Take Good Care of Children

We have to safeguard childhood. 

Today, after a troubling meeting about test scores and teacher rating, I found myself rushing the curriculum in an effort to cover standards fast.  As some students came up to me with questions related to the fourth grade standard, it was clear that they were about a year or more behind with regard to the numeracy understanding and knowledge they needed to reach that standard.

The children, eager to learn and capable of learning, could easily learn this skill with adequate time and good teaching leading from manipulative exploration to paper/online models to the more abstract work with the concept, but faced with a large number of standards--where's the time for that kind of teaching.

The sad reality here is that standards are one-size-fits-all assessments aimed at grade level.  It's as if the test makers/promoters believe that all nine- and ten-year-olds develop at the same rate with all skills and understanding, yet we all know that academic development differs for multiple reasons.  Children, unlike robots, have unique profiles, strengths, and challenges.

So, like teachers everywhere, I was troubled with my own rushed approach.  We all know that good teaching is meeting children where they are and lifting their skill and effort in ways that represent the best of what we know about cognition, development, student interest, and student need.

So in the end, I told the students that I rushed the lesson which wasn't a good idea, and that we'd learn about the topic in many ways in the days ahead.  I said that it's my job to teach them well, not rush.

Also, it's society's job to respect childhood and to respect children.  It's okay to want the best for our children, and it's okay to test children now and then to see what kind of progress they are making in specific areas--areas that are well understood and served by tests. But it's not okay to force standards on children who are one to two year's below the standard expectations. What would be better is to let students take a series of tests by level, when they pass one level, then they could take another.  That would be a much better match for students' developmental growth providing reasonable goals.

Just think, with a system like this, some children might test out of all tests by 8th grade or even earlier, while others who struggle with specific skills could take tests that that are the right reach for their current goals and needs thus providing a strong foundation. In this scenario tests would only play a small fraction of overall teaching/learning, and much more time would be spent on worthy, rich learning endeavor other than tests.

Teachers today are put in a tough place as they are rated on tests which are in some cases not a match for current research related to learning well, and a tough match because teachers are called to teach in ways that are not necessarily the best ways to motivate confidence, a strong academic foundation, and a sense of pride and vision with regard to passion, talents, and interests.

The money and time spent on too many mismatched measurements are not serving our students well.  Let's be smart about this, and move towards realistic, reasonable measurements that serve children well, and education programs that are holistic in ways that safeguard the joy of childhood and potential our beautiful children display each and every day.

When we look back on this overemphasis on tests, what will history say?  I think history will see it for what it is--a too-narrow, too time-consuming and mostly unfriendly focus for teaching young children well.