you have learned but there is no failure to be seen anywhere.  Learning is a process of succeeding, of growing on a path that is comprised of success and mastery.  No failure, no shame, no need to compare yourself to others.  You only compare your ability to learn to what it was before, and you are free, entirely free, to work harder at learning any time you want to.  It becomes obvious with a system of developmental grading that even the art of learning is a field where you can improve, because there are methods of learning, training and self-training that may work better for you than they do for other students.  Therefore, you can learn new things in all fields of knowledge, including in the knowledge of "how I learn better and more quickly."  In a system of developmental grading, each student could have a record of measurement of how they master their own best ways of learning.  Doesn't that sound better than "I got a D and she got an A"?  Learning in school could become such a positive experience that the students will like going to school and will accelerate their learning pace because they will be in charge of their own learning paths.  Development grading is based on a simple educational philosophy I learned in my life and through my educational experience over time:  If a child wants to learn something, there is nothing you can do to stop them.  The core principle of developmental grading is not to make children learn but to let children learn.  

 

Who should pay for public education?

We need to base taxation for education on income rather than property taxes.  It makes sense to levy property taxes for municipal services such as roads and lighting, but public education should not be provided as a municipal service.  We all benefit from public education all the time.  The purposes of public education benefit every member of society as universally as national defense.  Public education is the first step toward national security and safety.  A society and civilization must educate children in order to pass its culture and mission of survival and success to the next generations, our "posterity."  Education is the most creative act completed by a culture because education is the act of making adults and making citizens.  There is a traditional, entrenched misconception of what public education means in the viewpoint that public schools benefit mainly the poor, or mainly parents with young children, or public schools place a burden on the elderly.  All of these viewpoints are ridiculous.  Doesn't an elder person benefit when they are treated by a physician (who went to a public school)?  Don't we all benefit from public education when we need an auto mechanic, or a dentist, or a haircut or new clothing?  Don't we all benefit from public education when we go to the supermarket or sporting goods store?  When we heat our home or buy a car?  Of course!  We all benefit from public education all the time because our entire society is better because we are a culture of educated citizens instead of a culture of ignorant slugs.  The elderly benefit every day from public education because they are surrounded by educated people who make their lives easier, and longer.  It is said that the U.S.A. has the best and strongest armed forces in the world, including ongoing research and experimentation in weaponry and all of the technology of warfare.  And that has been paid for since 1916 by the federal income tax, which has nothing to do with property ownership.  If the income tax can purchase the best armed defense in the world, it should be able to purchase the best public education in the world.  The concept of "local control" of education is a bad myth.  The local government can certainly control the physical plant, the school building because that a local public facility, a municipal structure for a municipal service.  But the highest costs of public education, the teachers' salaries and much of the tools and equipment and supplies for the educational programs should be paid for by the state and national income taxes, because they provide a benefit that is as universal as national defense and public health regulations.  The idea that the local school is strictly an expression of the local commitment to education is dysfunctional.  The commitment to education is national.  The commitment to a quality educational facility can be logically treated as local, but not the educational effort of the public school program.  The educational programs of a public school are by definition an effort that benefits the public.  Think about it.  The small school systems in small towns actually educated children who will grow up and leave town to work someplace else.  If you live in a small town you are educating adults whose knowledge will eventually benefit people all over the country who you do not know and may never know.  Why should your property owners pay for the education of adults who are free to leave your town after you have paid about $25,000 for their education?  Let the nation pay for the education of the nation.  You can pay for the buildings and athletic fields, because they are in your town and you are free to use them for all the local events and programs that your municipality provides for your residents.  That is mainly education and recreation, of course, but these local facilities are available for other public uses that enrich the life of the community.