Where Are Student Needs In These National Standards?
In Response to the New York Times’ Article, “Panel Proposes Single Standard for All Schools”, many great letters to the Editor have been submitted. Here is a quote from one:
“While it’s true that eight of the 10 top-scoring countries have centralized education standards, so do nine of the 10 lowest-scoring countries in math and eight of the 10 lowest-scoring countries in science.”
-excerpt from letter by Alfie Kohn. Read the rest here.
Well said, Mr. Kohn.
I have written a bit now about how I feel standardized tests are a disservice to immigrant students and, well, sadly, the same can be said of standards that ignore their needs as well. Many people may think uniform national standards are a great, sensible thing. But show me two states that are identical in their student population, please.
Here is one comment in the article:
Another improvement over current state benchmarks, people involved in the initiative said, is that the proposed standards are what educators call vertically aligned, meaning that material students are to learn in early years builds a foundation for what is to come in the next grade.
This is an improvement for who? When teachers are given students who come from other countries with not only vastly different standards from ours, but also students who did not go to school regularly (if at all, thanks to such things as war and extreme poverty), what are those teachers expected to do? I’ll tell you: teach the grade standards and somehow find the ways and means to fill those giant gaps through “small groups”. It’s unfair to the students and teachers.
These standards, written without input from teachers like me, are an example of idealism at its worst.
Even standards that have been written by New York State, and likely most other states, that were written specifically for ELLs do not address the well-known research about their needs and the timeline they face in their development in a second language. Standards that don’t even address this research are meaningless, at best.
Are any language tests linked to immigration status in the US? Here in the UK we get students who are desperate to get through language exams to satisfy the requirements for permanent residency and the time limits given are too tight for a number of learners.
This has led to a ‘grey-market’ of not particularly legit ‘schools’ setting up, and charging desperate learners loads of money – for a piece of paper (language development strategies are described here: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6927010.ece
That’s interesting. There is a test to become a citizen that, unless you are older than 65 years, has to be taken in English. But, no, there’s no English test for visas or green cards and such.
It’s a recent thing… there is a “life in the UK” test which is needed for Indefinite Leave to Remain or Citizenship applications – but people whose English is lower than L1 level can just pass an approved exam and get a letter stating this from their learning provider.
With a test as high-stakes as this, there is potential and demand for fraud – lots of info on this mailing list: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=ESOL-RESEARCH
I wish I had the spine to do this: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/01/national/main3439491.shtml
It’s obvious kids are pushed through via the test results and that immigrant students, by and large, are expected to take those tests, too. I’m curious why you think it is immigrant students are not given more time or modified standards, given the obvious disadvantages (as you outlined) that they face. You are far more versed in this topic than I am. What’s the root of it all as far as you can tell?
There’s a lot to say on this, so I’ll save it for a post. For now, I recommend skimming this.
Pingback: Common Core Comment Period – awfully brief « JD2718