THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Sunday, April 2, 1995 TAG: 9504010078
SECTION: VIRGINIA BEACH BEACON PAGE: 06 EDITION: FINAL
LENGTH: Medium: 74 lines
Proposed revisions to the state's Standards of Learning in social studies, language arts, math and science have spurred debate among teachers, parents and school administrators. Excerpted here is a letter from Virginia Beach School Superintendent Sidney Faucette to William Bosher, state superintendent of public instruction.
We strongly agree that there is a need for standards. Standards are necessary if we are to focus our instructional efforts; standards are necessary if we are to develop an accountability model based upon the use of assessment data.
Our disagreement may arise from the fact that our local standards are based on discrete, specific curriculum objectives which guide activities and lessons. Our standards, however, represent the combination of several objectives; our standards tend to be broader than those standards presented in the draft document of SOLs.
We believe the elementary school should focus on reading, writing, mathematics and citizenship. In our local plan we will not assess science and social studies until the middle grades. For this reason, our staff felt that the proposed SOLs presented too much too early. We were especially concerned with the emphasis on specific social studies content standards in the early grades. We strongly feel that these grade levels should focus on literacy skills, computational competencies and citizenship development.
Another of our concerns deals with the issue of technology. . . . Our patrons repeatedly tell us that our goal should be the teaching of reading, writing and mathematics. Children from economically deprived homes may become the ``techno-peasants'' of this educational reform movement. One's birth should not determine one's access to knowledge and skills or mastery of standards. . . .
Some of the mathematics standards are not reflected in our local curriculum at all. For example, we do not ask students to estimate sums and differences of three-digit numbers in third grade. . . . (W)e feel that the skill is carried to an extreme level. . . .
At the secondary level . . . we emphasize the analysis of point of view in reading; point of view is critical in detecting author bias or propaganda. We stress matching language to the purpose and the audience; tailoring a speech or presentation is critical if you are to persuade and to convey information .
Historically, the social-studies program in the primary grades has focused on the family and the neighborhood. While our students are capable of more sophisticated study than has been past practice, I do not believe that the answer is in rote memorization (Standards 1.1 and 1.2 in which students are asked to ``identify by name and deed . . . ).
At the high-school level, we have difficulty with the creation of another required course. First, our teachers have studied either geography or history; further, their personal collections of materials reflect these areas of concentration. In the proposed plan, the two disciplines would have to be merged and a credit requirement for graduation added. Such an addition will further damage those elective offerings in the arts and vocational areas, studies which keep many of our students in school and engaged in learning. . .
The social studies SOLs are not teacher friendly and are not teacher preparation compatible. Mastery and application of the standards have been subordinated to redesign for no content or pedagogical purpose. . . .
Then, of course, if the state is going to replace all the useless textbooks (an ``unanticipated expenditure'' Dr. Faucette estimates at $1.5 million for Virginia Beach), retrain and bolster the morale of all teachers in the commonwealth, and redesign the liberal arts curriculum and teacher training programs at state colleges and universities, the ``new and improved'' social studies SOLs may have credence. Not being one of little faith, I will wait for the fair and reasonable decision of the State Board of Education. . . . by CNB