I suppose it's declasse to start a blog with a link, except, of course, what kinds of rules are there, really, in the blogosphere. Nyah.
Go ahead, click on it and read it. I'll wait.
When did the dumbing down actually start? Surely I do not have to explain what I mean. We all know that an American college degree does not represent the same level of learning as Oxford or Cambridge. Four year universities have begun offering remedial classes because too many high school graduates haven't the skills to successfully manage freshman level courses. To wit, while I was in graduate school at EWU, not only did we teach English 100 for those not ready for 101, but we had English 99 to prepare students for 100 and English 98, essentially a learning lab, to prepare the truly unprepared. This was not a community college accepting GED candidates. Matriculating students had to write an entrance essay exam. We graduate students read them and placed incoming freshmen accordingly. One young woman was placed in my English 99 section. She was outraged, and justifiably so-- she had received an A+ in honors English in high school.
The problem therefore must start before college. Is it solely the responsibility of high school teachers? As a high school teacher myself I think not. Because I do not despise freshmen (actually, I quite like them) I have always taught freshman level classes. Some enter high school with about a 4th grade ability to write, and yet they believe themselves capable of major research papers. Why? Because they've already done so in middle school. I have never seen any of these magnum opuses, but if they exist, they must have been so magnificent as to have completely exhausted their creators, because no student of mine has ever repeated such a performance once they get to 9th grade.
There, we've found the problem; it's the middle school concept. In grades 6, 7, and 8, there appears to be no need to actually learn anything or even turn in any work. (If you're a proud teacher of rigor in younger grades, I am NOT referring to you; I know you exist. You must be terribly frustrated that some of your peers engage in promotion without cause.) Case in point. Many of my happy little freshmen, having blissfully ignored the syllabus which specifically delineated grading standards including any and every chance for extra credit, right before grade reporting time will mince up to me and ask, “What can I do for extra credit?” I answer honestly, which does not satisfy them, because the answer does not suit them. “But I have a bad grade!” they continue. I agree with them of course, and explain that the time to worry about a bad grade is during the entire time that grade is being earned, mot at the last minute. They seem stunned. Apparently, this strategy works fairly consistently with many teachers in the earlier grades.
Ok, so middle school might be part of the problem, but I don't think it's the whole problem. There's a recent documentary film about bullying. It's certainly not a recent phenomenon that the Poindexters of the world are frequently the ones bullied. Although they've never been the only ones, it used to be that people knew it was wrong. Now, even though we have seen great successes by the Poindexter class, re: Steve Jobs and Bill Gates, etc, smart kids are still bullied relentlessly. I speak from the WASP perspective, but I read and hear reports from non-white communities that it is even worse, especially among African-Americans. Being smart is “acting white.” Hip-hop and rap rarely praise intellectual ability of any kind. One of my Native American Students, a Spokane from the rez dropped my English 101 class at Spokane Community College because of the taunting he received from other tribal members; they called him an apple (red on the outside and white on the inside).
Back when I was first getting my teaching certificate, an instructor at Whitworth in Spokane, teaching a class in exceptional education, made a statement I marveled at.
“Some children don't learn to read in first grade, and they move on to second grade, but they still don't learn to read so they go on to third grade without yet knowing how to read...”
I raised my hand, “Why?”
“Because we have to,” she answered.
“Why?” I tried again.
“We have to. They'll feel bad if they're held back.”
“Don't you think they'll feel bad being the only ones in class who can't read?” I posited. “Kids aren't dense,” I added, “They all know who can and cannot read. Kids who are behind are still behind regardless of what grade they're in.” She dismissed me, of course, then asked me to stay after class, both to convince me of her point justifying social promotion, and the beliefs of the entire educational system, it seems, and to punish me for contradicting her in class.
Above the copy machines at my school is emblazoned our three Rs, one of which is Rigor. Occasionally at a faculty meeting of one sort or another, someone tries to get at a definition or an agreement of some sort of what Rigor might look like at our school. The discussion always fizzles out. Who among us can enforce rigor? It's damned hard! To include rigor in school, think about it, think about it in first grade, second grade, middle school, university. If a student wants to progress and has to actually produce work to progress, maybe he will.
I know what you're thinking. You think I'm calling all these kids lazy. You'll say, some of them are simply not ready for such tough love. Exactly. Shakespeare said, in the words of Hamlet, “The readiness is all.” Readiness should be our sole criterion for promotion. Kindergarten teachers all over the country know when a child is ready to read or solve math. LISTEN TO THEM! No more Sarah Palins, please.
The entire quote from Hamlet Act V Scene ii is “We defy augury; there's a special providence in the fall of a sparrow. If it be now, 'tis not to come; if it be not to come, it will be now; if it be not now, yet it will come: the readiness is all.”
I really think we should insist on rigor. “If it be not now, yet it will come.