EdAction
Maple River Education Coalition PAC
105 Peavey Rd, St 116
Chaska, MN
55318
952-361-4931
http://www.EdAction.org
E-mail
October 21, 2003
Hearings on New Academic
Standards
The hearings across the state on the new academic standards will be complete
this week. Wednesday, October 22nd in Albert Lea, is the last public hearing.
Testimony may still be submitted on the Department website until Friday, the
24th: http://www.education.state.mn.us
Last night the Forest Lake hearing continued the battle of worldviews. Once
again the education cartel appeared in force with their pre-fab talking points.
It is embarrassing to observe those charged with educating our children address
their concerns with insults, personal attacks, and an attitude of condescending
arrogance toward the public, the parents and the committee members. They act out
their "civil government" philosophy, that is, unelected
organizations drive public policy by shouting the loudest, drowning out the
voice of elected
representation.
One Liberian woman took to the microphone to express her surprise that
American's would even consider NOT teaching what makes this country a beacon of
freedom in the world. She suggested that people spend a month in most places of
the world to discover the freedom that America represents.
The Profile of Learning was a highly politicized set of standards. The new
Geography standards reflect that same agenda, unfortunately. "Sustainable
development," for example, is an entire agenda of radically restructuring
our country and our communities. And it's required in the geography standards.
Only a small portion of the geography standards are physical geography. Most of
them are written straight from the national standards, the Profile-type content.
The economic standards also come straight from the Profile-type national
standards. They define "scarcity" as the core of economics. In fact,
the free market system works because private entrepreneurs create resources and
wealth.
But most of the standards are a substantial improvement. Geography standards
excepted, they are knowledge based, not process based. They expect students to
have knowledge and information that they can take with them into their futures.
Those who denigrate knowledge call it "regurgitating facts." Those who
don't want to teach national sovereignty and unalienable rights call the
standards "Euro-centric."
Many Profile-believers want to stay with the old. They are speaking up to their
legislators and to the committee. They are even collecting signatures on a
petition to bring the process to a halt and put themselves in charge again.
The most exhaustive petition drive, however, is an election. Minnesota engages
in elections every two years. That's why the Profile was repealed. There is a
deliberate effort to undo that election, even the legislation that was passed.
Some teachers have stated outright that they would not teach these kind of
standards. Thankfully, while they may be the loudest, but they don't represent
all teachers, many of whom are appalled at the behavior of their colleagues.
We encourage you to make your own views known to your own elected
representatives. The Profile advocates are.
The following is a letter one parent wrote to voice the view of so many
thousands who battled the Profile for five year in their local schools.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Commissioner Yecke,
My
husband and I are the parents of 3 children, two boys now in college and
one daughter in the ninth grade. We have been unable to go to any of the
hearings regarding the new social studies and science standards so I went to the
Department of Education web page to look at the standards and have read some of
the comments in the newspapers. The most recent article appeared in the
Mankato Free Press and it prompted my letter.
According to the article, the Mankato area administrators and teachers are
concerned that the new standards have too much memorization and not enough
critical thinking. This amazes me.
How can a student think critically if he or she does not have the
"facts" of the subject easily at hand? I still have facts in my
head that were required to be memorized oh so many years ago. I thank my
teachers for this. This is a life long gift that the student can use when
reading, talking or watching a movie about history,
civics and science, be it in college or as a parent down the road. Having these
facts gives you a point of reference and a certain confidence that I see lacking
in the students of today. The article in the Free Press calls memorization
the lowest form of learning. Far from it -- it is the foundation for more
learning.
The standards as written on the web page are user friendly for the parents, too.
There is an educational jargon that does not make it easy for an equal
partnership between teachers and parents to exist. The clarity of the new
standards is very welcome.
Finally I must also comment on the Op-ed by Jim Davnie in the October 5, 2003
Star Tribune. I find it sad the Mr. Davnie is so critical of the
standards, somehow finding in them a political agenda.
The previous standards were full of history as viewed by a particular group
rather than simply following the path of our history and finding in the history
of our country much to be proud of. If our children are not inculcated
with a pride of country, what will become of our country? He worries that
the drama and energy is
squeezed out of history with these new standards. I think that this will
always be dependant on the teacher. My concern is more that the teachers
have strong knowledge in the content of the subject they teach and that the
textbooks are not written with political correctness at the core. The job
of the teacher is to find a way to convey that knowledge and some will be better
at it than others.
Thank you for taking the time to read my thoughts. I sincerely hope you
fight to keep these standards. I heard a national expert say that our new
standards are among the best in the nation. I know that they are so much
better than what we had. We have waited so long to get back on the right
path. Don't let those that would like to keep the Profile of Learning in place
under a different name have their way.
Sincerely,
Kathleen Miller
Waseca, MN