Standards: For Better or Worse

Standards, in education, are a complicated matter. I think standards come from a place where their intentions are pure, but they often become convoluted in their execution. It goes under the basic principle of high theory. On paper it looks fantastic and manageable, but when people start to use that theory, it often becomes confusing, misguided, and defeats its ultimate purpose.

That being said, I really like the idea of standards, and I support the development of national standards. Why should New Jersey have a different set of standards than Idaho? What makes children more or less capable of achieving great success based on their geographic location? If we are looking to rise to the top in the global education race, why are states working separately and against each other instead of working together to create a more cohesive unit. If the greatest educational minds in all fifty states teamed up to promote progress and authentic accountability and teaching practices, then we would give our students the first-class education they deserve.

Standards are beneficial in the way that they are almost a recipe for what a good curriculum should be made of. Now, a recipe can give you all the ingredients and directions you need to create a final product, but the product doesn't always turn out looking exactly what it should look like based on the cook's skill, work ethic, and experience. I believe standards present themselves in the same way to educators. They are mere ingredients. What you choose to do with them as an educator is completely up to you. I think they are a great tool to guide us as educators, but I also think they should be condensed and more manageable. When I look at the list of content standards for Language Arts, I often find myself bewildered. My colleagues and I recently combed over the standards in preparation for a curriculum alignment meeting between eight and ninth grade English teachers. It's amazing how much you are supposed to cover in a year. We came to the conclusion that the magnitude of the list often spreads our teaching thin. We should be using standards that teach towards mastery, not towards a general survey. The shear magnitude of the list is probably the biggest obstacle to overcome in terms of standards.

In my current district we do adhere to the standards. Our lessons are driven by them with clear objectives and activities and assessments that strive to meet those standards, but I must say, I am in a fortunate situation. My school and administrators give us the freedom to take risks and experiment with curriculum. Our students are basically driven and like learning, and parents are very supportive. It is an ideal setting to work with standards. I have worked in an urban district where my situation was quite the opposite. I sometimes found myself working with standards that were far below grade level due to the fact that my students weren't always present in class and there was little to no support from the parents or the administration. I longed to really educate, but by the time I was educating these students in their high school years, they had gotten used to the idea of busy work and not challenging themselves. It was disheartening, and I refused to accept less than what they were capable of doing. I believe that standards and curriculum need to be present in ALL school districts, even if the odds are working against you. Perhaps, that is when standards are needed most. The combination of dedication, passion, and high expectations, can help to make any school a place of success.

At the end of the day, we all need goals to live up to as educators. Standards give us a place to start, but it is our job as educators to infuse those standards with passion, enlightenment, and a true connection to reality for our students. The task can often look daunting, but we owe it to our students to give them every opportunity to be successful in the world they are about to enter as adults.