"students should graduate with a résumé, not a transcript "

[Are_grits_groceries]

teacherken's diary ::
Consider that title for a moment, at least one moment.

The words are from Arnold Packer, principal author of what is know as the SCANS report, (SCANS = Secretary's Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills, and the Secretary was of the Dept. of Labor). I encountered that phrase in a recent piece by Grant Wiggins, writing for The Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development's new EDge professional social network project in piece titled Abolish the Diploma.

There is an important message, contrary to most of our discussions about educational policy. What if we totally abandoned the idea of a high school diploma meeting certain common standards, what might that mean for education, for the money we spend on standardized tests? Can we consider the implications, at least for a moment? If you are interested in the idea, please keep reading.

Wiggins is one of the great advocates of Authentic Learning and Authentic Education (you can read about his ideas here, with an undergraduate degree from St. John's Annapolis and an Ed. D. from Harvard. But he is not afraid of challenging conventional thinking about education. Consider how his blog post starts:

===========================================
Imagine the following HS requirements being recommend to the School Board:
• 3 years of economics and business
• 2 courses in philosophy – one in logic, the other in ethics
• 2 years of psychology, with special emphasis on child development and family relations
• 2 years of mathematics, focusing on probability and statistics
• 4 years of Language Arts, but with a major focus on semiotics and oral proficiency
• US and World history, taught as Current Events - backwards from the present
• 1 Year of Graphics Design, Desktop Publishing, and Multimedia presentation

Outrageous? Hardly – if we do an analysis of what most graduates actually need and will use in professional, civic, and personal life. How odd it is that we do not require oral proficiency when every graduate will need the ability. How absurd it is in this day and age that students aren’t required to understand the capitalist system. How sad it is that physics is viewed as more important than psychology, as parents struggle to raise children wisely and families work hard to understand one another. Requirements based on pre-modern academic priorities and schooling predicated on the old view that few people would graduate and fewer still would go on to college make no sense. Ask any adult: how much algebra did you use this past week?
=========================================
<snip>
Consider this, written in opposition to evaluating teachers by the test scores of their students:

We do not have good tools to measure teachers, and when you hold people accountable with poor measures, things don’t just fail to improve. They get worse.

The reason is simple: Accountability changes workers’ focus from "do a good job" to "do a job that looks good according to the measure."

There is much more in Willingham's piece, and he is not opposed to accountability per se. As he concludes:

Advocates of teacher accountability often acknowledge these problems, yet insist it’s better than nothing. Not true. A poor system could make teaching worse and a failed attempt will allow opponents to dismiss accountability as a failed policy. Accountability is a good idea, but we have to get the measures right.
<snip>
There is much more: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/2/6/83313/10452

Interesting, procative, and definitely worth a read. It provides a different perspective on education that is radical in ways, but IMHO no more so than turning the educational system into 'charter school clients.'

Edit to add: I taught Physics. I asked my students one day if they thought they would use the material in the class again. One or two raised their hands.

I then asked them if they planned on having children. Most raised their hands. I asked how many had any experience dealing with babies or young children. One hand went up.

Next: "Why aren't you enrolled in the childcare class?" "Do you think the parenting fairy will visit when you have a problem?" "Are you content using the methods your parents used or do you think you need some more insight and exposure to different ideas? Food for thought I told them while once again sticking my nose in with some questions.

[Hannah Bell]

1. Accountability changes workers’ focus from "do a good job" to "do a job that looks good according to

the measure."

yes. anyone who's experienced this situation knows the truth of it, & the difficulty of continuing to try to do a truly "good job" when that's not what the system rewards -- in fact, it often penalizes a truly "good job".

plenty of workers besides teachers know it, too.

[Are_grits_groceries]

2. Very true, and

that thought should be emblazoned in a lot of places. It does have meaning in a lot of areas.

[mfcorey1]

3. This is what educators have been saying for years

Four years of Shakespeare and no skills does not prepare our children for the work force. Even though we would like to see it happen, all children do not want to go to college. This vocational concept is used minimally in school districts throughout the country.:nopity:

[Are_grits_groceries]

4. I have said for years that

students should be helped in paying for training after high school if it's in plumbing or astrophysics. There is worth in a lot of kinds of work.

[JackintheGreen]

5. Then I write to you as a physics teacher

I remember high school physics well. I had a great teacher. And the course was 'required' for students of my abilities. But I haven't much used physics out of high school. Except that when my daughter asks me the questions 12 year olds are wont to ask, I can usually answer them with a bit of accuracy.

But more pointedly to the reason I write to you: I ride a motorcycle. All the damn time. On the highways I pass time doing relatively simple physics in my head. I am traveling at 70 mph. If while traveling around the upcoming curve (with an assumed 5% camber) I strike a 3' high brick wall, how far will my body travel before striking the ground? I couldn't do that without physics!

[Are_grits_groceries]

9. Have at it.

A couple of students said they would use the info. If you aren't wearing a helmet, it also may be your last calculation. That's your choice.

[JackintheGreen]

14. Where did that last come from?

My teacher never taught me the proper formulas for figuring the crush force on an unprotected skull, but rest assured, my father taught me well, and I never ride without full-face helmet and kevlar riding gear.

But I'm confused why you'd pick that place to go. Lot of idiots around you parts?

[Are_grits_groceries]

16. Yes.

I see helmetless riders all the time. Over 21 and you are free as a bird. I just had a brain fart and wandered away. I didn't mean to make it sound like an attack.

[JackintheGreen]

19. No worries

Darwin takes care of his own. :toast:

[stray cat]

6. A resume is nothing if the student is incompetent and doesn't know squat about their area

A biology degree and they can't divide 10 by 5......or the difference between bacteria and DNA

[Pholus]

7. Physics teachers who can't impart the relevance of their subject....

are not good teachers. Period. Completely destroys the power of the rest of
his argument.

On the other hand, the absolute WORST class I ever took was general psychology.

1) Multiple choice questions, written so horribly so the answer was obvious from
the length of the answer. Seemed to follow a template:
a) buzzword 1
b) buzzword 2
c) combination of buzzword 1 and buzzword 2 because of the real world complications
brought about by condition c.
d) sarcastic answer, unrelated buzzword or "none of the above."

2) Despite this, random guessing STILL got you a "C" due to the pathetically low curve.

3) Uninteresting, straight out of the book lectures (with the exception of the
child development unit -- too bad that guy didn't teach the whole class instead
of the tag-team approach they used).

4) NOTHING I learned in that class was relevant to being a parent.

Let me fix the guy's list. First off, until 10th grade, everyone takes the same classes

9th-10th grade Seven hours/day
--------------
1) 2 years of basic civics. My civics class in high school was the most useful class I had
since it concentrated on what you needed to understand about government as a citizen.
People really seem to be missing this skill. Add your parenting classes here, as well
as practical instruction in finance management, applying for a loan, going to court, doing
your taxes and anything else related to your eventual role in society.

2) 2 years of mathematics.
a) Algebra and pre-calc.
b) Geometry, focussing specifically on proofs and deductive reasoning

3) Two years of language arts, concentrating on the ability to compose essays that GET TO THE
POINT and effectively communicates with an audience, Too many humanities types confuse number
of pages with effectiveness of your writing. Stop it.

4) Two years of technology/science. Sorry, you're NOT copping out because "science is hard"
a Biology
b Technology. Not just "using your Mac" as he proposes since that should be something you
develop in working on your other classes, but understanding the physical
principles behind modern technology. Learn programming, it's logic of the most
unrelenting sort. Nothing points out flaws in your reasoning process than the cold,
impartial screen calling out your failures.

5) Two years of performing arts. Your choice but you're doing it because you need to learn to
appreciate the world around you.

6-7) Two electives. No more study halls, homework is for after school. Allow talented students
to move ahead.

At the end of 10th grade, you get some choices:
-----------------------------------------------

1) Graduate, because if you're done on school you're wasting everyone's time being forced to go.
You'll regret it, of course, but perhaps there are always GED's later.

2) Business/Entrepreneur option -- yes, you want to work in the business world.

3) Vocational option -- yes, you want to dedicate to a practical career.

4) Pre-college -- because you want more out of life.

5) Anything I missed. Classes at the local vo-tech or college?

[Are_grits_groceries]

11. What was proposed here is a starting point.

It is a proposal that literally takes education off the usual path. I think that suggesting changes and discussing it is the idea.

Your ideas have merit, but you sound as if they are written in stone. What you experienced in certain classes may not match someone else's take at all.

In addition, people who make judgemental declarations on one example are possibly close-minded people who appear to know everything. Period.

[Pholus]

28. Sorry, I am just slow at my rhetorical games.

I never did "flowery" writing very well. Let me take this sentence from TFA...

"How sad it is that physics is viewed as more important than psychology, as parents struggle to raise children wisely and families work hard to understand one another."

And use the same sentence structure to indicate why "perhaps" and "just maybe" I saw a bit of closed mindedness myself in the proposed curriculum...

Ready?

How sad it is that psychology is viewed as more important than physics, as our families struggle to maintain a standard of living in an increasingly technological world and global problems demand that our children be able to apply the scientific method impartially to see through spin and obsfucation.

[Are_grits_groceries]

31. Got that!

I understand your point. I taught science so I agree it should be included. I also believe that the courses need revamping. I had some classes that made me want to get on my desk and start a fuss because they drove me up a wall.
It does sound close-minded, but I am taking it as a beginning and not gospel.I think there are a lot of areas we would agree on. I am intrigued by his thinking whether I agree with all of it or not. I like to mull the new ideas. Mulling while posting is apparently dangerous.
:hi:

[Pholus]

34. I can see what you're getting at...

Sorry, I just got caught up on that one point. Now I'm caught on another.

However, the question of accountability is going to rear its head no matter what you do. A resume/CV as I've used them are an advertisement more than an evaluation of me
as a person. A transcript is a list of what I started, what my successes were and what my weaknesses were. For example, that D I got in 9th grade algebra has been used as a
motivational story more than once considering that I ended with a PhD in a related field.

So my first question is: who prepares the resume?

I guess the school could, based on the evaluation of its teachers. Kind of like a rubric (an example of which I found online to write this)

In the topic of classical 9th grade algebra, Pholus showed minimal development in his written work. His proofs were vague and his written work
often showed few of the details which would illustrate his train of thought. He only barely met the lowest requirements that kept his work from
being unsuccessful.

Now the other categories (an you'll see I added a bit of prose to relate to the topic) are:
"Full development with concrete details"
"Full development with adequate detail"
"Development/detail needs improvement but are acceptable"
"Minimal development of topic, few if any details"
"Work was unacceptable and did not reach the minimums required in the problem statement"

But in the end, all I chose was a five step system and ranked myself in step 4. In other words, a "D" on an "ABCDF" system.


So there lies the problem I see.
---------------------------------

Any institutionally developed system will use a rubric which probably is just a re-expression of a grade. Any personally developed resume will avoid discussion of weak spots altogether and so employers will need to learn to read between the lines in order for the document to be relevant. Hiring will become more difficult since a lot more attention will have to be placed into the evaluation of many potential employees backgrounds as well as reading between the lines of the application. I would prefer to live under your proposed system, but I cannot see my opinion being in the majority.

Transcripts are by no means a perfect system. The obvious patch is the requirement of references or letters of recommendation where people stake their professional careers on vouchsafing a person's character and abilities. Most jobs I've cared about have done the latter and followed through in checking.

[caraher]

8. My quote: "students should graduate with an education, not a résumé"

And seriously, no science? In a world where ignorance of science makes it politically acceptable to refuse to acknowledge that we are in grave danger of choking to death on the effluent of our technological base?

The standard of relevance applied here is far too narrow and "career" oriented.

[Generic Other]

10. +1000

With an education, I can teach myself anything I need to know. With a resume, I might be able to get a job if I am lucky. Which one makes me richer?

[Are_grits_groceries]

15. The statement did not say graduate without an

education. It said without a transcript. He isn't proposing no education. He is proposing a different model to work from.

The idea is to start from a different place and look at learning in a different way. I don't agree with everything that was proposed, but neither do I dismiss it out of hand. In discussing this, changes are inevitable and probably warranted.

[Generic Other]

37. I have an education, and not all of it makes me a good employee

And that's how I want it to be.

[ProfessorGAC]

39. +1e36

Thanks

[City Lights]

12. !

:applause:

[rucky]

25. +1

Nothing truly great has ever been achieved because it would look good on a resume.

[JCMach1]

26. Exactly! +1M

[NuttyFluffers]

13. well considering various resumes are irrelevant in this economy, let's stick to some classics...

i'd rather teach children how to be curious, and then by what manner of thinking to pursue the means to satisfy their curiosity. all our previous theory and knowledge will eventually no longer be cutting edge in the future -- but how do you instill lifelong learning?

this curriculum is designed for a resume, but that's it. like certification, it will be obsolete soon after obtained. it has zero capacity to give the basic tools to the children to enhance themselves on their own. the specific knowledge is meaningless and ephemeral -- it is the passion and dreaming and curiosity and criticism that fires minds, and it is the principles of openness, research, and questioning that helps them find their own answers.

people keep wanting to waste time on formulas, when they forget there's a human being in front of them... engage the human being; it's a lot smarter than you think!

[Pholus]

30. "Formulas" are language too...

And, sorry to say that Einstein may have replaced Newton, but that doesn't mean that there isn't a truth to what Newton saw. It just means that there is more out there than what we see day to day.

And why are you harshing on formulae? They're the most powerful, concise language you can think of to relate an understanding of the world around us. An basic understanding of mathematics means that a formula can avoid the necessity of writing volumes of descriptive prose. Hidden in those formulae are implications the author may not have considered, yet the nature of the formula demands those implications and they might be noticed by someone in her audience. And I am very sad when people build walls around themselves -- deliberately cutting themselves off from "formulas" as if they're NOT part of the world they live in -- to avoid appreciating the beauty of our universe.

I engage people plenty -- but many human beings do not want to be engaged. Doesn't mean that I stop trying...

[NuttyFluffers]

38. you interpret the wrong context of my usage of the word 'formula'.

i am not referring to 'formula' as it relates to mathematics at all.

i am using 'formula' as the listed prescriptive curriculum, or any other latest reform gimmick, that will supposedly make public education "super efficient and relevant, just like business."

humans are not robots and class subjects are not fixed data to be plugged in. there is no curricula "formula" that will solve our current education woes. that is what i was referring to.

ps: i do find mathematical formulae quite beautiful. thank you though for such an impassioned appeal for people to reassess the internal beauty of their mathematical 'shorthand'.

:hi:

[La Lioness Priyanka]

17. have we declared doctors and scientists to be irrelevant?

[Are_grits_groceries]

21. This is a starting point for

a new way to look at education. I don't agree with all of it. Adding science in would be one change I'd make. It's to start a discussion.

People complain all of the time about schools not working. A new proposal is made, and everyone goes up in a puff of smoke.

There are a lot of ideas that have merit even if all of a new proposition isn't acepted. Why throw out everything without thinking about the whole? That's what the diarist asked for people to do at the beginning.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

!

[La Lioness Priyanka]

18. !

[aikoaiko]

20. "students should graduate with a résumé [or vita], not a transcript "

If I may, I think a vita might be a better goal for some.

[Are_grits_groceries]

23. I think that is true.

People have gone over the edge because of the word 'resume'. I believe the author is trying to get away from transcripts and come up with another method.

'Resume' may not have been the best choice. Heads certainly seem to have exploded.

[PVnRT]

22. Two years of psychology? Is this a joke?

News flash: high school students take psychology because it's an easy A for their senior year. And to say that, basically psychology is just as important as mathematics...what a fucking joke.

[Are_grits_groceries]

24. Lesson for the day:

Please read the PROPOSAL about education that was made including the rest of the article not posted.

Remember that it doesn't say without an EDUCATION. In addition,'resume' may not have been the best choice of word.

Please consider why he is proposing certain courses. For Gawd's sake, if you think of the worst class you took in a subject area then nothing would have value. The psychology courses are geared towards child -rearing and family.

Once you have climbed down off of the ceiling where you launched yourself in outrage, please calmly add what courses you would like and state why. Don't huff about it. Think about it.

Good grief. I re-read the post to see if I had proposed that Sarah Palin be made Sec. of Education since the outrage almost melted my monitor.

I wanted a discussion. Silly me. How will education ever change if this is the level of discourse?

[JCMach1]

29. 3 years of Business and Economics?

Why so we can be fully indoctrinated into the ideology of consumerism?

What this guy is proposing is retro-fitting education to create worker drones for the system.

Oral proficiency in language and semiotics???

Semiotics? :wtf: was this guy smoking if he thinks that is either interesting or relevant at the secondary level.

You can tell this guy understands nothing about literacy.

The resume approach is total BS. I could have trained in IT for my Bachelors. I came very close to doing it. Instead, I chose a Liberal Arts education that has opened more doors in my life than anything else could.

I could have gone into IT and been unemployed now(that's what the Business world wanted in 1985) and been un, or under-employed today. Instead, I chose to go for a degree that sharpened my communication and critical thinking skills. The result is that I am doing quite well, thank you.

[Lyric]

27. If I were given Godlike Powers to create a curriculum and system

of teaching--kindergarten would start at age 4 (or earlier, if a child shows enough basic skills to handle it) and high school would last two years longer, giving every student more time in the public school system before being shipped off to either college or labor. Sure, they'd be in school a bit past the age of majority, but that's just how it would be. Those extra two years of high school would be spent learning Wiki-style. Every student would be allowed to choose his/her classes, based on interest level, and those "special elective" classes would only last half a semester each (which allows time to make changes if a students' interests change.) All of those classes would be taught at college-level, and ALL would have a writing component. I have talked to more professors than I can recall, in fields from English to Psych, Poli-Sci, History, and Biology, and the number-one complaint of ALL of them is that their students can't write worth a damn. THAT would change, because I'd require a 6-week college-level composition course every year of high school.

Some of the ideas for the 6-week, intensive elective classes: Linguistics, Desktop Publishing, Practical Graphics Design, Excel/Powerpoint/Word, assorted topics in Political Science, Literature, History, Business Ethics, Economic Theory, Management, Environmental Ecology, Molecular Biology, Genetics, Chemistry, and other life skills (budgeting, volunteering, banking, driving, investing, parenting, civic duties, etc.) IMHO, college should last a minimum of 6 years as well, because right now, the 4-year degree programs give students enough time to learn lots about their major, and not much else. What kind of "education" is that? They graduate with no cultural capital and no intellectual or cultural breadth. Life is more than just your job. Someone upthread mocked Shakespeare, but I think that growing up without getting a basic education about literature (especially important literature, like Shakespeare) is a horrific idea. The point of an education is to prepare kids for LIFE. That involves a hell of a lot more than just your job. Reading Shakespeare in an analytic, thoughtful way gives students the opportunity to see that many of the social ills and political problems of today were just as bad back then as they are now--and likewise, many of the joys and rewards are the same as well. It gives us an empathetic connection to the people who made us who we are in a way that recitative history simply does not.

If we want to train good little robots, then we focus primarily on job skills and practical classes and we dump or deeply trivialize Shakespeare, art, music, and everything else that isn't relevant to a job. If we want to raise human beings capable of complex thought with deep wells of empathy, morality, a connection to history, AND relevant job skills, then we make sure students have the opportunity to take lots of BOTH kinds of classes.

[Are_grits_groceries]

33. I believe that one of the reasons students

don't write very well is because they don't read. If you read a lot, the structure of language becomes part of what you pick up without knowing it. Of course, as you pointed out, they need to write. They need to take anything they have picked up and put it to use.

I also believe that EVERY teacher should be required to take courses in how to teach reading skills. Then they could incorporate those skills as they teach the subject matter. Every class would provide some reinforcement.

I also think that the OP curriculum needs work. I wouldn't leave out art or other courses. The proposal does, however, try to break the mold we have been in for years.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

32. Another attempt to dumb down school under the guise of revising education

Not near enough science, no biology, no Phys Ed, no fine arts. No alternate tracks for the non-college bound. Psych? easiest course in most high school followed by economics. This is about as silly as it gets.

[Pholus]

35. In defense of the OP...

And despite my own harshing on this all, the original quote when to St. John's, which is a classics school with an original take on grading. A lot of what is proposed is already in place there and so one simplistic read on this is "St. John's curriculum and grading for all"

Their psych class is probably VERY rigorous compared to what you and I would think -- I don't think if you saw it you'd think the students were getting off lightly.

But there is a big weakness (IMHO) to explain the lack of science: they try very hard to learn everything from primary sources and learning physics from Principia might not be the best way to start if you know what I mean. "The action of the motion" doesn't translate well into 20th century speak since Hamilton and Lagrange developed the concepts of momentum and energy must more elegantly.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

36. Regardless that kind of curriculum does little to prepare students for college and/or the real world

Right now too many students are being offered only a sub-par college prep. We need to include vocational and non-college options for many students. I don't see where this curriculum addresses any of the above. The hard science and math are also critical in the long term, again, this is halfhearted at best. Maybe it would be OK for those headed into some sort of liberal arts field but that would be unfair to the majority. Remember that liberal arts majors are the lowest paid and have the highest unemployment levels upon graduation