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.