EdAction
Maple River Education Coalition PAC
105 Peavey Rd, St 116 
Chaska, MN  55318 
952-361-4931
http://www.EdAction.org
E-mail

May 13, 2003

New K-12 standards hobbled from the start

By Ellen Hoerle
Star Tribune

Only one sentence in the May 4 editorial "K-12 Standards / Compromise on best of two plans" is on the right track. It's the sentence, "This time they need to get it right."

Compromise on education standards that will affect delivery of education in this state for years to come is not the answer. The problem is that both sets of standards (the House and Senate versions) have already been compromised in their creation. The Senate version was compromised from the outset because it was originally intended to beef up the Profile of Learning. The House version was compromised because several dark clouds hung over the minds of too many members of the standards subcommittees that were given the daunting task to create new standards in a few short weeks.

The budget crisis influenced many subcommittee members to try to accommodate all types of math curricula so that districts would not have to drastically change their math curricula because money to do so won't be available. Fear that many schools would be labeled as "failing" under No Child Left Behind led to an easing of requirements and expectations. The math group was given math standards from other states to use as a starting point.

In the current final product, however, almost all math standards have been moved to higher grades to assure mastery of content by all or nearly all students. Our children won't be competitive on a national level, much less an international level, if our expectations are not at least at the same level as those in other states.

Yes, the politicians and decisionmakers in this state are going to have to accept the fact that other states beat it to the punch. While this state was bickering over how to save the Profile of Learning, other states were writing rigorous, content-based standards that bring praise from national experts.

Furthermore, given the division that was apparent between the parents and many educational experts in the subcommittee meetings and during the public hearings, is it really possible or necessary for educational standards to "have broad-based community and bipartisan support"?

If that is the case, then we have forgotten that our most important responsibility is to create the best possible education standards for the children of this state, so that they can be competitive in the national and international community. That is not possible in a political atmosphere, where compromise is the rule. It is not possible in a public atmosphere, where the loudest voices tend to want to keep the status quo.

Compromise between the Senate and House versions is not the answer. Reinventing the wheel is not the answer. Insisting the standards have to be "Minnesota-grown" is not the answer. Growing up and admitting we must do what is best for Minnesota's children is the answer.

With time running out, the best and fastest way to do that is to take the best ideas from other states, add clarity and rigor where needed and get on with our most important mission: ensuring that the education Minnesota children receive will adequately prepare them to be competitive in the national and international community.

Ellen Hoerle, Eden Prairie, is a member of the Minnesota Standards Math Committee.