Division I regional track finals
Fenwick graduation 2012
Ponitz graduation 2012
Dayton Daily News education reporter Scott Elliott writes about schools, kids, teaching and learning.
Home > Blogs > Get on the Bus > Archives > 2007 > August > 13
Monday, August 13, 2007
Too much science and math?
(Will future generations know what’s happening in this photo?)
In the Wall Street Journal last week, the Fordham Foundation’s Checker Finn and education historian Diane Ravitch forcefully address an issue that has troubled me some recently.
Ohio is one of several states that is pushing schools — from the elementary grades through college — to emphasize more science, technology, engineering and math in instruction. Dayton is even angling for a “STEM” high school. Lawmakers want to start a bunch of them around the state.
But Finn and Ratvich have an important question — if science and math instruction grows, will other important subjects be crowded out? And, interestingly, they seem to take a shot at standardized testing, despite Finn’s long running support of standards and judging schools by their test scores.
You need a subscrption to read the whole story at WSJ.com. But here’s their core argument:
“But there is a problem here. Worthy though these skills are, they ignore at least half of what has long been regarded as a “well rounded” education in Western civilization: literature, art, music, history, civics and geography. Indeed, a new study from the Center on Education Policy says that, since NCLB’s enactment, nearly half of U.S. school districts have reduced the time their students spend on subjects such as art and music.
This is a mistake that will ill-serve our children while misconstruing the true nature of American competitiveness and the challenges we face in the 21st century.”
And
“The liberal arts make us “competitive” in the ways that matter most. They make us wise, thoughtful and appropriately humble. They help our human potential to bloom. And they are the foundation for a democratic civic polity, where each of us bears equal rights and responsibilities.
History and literature also impart to their students healthy skepticism and doubt, the ability to question, to ask both “why?” and “why not?” and, perhaps most important, readiness to challenge authority, push back against conventional wisdom and make one’s own way despite pressure to conform. (How will that be viewed in China?)”
And here’s the quote that blew me away on testing:
“We’re already at risk of turning U.S. schools into test-prepping skill factories where nothing matters except exam scores on basic subjects. That’s not what America needs nor is it a sufficient conception of educational accountability.”
That one’s an eye-popper because few have done more than Finn to push standards-based testing as the primary accountability measure in the U.S.
But overall, it’s hard to argue with their core point — math and science are very important and generally undervalued in the U.S. education system. Yet, emphasizing one or two subjects in schools generally has the effect of crowding out other subjects.
Finn is a history nut and I know it drives him crazy that schools faced with testing benchmarks in reading and math often skimp on subjects like history to spend more time preparing for state exams.
Is there a way we can safeguard history, literature, art, music and physical education while still prioritizing science and math? Give us your take.
(Image credit: University of Iowa)
Permalink | Comments (11) | Categories: Teaching and Learning
