Opinion
Federal Opinion

No National Standards for Public Schools

By Andrew J. Coulson — January 30, 2007 4 min read
  • Save to favorites
  • Print

Hippolyte Fortoul, the education minister to Napoleon III, liked to boast that he could pick up his watch at any time of day and tell a person what every school student in France was learning at that moment. Soon, U.S. Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings may be able to do the same.

Earlier this month, U.S. Sen. Christopher J. Dodd of Connecticut, a Democrat, and U.S. Rep. Vernon J. Ehlers of Michigan, a Republican, proposed the creation of national standards for math and science classes at the K-12 level. The “Standards to Provide Educational Achievement for Kids” Act, which I hope doesn’t attempt to teach kids how to come up with clever acronyms, would lay down explicit goals for what every child should learn in those subjects at every grade, and financially reward states that adopted them. (“Standards Get Boost on the Hill,” Jan. 17, 2007.)

Both liberals and conservatives now seem bent on adding a federal conveyor belt to our already factory-like public schools.

To say that national standards enjoy bipartisan support would be an understatement. A flier promoting the Dodd-Ehlers bill lists the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation, led by a former Reagan administration assistant secretary of education, Chester E. Finn Jr., immediately above the National Education Association, the country’s largest labor union. Throw in the recent high-profile endorsement of national standards by the New Commission on the Skills of the American Workforce, and a federal curriculum-and-testing package begins to seem like a done deal.

It should be left undone.

For one thing, it’s just more of the same, and the same isn’t working out. For 150 years, we’ve relentlessly centralized control over our schools, and they’ve grown from one-room schoolhouses answering directly to parents to vast bureaucracies consuming half the budgets of their respective states. We’ve gone from 127,000 school districts in 1932 to fewer than 15,000 today.

The argument, then as now, was that more-centralized control would allow the real experts to beat our dysfunctional school systems into shape, lowering per-pupil costs and raising achievement. But public schools now spend twice as much as they did in 1970, in real, inflation-adjusted dollars. Meanwhile, the overall achievement of high school seniors has stagnated over that same period, according to the U.S. Department of Education’s own “Trends in Academic Progress” study (though the scores of African-American students did improve).

That record does not make a compelling case for even further centralization.

National-curriculum advocates argue that there are success stories—places where they believe uniform standards improved student performance—at the state level. But they also acknowledge that there are states with poor or even counterproductive standards.

Another justification is that national standards are purportedly necessary to ensure academic success on the world stage. Italy has a national curriculum, and it is the only industrialized country that performed worse than the United States in 12th grade science on the Third International Mathematics and Science Study. Canada and Australia, who trounced us in both subjects, have no national curricula.

The proposed legislation’s standards are described as “voluntary,” but for whom? Not for parents and students. What the bill’s authors mean is that it would be voluntary for state school boards or superintendents. Once they decided, you, me, and Dupree would not have a choice. State authorities would receive financial incentives to participate, just as they do under the No Child Left Behind Act—and no state has opted out of that program.

Nationalizing the curriculum is inconsistent with both liberal education philosophy and conservative political philosophy. Progressive educators have long maintained that education should be a “child centered” process addressing each student’s unique needs and skills. Once upon a time, conservatives maintained that parents, not central planners, should be in the education driver’s seat, and that competition should be allowed to drive excellence and innovation. They used to point out that the 10th Amendment reserves responsibility for education to the states and the people.

The best thing we can do for American students is to treat them as the individuals they are.

Despite these avowed ideals, both liberals and conservatives now seem bent on adding a federal conveyor belt to our already factory-like public schools. Children would be fed in one end, moved through a homogenized curriculum at a fixed pace, and then supposedly emerge well educated on the other side.

This approach assumes that children are all alike, and learn every subject at the same pace. But of course they aren’t and don’t. The best thing we can do for American students is to treat them as the individuals they are, helping them progress through their studies at the best pace for them. We can do that by giving families unfettered choice, and requiring all schools to compete to serve them.

Sen. Dodd and Rep. Ehlers should be commended for trying to improve our schools, but we’ve been centralizing control for a century and a half with little to show for it. Americans are an entrepreneurial, liberty-loving people. Surely we can find a better exemplar of education policy than a 19th-century French imperialist.

Related Tags:
Federal Policy Opinion

A version of this article appeared in the January 31, 2007 edition of Education Week as No National Standards For Public Schools

Events

This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
Professional Development Webinar
Inside PLCs: Proven Strategies from K-12 Leaders
Join an expert panel to explore strategies for building collaborative PLCs, overcoming common challenges, and using data effectively.
Content provided by Otus
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
Science Webinar
Making Science Stick: The Engaging Power of Hands-On Learning
How can you make science class the highlight of your students’ day while
achieving learning outcomes? Find out in this session.
Content provided by LEGO Education
Teaching Profession Key Insights to Elevate and Inspire Today’s Teachers
Join this free half day virtual event to energize your teaching and cultivate a positive learning experience for students.

EdWeek Top School Jobs

Teacher Jobs
Search over ten thousand teaching jobs nationwide — elementary, middle, high school and more.
View Jobs
Principal Jobs
Find hundreds of jobs for principals, assistant principals, and other school leadership roles.
View Jobs
Administrator Jobs
Over a thousand district-level jobs: superintendents, directors, more.
View Jobs
Support Staff Jobs
Search thousands of jobs, from paraprofessionals to counselors and more.
View Jobs

Read Next

Federal Trump Admin. Warns Schools: End Race-Based Programs or Risk Losing Funds
A sweeping new letter from the Education Department says schools and universities should stop using race as a factor in programming.
6 min read
budget school funding
iStock/Getty
Federal Trump Shakeup Stops Most Work at Education Department's Civil Rights Office
President Donald Trump is downsizing a federal office that he's also using to carry out his policy agenda for schools.
9 min read
President Donald Trump listens as Elon Musk speaks in the Oval Office at the White House, Tuesday, Feb. 11, 2025, in Washington.
President Donald Trump listens as Elon Musk speaks in the Oval Office at the White House, Tuesday, Feb. 11, 2025, in Washington. The department's office for civil rights, which enforces federal civil rights laws in schools, has been hamstrung by the Trump administration's goal of shrinking the agency.
Alex Brandon/AP
Federal Trump’s 4th Week: Musk’s Team Pushes Ed. Dept. Cuts as McMahon Faces Senators
Linda McMahon appeared before U.S. senators, answering for an already turbulent time at the Education Department before she's taken charge.
6 min read
A shouting protester is removed from the hearing room as Linda McMahon, President Donald Trump’s nominee to be Secretary of Education, testifies during her Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee confirmation hearing, at the U.S. Capitol, in Washington, on Feb. 13, 2025. A shouting protester is removed from the hearing room as Linda McMahon, President Donald Trump’s nominee to be Secretary of Education, testifies during her Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee confirmation hearing, at the U.S. Capitol, in Washington, D.C., on Thursday, February 13, 2025. (Graeme Sloan for Education Week)
A shouting protester is removed from the hearing room as Linda McMahon, President Donald Trump’s nominee to be Secretary of Education, testifies during her confirmation hearing before the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee at the U.S. Capitol in Washington on Feb. 13, 2025.
Graeme Sloan for Education Week
Federal Trump Picks Long-Serving State Chief With Bipartisan Fans for Top Ed. Dept. Role
Trump nominated North Dakota State Superintendent Kirsten Baesler to a key post overseeing K-12 policy at the U.S. Department of Education.
5 min read
North Dakota Superintendent of Public Instruction Kirsten Baesler announces the gathering of a task force to look into future options the state has for the assessment of students during a press conference May 8, 2015, at the state Capitol in Bismarck, N.D.
North Dakota Superintendent of Public Instruction Kirsten Baesler announces the gathering of a task force to look into future options the state has for the assessment of students during a press conference May 8, 2015, at the state Capitol in Bismarck, N.D. President Donald Trump has tapped Baesler to serve as assistant secretary of elementary and secondary education.
Mike McCleary/The Bismarck Tribune via AP