A Minor Musing About Tests, Citizenship And Otherwise

Let's begin with a point of agreement. It appears both Governor Noem and I want young'uns to be good citizens. Some of the best debaters I coached served as legislative pages.  Lincoln-Douglas debaters spent hours researching the nature of good and bad governments. Policy debaters, their desire to have every discussion reach a terminal impact notwithstanding, debated what the U.S government should and should not do. Public forum debaters argued about a little bit of everything relating to important political events. In one way or another, each of them dealt with what it means to be a good citizen.

Governor Noem doesn't want students to debate about the nature of good government or what constitutes a good government policy. Instead, she wants students to pass a citizenship test in order to earn a high school diploma. This is a bad idea.

First, I cannot count the number of times I have supervised a study hall and heard a freshman say, "When am I ever gonna use this?" when doing an Algebra I, physical science, or world history assignment. Every grammar class that I taught had a student who said, "I don't need grammar; I talk good." The reaction to the citizenship requirement will be the same if not worse. "I don't need to think about citizenship; I vote gooder than you" is not a habit or a syntax that South Dakotans should encourage.

Second, if the testing that has come with No Child Left Behind, Common Core, and any other education policy conceived in the 21st Century has shown anything, it's that the mandated measurement ceases to be a measurement: it becomes the goal. In other words, the test will soon become more important than good citizenship. I may be in a minority, but rational, curious, and independent voters should be the goal. If this policy is enacted, the goal will become good test takers.

Third, the citizenship test may require students to know that Hamilton, Madison, and Jay wrote the Federalist Papers, but does it require them to explain why "Federalist 10" or "Federalist 51" matters in 2019? The test may require students to know that the first ten amendments to the Constitution are known as the Bill of Rights, but will they be able to discuss why the absolute phrase "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State" has caused so much controversy over the past few decades? If the test requires students know the term "checks and balances," will it also include examples of when checks and balances have been successful or failed? In short, it's doubtful students be able to explain how the United States government works; they will just identify a few concepts.

Finally, my cynical nature causes me to suspect that this proposal is a throwaway line designed to further the impression that Republicans are the sole possessors of virtue, rectitude, and patriotism whereas non-Republicans hate the every decent part of western civilization writ large. Creating good citizens is an important goal, especially for a credal nation such as the United States. It's certainly a far too important goal to become a political talking point.

I Provide Conservatives With An Advertisement To Use If Secretary Of Education Becomes An Elected Position

Like Cory, I support Jim Bolin's proposed legislation to make the Secretary of Education an elective position. Cory's unabashed optimism shows through when he writes:

More lines on the ballot, more people to vote for, more public officials required to lead public conversations and win the mandate of the people—yes, yes, yes!

Cory, however, overlooks one predictable element of the public conversation that will be cringeworthy, the political ads.

In an effort to save my conservative friends time and money, allow me to provide the template for every commercial spot your candidates will run should this legislation become law in South Dakota.

I think I've hit everything: intimidating teacher stereotype, vulnerable student, liberals bad, conservatives good, and chalkboard nostalgia. Heck, I even have the flag in the opening frame. What more will a staunch conservative want?

Snark aside, South Dakota should have more elected positions. Making the secretary of education one of those positions is a good first step.

SHHH! Don't Tell Anyone, But Lora Hubbel Let A Non-Conservative Attend Her Common Core Concerns Event

This morning, my long-suffering wife had errands in Sioux Falls and Brandon, so I donned my dressiest chambray shirt and blue jeans and had her drop me off at the Lora Hubbel organized Common Core Concerns event. To blend in, I put my laptop and some quizzes that I wanted to correct in my Liberty Manics NSA field bag. (I really need to work on live blogging.)

I arrived fashionably late, but in time hear Dr. Sandra Stotsky, one of five people on the Common Core's Validation Committee who refused to sign off on the standards. Stotsky hit on many of the concerns that I've expressed about the Core in other posts. She won me over by telling the 100+ in attendance that the Core will reduce the teaching of fiction. She also correctly asserted literary texts are necessary for writing and critical thinking skills.

In addition, Stotsky also pointed out that the claims about the Core being international benchmarked and research based are specious. The standards have not been field tested. More importantly, she asserted rather convincingly that the math standards and English standards are not necessarily more rigorous than those that preceded them because the Core standards are divorced from content. She pointed out that the standards ask high school students to discern theme, but one can discern theme in both The Cat in the Hat or Moby Dick.  Finally, she pointed out that the standards were not developed by math or English teachers or college professors who teach those subjects. They were developed by testing experts and textbook publishers. In the main, Stotsky's presentation echoed concerns raised by Diane Ravitch and other educators who have concerns about the Core.

If Stotsky presented a prima facia case that the Common Core will likely do more harm than good, Jenni White, President of Restore Oklahoma Public Education (ROPE) confirmed some of my worst fears about the conservative Core opponents. While White did not invoke the UN, she went through various ways that the Core is part of a federal government effort to data mine and data bank family and student information. I started correcting mythology quizzes during her speech, but had to give up when she violated Godwin's Law and invoked Hitler as an early fan of data collection. She also told the crowd that opposing the Core is her Christian duty. I'm all for folks doing their Christian duty, but opposing these standards seems to fall under a civic obligation. I'm not sure if it was White's high energy approach, her Hitler comparison, or her call to Christian civil disobedience, but the crowd responded to White more enthusiastically than they did Stotsky.

During the breakout sessions, Representatives Bolin, Stalzer, and May discussed a bit of legislative history and the need to revisit the Core during the upcoming session. Some in the audience seemed eager to begin an initiated measure. Several other legislators, including Manny Steele, spoke from the audience.

To sum up, I'll give a few random observations. First,attending the event reminded me of being a visitor at a small town church. Many seem to have been together for other political and cultural battles. They had a certain comfort with each other and felt confident that everyone there would share not only the goals but also the underlying reasons for those goals. As one who is politically displaced, that atmosphere felt a bit cloying.

Second, I regret missing the opportunity to meet Steve Sibson whom Lora asked to help with one of the other breakout sessions. I should have been more social, but the farm boy that's still in me just doesn't do the social well.

Finally, however correct and well-intentioned those attending audience may be or not be, the effort to have the South Dakota Department of Education reverse the Core's adoption is a long shot at best.

Get Thee To A Tech School. . .

. . . for a good ROI that is.

Payscale has listed the colleges and universities that provide the best return on investment (ROI) in 2012. South Dakota School of Mines and Technology (SDSMT) came in 25th, right behind Princeton. Over 30 years, a SDSMT grad can expect to earn $1,228,000 on an $85,830 investment for an annual ROI of 9.7%.

In 2012, Black Hills State University provided a negative ROI without financial aid.  Over 30 years a BHSU graduate will lose about $17, 500.

 SDSMT has recently hired a new president,  Heather Wilson, a former New Mexico congresswoman who has a record of being less than friendly to the LGBT community. Given the minor dust up caused by this hire, the biggest question posed by these numbers may be whether SDSMT will have the same or better ranking  five years from now.