Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SUNDAY, September 26, 1993 TAG: 9309290329
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: D2 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE:
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
As it is, most Virginians heard about it in the form of exaggerated and sometimes false caricatures promulgated by opponents who sifted the Department of Education's initiative through the filters of their own fears and special agendas.
The religious right, fearful of any effort to teach values to their children outside of a religious context, portrayed OBE as a program of political correctness, interested more in churning out a new generation of agnostic liberals than in teaching reading, writing and 'rithmetic.
Some classroom teachers, fearful of individualized student testing and yet more mandates from a far-off bureaucracy, portrayed OBE as a nightmare of record-keeping and paperwork.
A fed-up public, fearful of a feel-good educational philosophy that emphasizes telling kids how well they do rather than teaching them how to do well, perceived OBE as more of the same, only worse. And more expensive.
Some of these fears may have had a reasonable basis, but most were rooted in misinformation and distortions. Opponents, for example, alleged that Outcome-Based Education had been tried in Chicago, and parents had sued to get it out of their schools. In fact, black parents brought suit over work books that portrayed minorities in negative, stereotypical ways. OBE continues to be implemented there.
Given the growing opposition to OBE in Virginia, the governor did the politically expedient thing by abandoning it. What cannot be abandoned is the effort to improve education in the state, and to make educators (and parents) more accountable for the success of the children who are their charges.
In some of its parts and some of its versions, OBE did come across as touchy-feely and politically correct. Opponents seized on this to malign the entire initiative. But in theory, at least, OBE and its Common Core of Learning were designed to address precisely those concerns heard most often in criticisms of public education today: that adolescents are leaving the public schools without the basic reading, writing, figuring and thinking skills needed to succeed in society.
Would protestations of tolerance and brotherly love have become more important than conjugations of verbs and solutions to word problems? The Education Department says the "critical attitudes" addressed were "responsibility, life-long learning and quality work."
Would standards have been lowered to ensure that no child failed? The Education Department insists educational standards would have been raised, not lowered. Students would have had to demonstrate their ability to do algebra, rather than the mere fact that they took algebra classes.
Would OBE have tightened central control over schools by a monolithic state bureaucracy, depriving parents and teachers of any ability to set the educational agenda for their children? The Education Department says rigorous standards would have been set in the Common Core of Learning, but the curriculum itself would have varied from place to place, with teachers and parents able to contribute to decisions at schools and within school systems.
An emphasis on personal responsibility, the need to demonstrate mastery of skills, the freedom to develop curriculums locally that meet tough state standards for achievement. Liberal or conservative, who can object to such goals?
Indeed, the public has been demanding that schools do a better job meeting just these goals.
They will not to be achieved, apparently, through the Common Core of Learning. OK. How will they be achieved? OBE has been pronounced DOA by the governor, but the need for world-class education is alive and well.
by CNB