A lot has changed since 1997. Eighth graders then were only dipping their toes into the Internet then; now they don't know anything else. And of course, eighth graders in 2008 bore the full brunt / enjoyed the full benefit of No Child Left Behind, having completed six consecutive years in which their schools were tested and rated under NCLB. During that time, roughly 6.8 billion articles and news stories were published stating unequivocally that NCLB is responsible for a drastic narrowing of the curriculum, arts teachers being taunted by students and beaten up in the faculty lounge, etc., etc. And yet arts and music scores stayed virtually the same.
I'm not even sure these unchanged numbers are obviously a good thing. Shouldn't there have been some tradeoffs, some substitution of results in focused-upon subjects like reading and math for everything else? Math results for 13-year olds got better during roughly the same time period while reading results stayed flat. In some ways this is all an argument for humility among federal policymakers in their aspirations for magnitude and pace in changing a massive, decentralized K-12 education system.
2 comments:
looks like there's a different spin going around: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/16/education/16scores.html?ref=todayspaper
I like art but I felt that many of those NAEP questions were a bit on the esoteric side. Very heavy on 20th century work when many art-lovers are more familiar with earlier styles (Impressionism, Classicism, etc).
Post a Comment