 college of education | fall 2003 | Back to Contents | |
|
|
Policy Update
The Education Policy Center (EPC) at Michigan
State University launched in June its effort to reach a national audience
with a conference in Washington, D.C., that focused on how to break the link
between poverty and achievement in the public schools. The goal was to engage leading scholars from various disciplines in what has been an overlooked area in the national debate about reforming k–12 schools: the link between the academic content children study and their achievement. At the heart of the discussions was the curriculum in mathematics and science and how and why students in poor and underprivileged areas are often exposed to less challenging and interesting coursework. “I thought the conference was extremely successful and I think the reason is because the topic is one that is underdeveloped in a lot of thinking of American educational policy,” Schmidt said. “People talk about the importance of having standards and accountability, but rarely do they then get to the level of ‘What should be the content and substance of those standards?’ At what level should we expect our kids to know mathematics, for example? The same is true for assessment. Everybody says assessment is important, but what does that mean? “This is really the focus of a larger part of our work at the policy center and the conference was able to bring together a very prestigious group of people to think about these issues.”
Participants included Nobel Laureate Leon
Lederman, a physicist at the Illinois Mathematics and Science Academy; E. D.
Hirsch, professor emeritus at the University of Virginia and author of
Cultural Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know and The Schools We Need
and Why We Don’t Have Them; and u.s. Rep. Vernon Ehlers of Michigan, a
physicist and science educator. |
“The thing that surprised me was that all of
these very eminent scientists and mathematicians had made a professional
commitment to the improvement of k–12 education,” Plank said. “That is not
where they came from, but they recognized that if they were to have
successors that they had to pay attention to teaching and learning in k–12
schools and all of them have made serious professional commitments to making
k–12 education better. “Their professional qualifications were impressive, but what was truly impressive was the moral commitment that they had made to kids and schools.” Schmidt said that for too long scholars in the disciplines have “stood back” and have failed to engage in the process of developing content standards. Others who are less qualified to develop those standards have moved in to fill that vacuum. What is needed, he said, is to involve disciplinary scholars, teacher educators, and teachers to set meaningful standards. “I think that is the battle we are fighting,” he said. “We’ve wound up with standards that look like arbitrary lists of topics rather than reflecting seriously what mathematics is about. I believe that problem will be seriously addressed and fixed if we bring to the table our colleagues in the disciplines, as well as those in education who know schooling.” Given the success of the conference, Schmidt and Plank are considering holding an annual Washington conference that would focus on particular issues related to curriculum and standards. Although no decision has yet been made, the two are considering a session next year that might focus on teacher knowledge.
The professors are also planning to publish a
book or report based on the presentations at the conference. Excerpts from
some of the conference panel sessions and policy center reports can be found
on the EPC Web site at www.epc.msu.edu
|
