Obama's Education Takeover (Encounter Broadsides)
and over one million other books are available for Amazon Kindle. Learn more
| ||||||||||||||||||
Browse our Bookshelf Favorites store for big savings on popular fiction, nonfiction, children's books, and more. |
Frequently Bought Together
Editorial Reviews
About the Author
Lance Izumi is Koret Senior Fellow and senior director of education studies at the Pacific Research Institute. He is the co-author of the groundbreaking book Not as Good as You Think: Why the Middle Class Needs School Choice and co-executive producer of the award-winning 2009 PBS-broadcast film documentary Not as Good As You Think: The Myth of the Middle Class School. He also appears in the Academy Award-winning documentary Waiting for Superman.
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images? |
More About the Author
Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.
Customer Reviews
Share your thoughts with other customers
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
17 of 17 people found the following review helpful
Format:Paperback|Amazon Verified Purchase
About a year ago, as I was revisiting math education resources to help prepare my students for the California Standards Test (CST) I ran across a reference to the "common core," set to replace the state's current math standards in 2015. Following a few links in the California Department of Education website, I found the proposed new standards along with numerous bromides about "preparing children for the 21st century workforce," promoting "critical thinking," and integrating technology. It all sounds great, until one actually reads these standards and realizes how appallingly bad they really are. To cite just a few examples, 5th grade California students are currently expected to add, subtract, multiply and divide with decimals. Beginning in 2015, they will be asked to "read and write" decimals. Really? That is the rigor our nation is demanding of children in the 21st century? Needless to add, multiplication and division of fractions are also gone, as are exponents, and even mastery of basic skills which is to be replaced by calculator usage. "How did this happen?" I wondered. Having just finished Lance Izumi's recent broadside, I now know. The common core standards are part of the educational agenda of the Obama administration which seeks to replace local and state standards with national standards. However, the creation of these standards involved a fair amount of politics and finally settled on the rather minimalistic goal of limiting the amount of remedial courses that may have to be taught on the campuses of community colleges. It is a sad and disheartening story.
In a sense, this story started before Obama, and if this little booklet has a flaw, it is that it places too much blame on the current administration for the federal takeover of education. The "No Child Left Behind" legislation, promoted by George W. Bush and sponsored by Ted Kennedy imposed numerous costs and restrictions on education. By grading schools solely by the performance of their students on math and language arts tests, this legislation undermined education nationwide. Not only have courses in art and foreign languages been cut, but even science and social studies have received less attention. Nonetheless (in some states anyway) the focus on math and language arts did accomplish the goal of raising student proficiency dramatically. When I started teaching, it was common for only a quarter, or less, of students to be proficient or advanced in math. Now more than 60% of students are. The coming adoption of national standards, however, will have the opposite effect, especially with regard to mathematics. As Izumi notes, only one math content expert was even on the validation committee for the new standards. That person, James Milgram, emeritus professor at Stanford, excoriated the new standards as being woefully inadequate. Indeed, the author notes that under the proposed new standards, most students will not even have enough math background to be admitted to the best state universities in the country. Indeed, as compared to states like California and most other industrialized countries, students will be a full year behind by 5th grade, and two years behind by 7th grade.
How did this happen? In one sense, it is to be expected that when you try to find common ground amoung hundreds of different standards found among the 50 states, you will only get a certain minimal area of agreement. This minimum is a reflection, not of the needs of children for the workforce of tomorrow, but rather of the political process as a whole. If you further include among your panel "education professionals" who often lack an extensive math background (and anyone who reads education "research" today knows that math is not a strong point among education professors) you cannot expect a focus on higher math skills. Students may, as some trade journals suggest, be required to "analyze" and "interpret" literature, instead of simply writing book reports, but the new standards mean that any critical analysis that requires serious thought (the kind that can be quantified) will be sorely lacking.
But there is a larger problem at work here. The Obama administration seems committed to the idea that the national government is the best vehicle for resolving almost any issue the country faces. Too many uninsured? Nationalize health care. Not enough consumer spending? Make up the difference with national (debt) spending. And if education still is not meeting the demands of NCLB, despite the dramatic advances children have made in the last decade, then nationalize curriculum too. Needless to add, I am not a fan of much this administration has done, but promoting the new common core standards by tying its acceptance to federal funding is by far the most damaging thing this administration will do. Because even if the standards are eventually ammended (and that is a lot harder to do on the national level than it is within state education bureaucracies) we will have lost a whole generation of students who will be receiving an inferior math education. One can criticize the author for some of his suggestions (he advocates vouchers, but school choice may not help: one can see federal money corrupting the curriculum of demanding private schools the same way it is damaging public education today) but something should be done before the 2015 adoption of these new standards. If implemented as planned, they will dumb down education in precisely those areas (math and science) that will be most in demand. Reading this book by Lance T. Izumi will help make you aware of what is at stake.
In a sense, this story started before Obama, and if this little booklet has a flaw, it is that it places too much blame on the current administration for the federal takeover of education. The "No Child Left Behind" legislation, promoted by George W. Bush and sponsored by Ted Kennedy imposed numerous costs and restrictions on education. By grading schools solely by the performance of their students on math and language arts tests, this legislation undermined education nationwide. Not only have courses in art and foreign languages been cut, but even science and social studies have received less attention. Nonetheless (in some states anyway) the focus on math and language arts did accomplish the goal of raising student proficiency dramatically. When I started teaching, it was common for only a quarter, or less, of students to be proficient or advanced in math. Now more than 60% of students are. The coming adoption of national standards, however, will have the opposite effect, especially with regard to mathematics. As Izumi notes, only one math content expert was even on the validation committee for the new standards. That person, James Milgram, emeritus professor at Stanford, excoriated the new standards as being woefully inadequate. Indeed, the author notes that under the proposed new standards, most students will not even have enough math background to be admitted to the best state universities in the country. Indeed, as compared to states like California and most other industrialized countries, students will be a full year behind by 5th grade, and two years behind by 7th grade.
How did this happen? In one sense, it is to be expected that when you try to find common ground amoung hundreds of different standards found among the 50 states, you will only get a certain minimal area of agreement. This minimum is a reflection, not of the needs of children for the workforce of tomorrow, but rather of the political process as a whole. If you further include among your panel "education professionals" who often lack an extensive math background (and anyone who reads education "research" today knows that math is not a strong point among education professors) you cannot expect a focus on higher math skills. Students may, as some trade journals suggest, be required to "analyze" and "interpret" literature, instead of simply writing book reports, but the new standards mean that any critical analysis that requires serious thought (the kind that can be quantified) will be sorely lacking.
But there is a larger problem at work here. The Obama administration seems committed to the idea that the national government is the best vehicle for resolving almost any issue the country faces. Too many uninsured? Nationalize health care. Not enough consumer spending? Make up the difference with national (debt) spending. And if education still is not meeting the demands of NCLB, despite the dramatic advances children have made in the last decade, then nationalize curriculum too. Needless to add, I am not a fan of much this administration has done, but promoting the new common core standards by tying its acceptance to federal funding is by far the most damaging thing this administration will do. Because even if the standards are eventually ammended (and that is a lot harder to do on the national level than it is within state education bureaucracies) we will have lost a whole generation of students who will be receiving an inferior math education. One can criticize the author for some of his suggestions (he advocates vouchers, but school choice may not help: one can see federal money corrupting the curriculum of demanding private schools the same way it is damaging public education today) but something should be done before the 2015 adoption of these new standards. If implemented as planned, they will dumb down education in precisely those areas (math and science) that will be most in demand. Reading this book by Lance T. Izumi will help make you aware of what is at stake.
11 of 12 people found the following review helpful
By Rebecca
Format:Paperback
While the media is busy covering the campaign and the jobs issue, almost no one is writing about Obama's education power grab. The foundation of America's school system is built on local and parental control, but like health care, Obama wants to take over education too. This is a must read for parents, educators, and school board members. If the federal government hijacks education from the hands of families and communities, the long-term decline of our education system is almost certainly assured. This little book is packed with punch -- we can't allow Obama to take over our education system too.
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
Format:Paperback
This is the best introduction to the controversy over national curriculum-content standards, national tests, national curriculum frameworks, & federally-funded lesson plans. It tells how the Obama administration has induced states to adhere to the national curriculum-content standards and national test consortia through the scoring of Race to the Top grant applications and through No Child Left Behind waivers, and what it hopes to lock in place permanently through the reauthorization of the federal-aid-to education law (the Elementary & Secondary Education Act). The Obama administration's directing of curriculum is in violation, Izumi points out, of three federal statutes (Department of Education Organization Act, Elementary & Secondary Education Act, General Education Provisions Act). Izumi's book is well-written, well-organized, and remarkably complete considering its short length.
Most Recent Customer Reviews
4.0 out of 5 stars
The Common Core Curriculum
This book is a good start for those who are beginning to study the Common Core Curriculum Standards. Read more
Published 7 months ago by double scull
1.0 out of 5 stars
Misleading about Federal control of education
This little book misleads the unitiated reader to believe the Federal Takeover of education has been initiated by Pres. Obama with Common Core Standards, etc. Read more
Published 15 months ago by California
What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?
Listmania!
|
|
