The Civic Knowledge Divide

"We are in danger of losing a generation of citizens schooled in the foundations of democracy--and of producing high school graduates who are not broadly educated human beings," warns Dr. Judith L. Pace in her commentary at Education Week on December 18, 2007.

Pace goes on in this commentary to make comments that reinforce what has been mentioned in other "blog postings" at this site and that is that squeezing out social studies occurs disproportionately in low-performing schools with large minority and low-income populations. Yet, these are the very students who could benefit the most from a rich curriculum that encourages civic participation. By not providing them with this opportunity, another inequality divide is created between the haves and the have nots. As Pace indicates, studies point to a glaring gap in civic knowledge based on test scores correlated with socioeconomic background and race or ethnicity.

Although diverse opinions are crucial to a democracy, opinions formed without the proper background civic knowledge will lead to unwise decisions and thus, pave the way for "potentially dire consequences for our democracy."

Pace ends her commentary with a reminder from Linda Darling-Hammond that we who are practitioners and scholars must educate our government about what all our children need in order to be well educated.

Reference
Pace, J. L.(2007). Why we need to save (and strengthen) social studies. Education Week. Retrieved on December 19, 2007 from the World Wide Web: www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2007/12/19/16pace.h27.html?print=1

Financially Compensating the "Best" Educators

As a taxpayer and educator I am responding to "Paying better teachers better" published [in Utah County's Daily Herald] on December 16th, 2007.


I concur with John Morefield, an educator from Seattle, Washington who said: "I have come to believe that a school designed to work for children of color, works for white children. The reverse, however, is not true. Consequently, if we design our schools to work for children of color they will work for all children."


As someone who taught mostly white mainstream students and then diverse learners, mostly English language learning Hispanics, I know first hand that doing what we've always done that works for white mainstream learners isn't sufficient for diverse learners.


As Utah's student demographics continue to become more diverse, the "best" principals and teachers will be those who change what they have always done. This will obviously require humility, sacrifice, commitment, and willingness to step out of one's comfort zone to learn what it takes to design the kind of school Morefield suggests.


This opportunity and challenge to become effective with diverse learners can be exhilarating, and thus, a reward in itself. Yet, because of the extra time, energy, and expertise required, Governor Huntsman and other policy makers would do well to consider financially compensating educators who willingly accept this challenge.

Religion: Not the Enemy

Throughout history in all parts of the world religion, more often than not, has been at the center of wars and conflicts as well as persecution, bigotry, and discrimination. Yet, identifying religion as the root cause may be identifying the wrong culprit.

There has been nothing in the teachings of my Christian LDS (Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints) experience that would encourage or condone this type of behavior. From my understanding of other religions, the same could be said for them.

In fact, the teachings from my Christian LDS experience have always been to love and care for my "neighbor." The story of the Good Samaritan teaches that neighbor is "anyone in need," transcending any social-cultural predicament. As Chang (2007) so aptly describes, this would include others of similarity, others of difference, and others of opposition. In Matthew 5:43-44, 46-47 of the New Testament Jesus teaches: "Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?"

The counsel that LDS members have repeatedly and consistently received from our LDS church leaders is to be respectful of others and their beliefs. The 11th Article of Faith of my LDS faith states: "We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may."

If these, or ones similar, are our religious teachings, why is religious bigotry--defined as intolerance, fear, and hatred of those different from ourselves-- such a common occurrence and so prevalent throughout the world, including the United States? I would venture to say that the real culprit is not religion, but people, especially people who excuse or condone their hateful and oppressive behavior in the name of religion.

Reference
Chang, H. (2007). Self-narratives for Christian multicultural educators: A pathway to understanding self and others. Retrieved October 15, 2007 from the World Wide Web
http://www.icctejournal.org/ICCTEJournal/past-issues/volume-1-issue-1/self-narratives-for-christian-multicultural-educators-a-pathway-to-understanding-self-and-others/?searchterm=chang

Religion and Multicultural Education Are Intertwined

It is important to mention that much of the critical multicultural education movement was an outgrowth of the civil rights movement under the leadership of such people as Martin Luther King, Jr. and Malcolm X whose work was grounded in spirituality. And as we study the world of African Americans we hear a voice that says, “We are a spiritual people!” It is the same with the Latino/Hispanic culture. Thus, it only stands to reason that we allow spirituality to play a critical role in culturally responsive education.

Teaching About Religion Is Critical to Multicultural Education

Teaching about religion is especially critical to multicultural education.

In 1988, a broad coalition of 17 religious and educational organizations published guidelines that distinguish between teaching about religion and religious indoctrination. The guidelines state, in part:

• The school's approach to religion is academic, not devotional.
• The school sponsors study about religion, not the practice of religion.
• The school educates about all religions; it does not promote or denigrate any religion nor does it press for student acceptance of any one religion.

In addition to these religious-liberty clauses, there are also three guiding principles that Charles Haynes calls the civic values at the heart of American citizenship. They are:

RIGHTS: The rights guaranteed by the Constitution are for citizens of all faiths and none.

RESPONSIBILITIES: Religious liberty depends upon a universal responsibility to respect that right or religious liberty for others.

RESPECT: Living with our differences, including religious difference, in a democracy requires a strong commitment to the civic values that enable people with diverse perspectives to treat each other with respect and civility.

When we teach about the many cultures and religions of our nation and the world, we must also simultaneously emphasize our common ground which is the values and responsibilities we share as American citizens.

Reference

Haynes, C. C. (2007). To advance religious freedom, teach about religion. Retrieved from the World Wide web http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/commentary.aspx?id=19421 on December 17, 2007.

Role of Religion

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." These words of the First Amendment of the U. S. Constitution prohibit government from establishing a religion and protects each person's right to practice (or not practice) any faith without government interference.

It is important for educators to have an thorough understanding of the meaning of the First Amendment in relationship to religion and public schools. The law concurs with Noddings (1998/1999) that the First Amendment does not prevent teaching about religion.

There are three main reasons why religion needs to be part of a public school education:

1. Religion and spirituality are part of who we are, not only as a country, but as a world, and have influenced both our public and private lives.



2. Ignorance about religion in religiously diverse societies, especially in the U. S. which is the most religiously diverse society on earth, is a root cause of intolerance, discrimination, prejudice, and stereotyping.



3. Teaching about religion is important and necessary if public schools are to provide students with a complete education. Much of history, art, music, literature and contemporary life is unintelligible without an understanding of the major religious ideas and influences that have shaped history and culture throughout the world.

In Abington v. Schempp (1963), the court stated: "[I]t might well be said that one's education is not complete without a study of comparative religion or the history of religion and its relationship to the advancement of civilization. It certainly may be said that the Bible is worthy of study for its literary and historic qualities. Nothing we have said here indicates that such study of the Bible or of religion, when presented objectively as part of a secular program of education, may not be affected consistently with the First Amendment."

Justice Tom Clark wrote for the Supreme Court concerning this same case saying: " A person cannot be fully educated without understanding the role of religion in history, culture, and politics...The law, constitutional or otherwise, is no impediment to the realization of this aim."

The question is no longer whether schools should teach about religion. That answer is a resounding "Yes"--In fact, it is a duty to do so.

Reference
Halford, J. M. (1998/1999). Longing for the sacred in schools: A conversation
with Nel Noddings. Educational Leadership, 56, 28-32.

Democracy and Moral Character

As Rep. LaVar Christensen reminds us, "Education's original aim was not simply to convey knowledge but to forge character." He is not the only one who expressed these sentiments. We can go as far back as Aristotle who told us that the aim of education is "to make men both smart and good." Thomas Jefferson insisted that democracy could not survive without a virtuous citizenry. President Theodore Roosevelt said, "To educate a man in mind and not in morals is to educate a menace to society." The English philosopher John Locke wrote, "Tis virtue...which is the hard and valuable part to be aimed at in education." Samuel Adams described the mission of educators as nurturing the "moral sense" of children. "Great learning and superior abilities, should you ever possess them," Abigail Adams told her son John Quincy, "will be of little value and small estimation unless virtue, honor, truth, and integrity are added to them." John Adams said, "Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people." Benjamin Franklin stressed that "only a virtuous people are capable of freedom."

William Bennett reminds us "The highest values of education in a democracy are more than the competitive advantage of an increasingly productive labor force....Education is "more than the acquisition of skills; it had [has] to do with the architecture of the soul."

From the summit conference hosted by the Josephson Institute of Ethics in Aspen, Colorado in July 1992 came the following declarations: The well-being of our society requires an involved, caring citizenry with good moral character. The ethical values of respect, responsibility, trustworthiness, justice and fairness, caring, civic virtue and citizenship are core ethical values that are rooted in a democratic society and that transcend cultural, religious, and socioeconomic differences.

We have an inspiring heritage and legacy, a democracy based on moral principles, that all must understand and appreciate if we are to carry the torch forward as we strive to narrow the gap between our country's ideals and realities. "Posterity--you will never know how much it has cost my generation to preserve your freedom. I hope you will make good use of it," quoting John Quincy Adams.

Because a country can only be as good and moral as its citizenry, it is imperative that each of us strives to develop a moral character and help our young people to do the same through our example and teachings.

Civic Education Is An Answer

Representative LaVar Christensen in his 2006 publication for the Annual Journal of Utah's Hinckley Institute of Politics quotes Frederick J. Ryan, Jr.: "Freedom is a fragile thing and never more than a generation away from extinction...It must be fought for and defended constantly by each generation."

Schools are an important part of this process. "Producing better citizens" was the original justification for creating America's public schools. Christensen states in his document that education's original aim was not simply to convey knowledge but rather to forge character. Therefore, when a school's focus is exclusively on reading, math, and other academics to improve one's personal economic prosperity, something very important is lost. This is exactly what is happening in our schools, especially for our diverse learners. Yet, they are the ones who have the most to gain from civic education--the purpose of which is to develop good citizens.

According to David E. Campbell's article Bowling Together, the characteristics of an education that develops good citizens are:

1. Equip the nation's future with the capacity to be engaged in the political process
2. Have citizens not only participating in democratic institutions, but also doing so knowledgeably
3. Impart the "ability to deliberate" in a context of "mutual respect among persons" which stems from political philosopher Amy Gutmann's defining characteristic of democratic education

Of course our diverse learners need to know the academics, but focusing exclusively on academic and leaving civic education to chance is not providing them an equitable education.

Considering the recent published findings of Dr. Robert Putnam's research study that he revealed in the 2006 Johan Skytte Price Lecture called E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and Community in the Twenty-first Century, it is even more critical that all learners have the knowledge and skills to be involved. Putnam's study found that in diverse communities, there is a greater distrust of neighbors, not only between groups, but even among members of the same group. Everyone seems to "hunker down"--pull in like a turtle. They expect the worst from their community, they volunteer less, they vote less, and have less faith that their cries for social reform will make a difference. All of which results in less social capital for everyone.

Rather than responding negatively to these findings, we can look at them as a challenging opportunity. After all, it is inevitable that diversity is only going to increase in America.

So what is the answer to this challenging opportunity? Although diversity can ultimately be valuable and enriching, we also need something that will unite us. I would propose that the characteristics of an excellent civic education as they have been described have the potential to do just that.

Willing to Dialogue With Those With Whom We Disagree

The work of my good friend, Izzy Kalman, the author of Bullies to Buddies, has done it once again!

I was disturbed by a conversation I had yesterday with a friend. This friend had just been involved in a very hot debate in Utah over vouchers. He shared with me that when he had reached out, more that once, to dialogue with those who had not only attacked his ideas because of their opposing views, but also had attacked his character, his offer to dialogue was either rejected or ignored.

This disturbed me greatly for various reasons, one being that if we as adults can't be role models on how to dialogue with those who disagree with us, how can we expect our young people to learn how to deal with conflict in a civil manner? Looking for answers I went to Izzy's website--www.bullies2buddies.org-- for some counsel. I wasn't disappointed.

At Izzy's website there was a link to another website--www.freedomforum.org. At this site I found "A Statement of Principles" called Religious Liberty, Public Education, and the Future of American Democracy. Although there are seven principles all of which are excellent, there was one, the 7th that particularly fit this situation with my friend.

The 7th principle: CONDUCT OF PUBLIC DISPUTES
Civil debate, the cornerstone of a true democracy, is vital to the success of any effort to improve and reform America's public schools.
Personal attacks, name-calling, ridicule, and similar tactics destroy the fabric of our society and undermine the educational mission of our schools.....Through constructive dialogue we have much to learn from one another.

There are still some lingering questions I am facing this morning: How can we have this happen--especially when efforts to dialogue are rejected and/or ignored? Where do we start?

It could very well be that the answers to these questions lie within the principles of spiritual leadership.

DOING What Parker Palmer Suggests

After I bought a GEO Tracker some years ago, I started seeing Trackers everywhere. They had always been there. I just hadn't seen them until a Tracker became part of my world. I've since learned that this phenomenon is not unique to me. It happens to almost everyone.


While writing and now that I have finished my research paper for Dr. Julie Hite's class titled Principals As Spiritual Leaders Improve the Academic Achievement of Diverse Learners I am experiencing something similar as to what I experienced with the Tracker. My eyes and ears catch things like articles, books, speeches, comments, etc. that might have gone unnoticed in the past. For instance, yesterday I ran across an article by Jeffrey L. Lewis & Eunhee Kim entitled A desire to learn: African American children's positive attitudes toward learning within school cultures of low expectations. Then this morning I accessed from Education Week a commentary by M. Christine DeVita entitled Getting serious about leadership. Not only was this an enlightening commentary, but also in this commentary was a link to the study released this year on preparing school leaders by Linda Darling-Hammond and a team of researchers from Stanford University. Obviously all this has led me to meet some incredible people.


Just like people who own Trackers feel a connection to each other, people who are committed to the principles of spiritual leadership feel a connection. It would be my hope that these people could follow the counsel of Parker Palmer that was posted on my "blog" yesterday and that is: Join with others in a community of support to buoy each other up by honoring the best within each other.

As we do so we will be better able to follow the other recommendation from Parker Palmer which was: Join in the politics around education protesting injustice and proposing paths toward justice because educating the young is far too important to leave their fate in the hands of politicians.

Parker Palmer Wisdom

While searching the internet for a quote by Parker Palmer (that I already ended up having!), I found a copy of his Commencement Address at the Bank Street College of Education in New York City on May 24, 2007.

Palmer offers some wisdom in that address that fits into what we have been discussing. He gives three suggestions to these educators that will help give them longevity in the vital work of education in spite of the discouragements that come from the working conditions of education:

1. Attend to your own inner life. Good teaching comes from the soul, not from techniques. Therefore, it's important for educators to stay close to the passions of the soul that took them into education in the first place. By attending to one's own inner life an educator will be better able to open up to helping the young people in their care to reach their potential.

2. Join with others in a community of support. The people in this community will be people who can buoy each other up by honoring the best within each other. This is very different purpose than a gripe-group or pity-party.

3. Join in the politics around education protesting injustice and proposing paths toward justice. Educating the young is far too important to leave their fate in the hands of politicians.

My response: As those of us who are attending to our inner life by striving to become spiritual leaders form a community of support, we can be much more effective in the political arena protesting injustices and advocating for what works for diverse learners.

Why Haven't We?

"We can, whenever and wherever we choose, successfully teach all children whose schooling is of interest to us. We already know more than we need to do that. Whether or not we do it must finally depend on how we feel about the fact that we haven't so far" (Edmonds, 1979, p.23).

The hard question is, "Why haven't we?" When I proposed this question, quoting Dr. Edmonds, to Linda Darling Hammond when she was in Salt Lake City, Utah for an Education Policy Forum on September 12, 2007, she responded with an enlightening and thought provoking question: "Who are the 'we'?"

I have pondered on her response, and I believe it is a very good point. It could very well be that what Walter Kelly's creation, Pogo said, applies: "We met the enemy and it is us." In other words, educators, and especially education leaders, have a responsibility to become part of the "we" that knows what works for diverse learners and then advocate for the implementation of those programs, policies, procedures, processes, peoples, and places that will support what works.

Although we educators are becoming better at fulfilling the first part of the responsibility--at least to a degree---we are not doing a very good job at fulfilling the second part. Even if we do advocate, nothing much changes. We must go back to Edmonds' quote, and ask why that is.

Referring back to yesterday's "blog post," much is due to how the bureaucracy of schools supports the status quo. It takes a lot of courage to confront a bureaucracy that rewards status quo and conformity.

In my book My Years As A Hispanic Youth Advocate..and The Lessons I Have Learned, I quote Parker Palmer from his book Courage to Teach substituting the word "I."
"Know that as I teach in ways that honor my own values without conforming to the situation, the force of the institution will come down on my head causing me to risk status, security, money, or power. The alternative rewards offered by living according to my values are fragile compared to raises, promotions, and status that organizations bestow on loyalists" (Lovejoy, 2004, p. 267).

If education is going to change for our diverse learners, we need educators who are willing to take the risk to be nonconformists: "Here in America we are descended in spirit from revolutionists and rebels - men and women who dare to dissent from accepted doctrine." ~Dwight D. Eisenhower, address, Columbia University, 31 May 1954

References:

Edmonds, R. R. (1979). "Effective schools for the urban poor." Educational Leadership, 17, 15-27.

Lovejoy, B. L. (2004). My Years As A Hispanic Youth Advocate..and The Lessons I Have Learned. Salt Lake City: Self-published.

Liberal Republican or Conservative Democrat?

At his the 2nd Annual Message to Congress on December 1, 1862, Abraham Lincoln said: "The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise with the occasion. As our case is new, we must think anew and act anew."


We could use similar words to describe our education system in our day. What worked in the past is not adequate for today, especially for our diverse learners.


The recent debate and eventual defeat of the private school voucher referendum in Utah has caused me to ponder the following question: Am I a liberal Republican or a conservative Democrat? My husband says there is no such thing, but if not, there is now. I'm just not sure which.

I find that my beliefs, opinions, and feelings are in tune with the Democrat compassionate stance when it comes to education issues, especially as they relate to diverse learners. I strongly support the Dream Act and bilingual education. Yet, expecting bureaucratic agencies, whether they be governmental or social, to solve the issue, is a pipe dream. Bureaucracies by their very nature support, encourage, and foster the status quo and conformity.

If we are going to meet the needs of our diverse learners, a stance that status quo is unacceptable must adamantly be taken. To overcome status quo will take an entrepreneurial spirit and attitude which is a trademark of the Republicans.

The bottom line question still remains after the voucher referendum defeat: How are the children? (Translation of Masai warrior greeting). This refers to all children--not just family related children. That is what the voucher debate and result should have been about.

Dr. William H. Jeynes argues the following which is worth pondering, "... to the extent to which religious schools promote parental involvement, religious commitment, and an overall more disciplined lifestyle, all of which relate to positive academic and social outcomes, it becomes very difficult to argue against allowing choice without sounding insular and self-serving. After all, even with low school choice participation rates, if the participant students of color are benefiting and the academic gap is reduced, it once again appears illogical and potentially racially oppressive and discriminatory to deny minority students the right to more fully reach their potential via a school choice system" (p.15).

How I or anyone else eventually defines one's self really isn't all that important. What is important to remember is: 1) We are facing a new challenge 2) Status quo is not an option and 3) The challenge is going to require us to think and act anew. The question is: Who is going to step forward?

Reference

Jeynes, W. H. (2007). Religion, intact families, and the achievement gap. Interdisciplinary Journal of Research on Religion, 3, 1-22.

Listen to The Student Voices

While researching for the research paper for Dr. Hite's class, I ran across this important information about the importance of listening to the voices of diverse learners.

Over 20 years ago the influential English sociologists Hammersely and Woods (1984) commented:"There can be little doubt that pupils' own interpretations of school processes represent a crucial link in the educational chain. Unless we understand how pupils respond to different forms of pedagogy and school organization and why they respond in the ways that they do, our efforts to increase the effectiveness, or to change the impact, of schooling will stand little chance of success" (p. 3).

Cook-Sather (2002) said:"As long as we exclude student perspectives from our conversations about schooling and how it needs to change, our efforts at reform will be based on an incomplete picture of life in classrooms and schools and how that life could be improved" (p. 3).

Seeking out the voice of students and engaging them in issues that face them uphold the values and principles of democracy (Sands, Guzman, Stephens, & Boggs, 2007).As we listen to the voices of diverse students and respond to those voices, we will have schools that work for them.

I concur with what John Morefield said in his work, Recreating Schools for All Children:"I have come to believe that a school designed to work for children of color, works for white children. The reverse, however, is not true. Consequently, if we design our schools to work for children of color they will work for all children."

REFERENCES

Cook-Sather, A. (2002). Authorizing students' perspectives: Toward trust, dialogue, and
change in education. Educational Researcher, 31(4), 3.-14.

Hammersley, M., & Woods, P. (Eds.) (1984). Life in school: The sociology of pupil culture.
Milton Keynes, UK: Open University Press.

Morefield, J. (???). Recreating schools for all children. Retrieved December 6, 2007 from
World Wide Web http://www.newhorizons.org/trans/morefield.htm#expectations

Sands, D. L., Guzman, L., Stephens, L., & Boggs, A. (2007). Including student voices in
school reform: Students speak out. Journal of Latinos and Education, 6, 323-345.

Quality work

I had worked literally hundreds of hours on a research paper for my class with Dr. Julie Hite. I was so proud that I had even turned it into her early. Therefore, when she contacted me to say that she strongly recommended that I revise it, I was stunned.

I didn't think I had it in me to give the paper one more ounce of energy, time, or thought. Yet, once the shock subsided, I realized the great opportunity she was giving---to do better.

Through this experience I was reminded of Dr. William Glasser's work and his definition of quality: Quality is constant improvement. There is also another quote that is relevant: Dr Al Mamary has defined quality work as “… the best that a student can do at this time”. This is a useful definition as it suggests there are a number of variables involved and that the pursuit of quality is an ongoing journey.

As soon as I acknowledged that my first submitted paper really was the best I could do at the time because of a variety of variables, it didn't mean that it was the best I would be capable of doing. In other words, once my knowledge was expanded, I would have the tools to improve it.

Thank you, Dr. Hite, for causing me to stretch by:

1. Understanding I was doing the best I could at the time
2. Acknowledging the strengths of the paper....and my personal strengths as well
3. Giving me suggestions on how to improve
4. Being there to guide and support me on the journey

...so that I can constantly improve.

Approaching our diverse learners like a Dr. Julie Hite will be giving them a most valuable gift.... even if they may not realize or appreciate it at first.

William Glasser Quotes

Quotes by Dr. William Glasser, the founder of Quality Schools:

As long as acquiring knowledge is the educational goal of schools, educational opportunities will be limited, as they are now, to affluent families.

Changing that definition to education is using knowledge and backing that up with all classroom work and tests focused on doing this is the way to upgrade the low grade system we have now.

Changing the system means giving up the way things have always been done that are no longer working.

Every single major push in education has made it worse and right now it's really bad because everything we've done is de-humanizing education. It's destroying the possibility of the teacher and the student having a warm, friendly, intellectual relationship.

I think it is totally wrong and terribly harmful if education is defined as acquiring knowledge.
If students get a real education where they are intellectually involved, where they have to show how they use the knowledge or improve the knowledge, they'll do fine on these tests.

Kids from poor families or poor backgrounds like A's as much as anybody else, but early in their career, by second or third grade, they give up on the idea that they'll ever get them and therefore we are killing them off on something that isn't even important, memorizing facts.

Now schooling, to get back to your question, schooling is basically 98 percent factual knowledge and so schooling is that what you're asked to learn in school and punished for not learning, that no one in the real world would ever ask you to know.

Running a school where the students all succeed, even if some students have to help others to make the grade, is good preparation for democracy.

So, we need to start understanding the difference between what I call factual knowledge and educational knowledge, and we don't focus much on educational knowledge.

There are only two places in the world where time takes precedence over the job to be done: School and prison.

We don't focus as much in schools on educational knowledge which requires thinking and application, as we do on acquiring facts.

Beyond Reading, Writing, and Arithmetic

Much of what I am going to share today comes from a paper published by Richard Rothstein in Phi Delta Kappan December 2006 titled, The Goals of Education.

The current overemphasis on academic skills in our schools is contrary to what leaders in American history have espoused. Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, and Thomas Jefferson all expressed goals for public education that expanded beyond reading and math. They felt there also needed to be political and moral goals.

Franklin thought history particularly important because "questions of right and wrong, justice and injustice, will naturally arise" as students debate historical issues "in conversation and writing." He also felt that physical fitness was as vital as intellectual fitness because "exercise invigorates the soul as well as the body."

There has been a fear throughout American history that public schools for the poor would include only basic reading and math skills and not the more important intellectual development that could empower the working class. As far back as 1830 in Pennsylvania a committee that had been appointed to examine urban public schools denounced urban schools for instruction that "extends [no] further than a tolerable proficiency in reading, writing, and arithmetic." Equality, the committee concluded, is but "an empty shadow" if poor children don't get an "equal education...in the habits, in the manners, and in the feelings of the community."

Horace Mann concluded after visiting Russia in 1837 that basic education in reading and arithmetic did not alone ensure democratic values. Students in Prussia were literate but supported autocracy. For this reason, Mann felt that schools in a democracy could not be held accountable for academics alone but must inculcate democratic moral and political values so that literacy would not be misused.

In 1938 the NEA which at the time was a quasi-governmental group composed of not only educators, but also professionals and policy makers in education, issued a report that proclaimed, "The safety of democracy will not be assured merely by making education universal." Or, in other words, making all Americans literate. The dictatorships [Germany, Italy, Japan, and the Soviet Union] have universal schooling and use this very means to prevent the spread of democratic doctrines and institutions.

Of course we want a literate American people, but we must also consider why that is important. I would conjecture that it is not only so each individual person can increase his or her earning power, but is also so that the principles of democracy that we treasure and value so highly will continue to exist. In order for the latter to occur, we must conclude that being literate for a democracy means more than being able to read, write, and do math.

We'll continue with this discussion tomorrow.

Academic Rigor With Heart

I am choosing to take a detour today and save until tomorrow the further conversation about civic learning.


Yesterday for class Dr. Hite took us to BYU's (Brigham Young University) library to meet with Rachel Wadham, the library education specialist. Just being in a library inspires and awes me. Yesterday's experience was no exception as I caught Rachel's contagious enthusiasm for learning and accessing information.


When I first discovered libraries as a young girl, I thought I had died and gone to heaven. I couldn't read enough books or gather enough information fast enough to satisfy my curiosity or desire to learn. The more I learned, the more I knew there was to learn, and I wanted to know it all. This insatiable appetite to learn it all is even harder now to address with the rate at which knowledge is expanding exponentially and when it is so accessible through so many avenues.

In spite of this strong desire to use my mind and to learn from books and other sources of intellectual knowledge, that alone won't quench the thirst or feed the hunger. The heart must be included in the search.

A few quotes to explain the importance of the heart in regards to learning:

• "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye." Antoine de Saint Exupéry from The Little Prince.
• "The heart has eyes which the brain knows nothing of." Charles H. Perkhurst
• The human heart knows things the eyes don't see, and feels things the mind cannot understand."
• "..it came to a time in my life when my heart told me things that my mind did not know...." Harold B. Lee quoting a prominent university professor
• "When we understand more than we know with our minds, when we understand with our hearts, then we know that the Spirit of the Lord is working upon us." Harold B. Lee
• "The heart is wiser than the intellect." J. G. Holland
• "If I create from the heart, nearly everything works; if from the head, almost nothing." Marc Chagall

In order to learn from the heart and allow it to guide our rigorous intellectual and academic pursuits, it is imperative that we take time to be still and to listen. The heart whispers so we have to listen closely.

It is important that as we pursue the getting of intellectual knowledge with academic rigor that we don't look beyond the mark by being past feeling. There will be times our hearts will provide answers to questions such as how to best meet the needs of our diverse learners that all the intellect and all the knowledge in all the libraries of the world won't provide.

Civic Learning For Minorities

"Knowledge about the ideas embodied in the Constitution and the ways in which it shapes our lives is not passed down from one generation to generation through the gene pool. It must be learned anew by each generation," declares Sandra Day O'Connor, former U. S. Supreme Court Judge and now co-chair of Campaign ForThe Civic Mission of Schools.

According to William A. Galston, Saul Stern Professor of Civic Engagement at University of Maryland, College Park, this is even more critical now: "While the importance of civic education is perennial, several needs combine to make it especially urgent today: the U. S. must integrate an unprecedented wave of immigrants into the mainstream of civic life: left un-checked, troubling inequalities in the civic participation of different socioeconomic and ethnic groups could exacerbate undesirable political and policy trends: and civic education is one of the few forces that can resist the rising tide of materialism in U.S. culture that numerous surveys have documented."

The statistics don't look too promising. In the 2001 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) test of U. S. history, more students scored below "basic" in history than in any other subject tested, including math, science, and reading: 13% in grade 4 scored below basic; 36% in grade 8; and 57% in grade 12. In other words, the longer they are in school, the worse it gets.

The statistics from the last civics assessment in 1998 paint an even bleaker picture, especially for minority students.

As our nation becomes more diverse our schools must step up to the plate to provide, especially for our minority learners, the opportunity to gain the knowledge, develop the skills, and cultivate the attitude needed for civic participation. Yet, the 2003 Council for Basic Education survey found that principals in schools with high proportions of minorities were more likely to have reduced time for history, civics, geography, the arts , and foreign languages so they could devote more time to math and reading.

Tomorrow's "blog post" will explain why a focus on only reading and math is detrimental and how the issue can be addressed so one focus doesn't have to be sacrificed for another.

Education Vision

Recently a summit on the achievement gap was held in Sacramento, California. What was presented at that summit has stirred up much conversation and debate. One such conversation/debate was between Richard Rothstein and Russlynn Ali which was printed daily for a week in the Los Angeles Times.

A couple of days ago I had the opportunity to access the whole transcript. While reading it, I found myself highlighting, writing "YES!!!" and starring Richard Rothstein's ideas, thoughts, and suggestions. For the next few days I'm going to draw upon his comments for my daily post.

Today I'm going to address an issue that takes us back to former posts centered on David McCullough and the need for history.

Rothstein notes one great harm NCLB (No Child Left Behind) has done to American education, particularly to disadvantaged children, and that is something called curriculum narrowing. At this point in time the law only holds schools accountable for math and reading. Inevitable result?- Something which sociologists have long called "goal displacement"--doing more of what you are accountable for and less of what you are not.

I would add something that I learned in my leadership class with Dr. Julie Hite at BYU--- "goal displacement" can cause an organization to focus on peripheral goals only because they are easy to measure, and not because they have any relationship to the long term vision or mission or goal of education. Thus, the most important educational goals are sacrificed.

Rothstein goes onto say that this is something well known in organizational theory. Management expert W. Edwards Deming urged businesses to "eliminate management by numbers, numerical goals" because they encourage a focus on short, not long-term, results. Peter Druker gave similar advice. What management experts are suggesting today is to use "balanced score cards" to measure success and not rely solely on financial indicators.

According to Rothstein, nobody is suggesting that better math and reading instruction be ignored. Yet, and this is an important "yet," to increase the low-income and minority children's chances for success, we must guarantee them a balanced education that includes more than math and reading instruction.

Rothstein comments that in Senate testimony, historian David McCullough observed, "Because of No Child Left Behind, sadly, history is being put on a back burner or taken off the stove altogether in many of our schools in favor of math or reading."

When schools only focus on reading and math, there is a decreased focus on social studies, history, science, art, music, etc., particularly in schools that serve low-income and minority students because this is where reading and math scores are the lowest. Even if the gap were narrowing in math and reading (which it is not), the gap is widening in other areas that are equally important but may be harder to measure numerically. And I would add that for minority students, especially English Language Learners, participating in subjects such as art, music, science, and history can help build self-confidence that can then translate into greater success with reading and math.

Rothstein quotes Chester Finn and Diane Ravitch, both once prominent NCLB advocates: If NCLB continues they write: "Rich kids will study philosophy and art, music and history, while their poor peers fill in bubbles on test sheets. The lucky few will spawn the next generation of tycoons, political leaders, investors, authors, artists and entrepreneurs. The less lucky masses will see narrower opportunities."

Although NCLB has made us recognize and acknowledge achievement gaps which we must do if we are to better meet the needs of our diverse learners, it is a draft that must be revised or even possibly rewritten altogether. This is true of even the best well laid plans.

And although NCLB's vision may be noble, I would question whether it is a vision. I see it as a goal to achieve a vision. That is part of the problem. We have not, yet, done what needs to be done to clearly articulate an education vision that will identify the purpose of education itself. NCLB may have been putting the cart before the horse, and therefore, we have focused on all kinds of "displaced goals," jeopardizing the realization of the true education vision we haven't yet identified.

Without a proper clear, articulated vision, we may win a battle, but lose the war. The "won battle" may be that we have children who have reading and math skills while we "lose the war" to have a well-educated society because we've neglected and sacrificed other important and critical aspects of education.

One of these important and critical aspects is history and civic learning. Rothstein quotes from the Campaign for the Civic Mission of Schools that Retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor now co- chairs: "As civic learning has been pushed aside, society has neglected a fundamental purpose of American education, putting the health of our democracy at risk."