The Only Proven Solution to Our Educational Problems

This very important blog concerning ending English functional illiteracy with a very much more efficient method of teaching fluent reading can be accessed with this link. It is not posted here because of Search Engine Optimization downgrade of duplicate posts.

An April 2008 Example of Hiding America’s Dirty Little Secret

Fig3ANationAccountable copy

A very damning report on American education was issued in April 2008 by the U.S.Department of Education, titled “A Nation Accountable.” For many years I have read the newspaper and watched TV new every day, and I saw no reference to this report. The report may have circulated in some governmental circles, but the report was apparently never shown to the American public. Unless you carefully examined this report, the seriousness of the problem of American education — particularly the problem of teaching reading — you probably do not know that the twenty-five year follow-up to the 1983 A Nation At Risk report showed no overall statistically significant improvement. This blog will quote some of the highlights of the report so you can better understand our present problems with American education. You are urged to follow this link to see the entire 25 page report.

“Executive Summary: “If we were ‘at risk’ in 1983, we are at even greater risk now. The rising demands of our global economy, together with demographic shifts, require that we educate more students to higher levels than ever before. Yet, our education system is not keeping pace with these growing demands

. . . . We simply cannot return to the “ostrich approach” and stick our heads in the sand while grave problems threaten our education system, our civic society, and our economic prosperity. We must consider structural reforms that go well beyond current efforts, as today’s students require a better education than ever before to be successful.”

Introduction:  In the spring of 1983, the National Commission of Excellence in Education issued A Nation At Risk — its eye-opening report that indicted education officials, school leaders, and the American public for complacency. The university presidents, eminent scientists, policymakers, and educators who made up the Commission refused to paint a happy face on the eroding quality of American education. They said that we had become self-satisfied about our leading position in the world and ‘lost sight of the basic purposes of schooling, and of the high expectation and disciplined effort needed to attain them.’

1. How Far We’ve Come: Curriculum Content: . . . by 2005 almost 65 percent of high school graduates were taking the recommended course work — four times the rate that students took the recommended course work in 1983. Yet, while we have coma a long way, it is a national shame that nearly a third of our high school student still do not take the rigorous program of study recommended in 1983 for all students. . . .

“The Commission was disturbed by the easy courses and ‘curricular smorgasbord’ available to high school students. Unfortunately, this has not changed greatly. Both easy courses and this smorgasbord still remain, with diluted content now hiding behind inflated course names. . . .the reading scores of 20 students born in 1983, who turned 17 in 2000, would have been the same as those of a similar group of students who turned 17 in 1984. . . .

A Nation At Risk anticipated that our secondary schooling deficiencies could eventually threaten the quality of the entire K-12 system, and this [No Child Left Behind] legislation has generated data that, unfortunately, confirm this threat.

1. How Far We’ve Come: Standards and Expectations: {T}eaching materials that are demonstrably effective are still rare.

        “1. How Far We’ve Come: Time: In 1983, the Commission was concerned that American children spent less time in school than children in other countries. . . . However, our children do not spend more days in school than they did in 1983, save for those in some charter schools or in a few state or local pilot programs. . . . Nonetheless we are spending fewer hours per week on academic subjects and have a shorter school year than many other industrialized countries.

“1. How Far We’ve Come: Teacher Quality: While most teachers have taken steps necessary to meet their states’ Highly Qualified Teacher definition, there is little evidence to conclude that his provision has led to notable increases in the requisite subject-matter knowledge of teachers or to increases in measure of individual teacher effectiveness. . . .

        “Progress has . . . been made on recommendations that required real change, if they were supported by powerful political groups in education, especially teachers’ unions. . . . Virtually no progress has been made on recommendations that required real change if they were opposed by the same interest groups. For example, merit pay for teachers remains negligible, and the school year has not lengthened.

“1. How Far We’ve Come: Leadership and Financial Support: [T]he Commission stressed the importance of providing the resources such a system would require. As they noted, ‘Excellence costs. But in the long run mediocrity costs far more.

        “II. What Has Been the Result of These Efforts and, More Importantly, Are We Still At Risk? In 1983, we faced a grave risk of losing our leading position in the world, the Commission warned. We had little idea of how we were doing, and we were happily complacent in assuming that we had, and would continue to have, the best schools money could buy. The report challenged this illusion and forced us to recognize the profound deficiencies in our educational system. In the last two decades, policymakers have worked to develop measurement systems that obviate the need for another such surprising report and that keep the country aware of the challenges we face

“As a result of No Child Left Behind, we now have annual test score data on students in reading and math from the third grade through the eighth grade and one in high school. We are able to see how well each of the approximately 96,000 public schools in our country is performing, not just overall but also for each group of students a school serves, such as minority students, students with disabilities, and English language learners. We have transformed ourselves from a nation at risk of complacency to a nation that is accountable and at work on its education weaknesses. We now know the daunting scope of the problem — and must enlist everyone to address weaknesses if we are to make progress up the mountain. . . .

“American education outcomes on international comparisons have not improved significantly since the 1970s. International tests show that the United States is, at best, runing in place, while other nations are passing us by.. Many countries now match or exceed us, not only in the number of years their children attend school but also in how much those children learn. The United States was the world leader in high schoold completion, but among our 25-34 year olds, it has now slipped to 10th place, falling behind such countries as Canada, Switzerland, and South KOrres. It may fall farther behind yet. The same is true for achievement. On most international tests, the United States is standing still while others are gaining ground. With performance like this, it’s no wonder that most foreign children studying in the United States find our schools easier than the ones they left back home — despite the fact that Americans spend more money per student than almost any other country in the world.

“III. Remaining Challenges: On a strictly domestic level our performance at the high schoollevel is as alarming s it was at the time of A Nation At Risk, if not worse. Of major concern here is the number of students dropping out of school before getting their high school diplomas. States and districts have used a varietyof way to measure graduation rates, pointing to the need for more accuracy and consistencyin these calculations. Some of these methods are misleading, and result in numbers near 90 percent. :However, a more accurate measure is the percentage of student who graduate after starting ninth grade four years earlier — which is only 70 percent for the class of 2006.

        “The situation is even more troubling for minority students in the inner cities. Half of them do not graduate from high school on time — a staggering fact. . . . It is sobering to realize that iin 2006, nearly 60 percent of high school dropouts over the age of 25 were either unemployed or not participating in the workforce at all.

“Educational quality directly affects individual earnings, and dropouts are much more likely than their peers who graduate to be unemployed, living in poverty, receiving public relief, in prison, on death row, unhealthy, or single parents. High school dropouts, on average, earn $8,100 less per year than high school graduates, and about $1 million less over a lifetime than college graduates. On an annual basis, the median income for those with a college degree was over $51,000 in 2007, while for high school dropouts it was only $22,000. [precisely: dropouts: $22,256, high school graduates: $31,408, college graduates: $51,324]

“But the tragedy is not a burden of the individual alone. High dropout rates also affect our communities and the nation because of the loss of productive workers and the higher costs associated with increased incarceration, health care and social services. A report noted, ‘Four out of every 10 young adults (ages 16-24) lacking a high school diploma received some [sort of public relief] in 2001.’ This report also noted, ‘. . . a dropout is more than eight times as likely tob in jal or prison as a person with at least a high school diploma.’

“IV. Looking Ahead: While we are no longer complacent or idle, we continue to face many challenges, several of which did not even exist in 1983. The standards and accountability movement has resulted in new transparency in student achievement — by grade, subgroup, and subject, and by school, district, and state. While we are finally capable of defining our difficulties, the full solutions to some of them have not yet been found. Where solutions have been found,  they have not been put fully in place because not everyone is willing to accept and make the changes that are necessary. . . .

        “Schools today must not only keep pace with rapid advances in technology (which are slowly changing the way students and teachers learn and interact) but also work to address increasing threats to school safety. . . . We know, from emerging research on schools in Illinois and Florida, that students who attend charter middle and high schools have been substantially more likely to graduate with a standard diploma and attend college than their counterparts in traditional public schools. . . .

“Furthermore, the magnitude of our problems in secondary education is becoming increasingly clear. Our high schools have not improved enough since A Nation At Risk. . . .

        “Education makes not only the individual better off but also the society.”


Note that although reading is the foundation of all learning in schools — it is required for class-work, homework, and testing, in almost every subject — the graph above shows that the reading scores of 9-, 13-, and 17-year-olds have been essentially flat from 1984 to 2004 while the cost per pupil has gone from $5,896 to $9,116.

A Nation At Risk


f_1wp525.jpgThis blog consists of all the major findings of the very significant study of American education issued in 1983, titled

A Nation At Risk

This is a very scholarly and comprehensive study of American education just prior to 1983. It caused some educational changes shortly after its release, but much of the activity it spurred has now been abandoned, and there was no lasting overall statistical improvement in the teaching of reading. To see the entire report, go to


Secretary of Education T. H. Bell created the National Commission on Excellence in Education on August 26, 1981, directing it to examine the quality of education in the United States and to make a report to the Nation and to him within 18 months of its first meeting. In accordance with the Secretary’s instructions, this report contains practical recommendations for educational improvement and fulfills the Commission’s responsibilities under the terms of its charter. . . .

The Commission’s charter contained several specific charges to which we have given particular attention. These included:

  • assessing the quality of teaching and learning in our Nation’s public and private schools, colleges, and universities;
  • comparing American schools and colleges with those of other advanced nations;
  • studying the relationship between college admissions requirements and student achievement in high school;
  • identifying educational programs which result in notable student success in college;
  • assessing the degree to which major social and educational changes in the last quarter century have affected student achievement; and
  • defining problems which must be faced and overcome if we are successfully to pursue the course of excellence in education. . . .

In going about its work the Commission has relied in the main upon five sources of information:

  • papers commissioned from experts on a variety of educational issues;
  • administrators, teachers, students, representatives of professional and public groups, parents, business leaders, public officials, and scholars who testified at eight meetings of the full Commission, six public hearings, two panel discussions, a symposium, and a series of meetings organized by the Department of Education’s Regional Offices;
  • existing analyses of problems in education;
  • letters from concerned citizens, teachers, and administrators who volunteered extensive comments on problems and possibilities in American education; and
  • descriptions of notable programs and promising approaches in education. . . .

A Nation At Risk

All, regardless of race or class or economic status, are entitled to a fair chance and to the tools for developing their individual powers of mind and spirit to the utmost. This promise means that all children by virtue of their own efforts, competently guided, can hope to attain the mature and informed judgement needed to secure gainful employment, and to manage their own lives, thereby serving not only their own interests but also the progress of society itself.

Our Nation is at risk. Our once unchallenged preeminence in commerce, industry, science, and technological innovation is being overtaken by competitors throughout the world. This report is concerned with only one of the many causes and dimensions of the problem, but it is the one that undergirds American prosperity, security, and civility. We report to the American people that while we can take justifiable pride in what our schools and colleges have historically accomplished and contributed to the United States and the well-being of its people, the educational foundations of our society are presently being eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity that threatens our very future as a Nation and a people. What was unimaginable a generation ago has begun to occur–others are matching and surpassing our educational attainments.

If an unfriendly foreign power had attempted to impose on America the mediocre educational performance that exists today, we might well have viewed it as an act of war. As it stands, we have allowed this to happen to ourselves. We have even squandered the gains in student achievement made in the wake of the Sputnik challenge. Moreover, we have dismantled essential support systems which helped make those gains possible. We have, in effect, been committing an act of unthinking, unilateral educational disarmament.

Our society and its educational institutions seem to have lost sight of the basic purposes of schooling, and of the high expectations and disciplined effort needed to attain them. This report, the result of 18 months of study, seeks to generate reform of our educational system in fundamental ways and to renew the Nation’s commitment to schools and colleges of high quality throughout the length and breadth of our land.

That we have compromised this commitment is, upon reflection, hardly surprising, given the multitude of often conflicting demands we have placed on our Nation’s schools and colleges. They are routinely called on to provide solutions to personal, social, and political problems that the home and other institutions either will not or cannot resolve. We must understand that these demands on our schools and colleges often exact an educational cost as well as a financial one.

On the occasion of the Commission’s first meeting, President Reagan noted the central importance of education in American life when he said: “Certainly there are few areas of American life as important to our society, to our people, and to our families as our schools and colleges.” This report, therefore, is as much an open letter to the American people as it is a report to the Secretary of Education. We are confident that the American people, properly informed, will do what is right for their children and for the generations to come.

The Risk

History is not kind to idlers. The time is long past when American’s destiny was assured simply by an abundance of natural resources and inexhaustible human enthusiasm, and by our relative isolation from the malignant problems of older civilizations. The world is indeed one global village. We live among determined, well-educated, and strongly motivated competitors. We compete with them for international standing and markets, not only with products but also with the ideas of our laboratories and neighborhood workshops. America’s position in the world may once have been reasonably secure with only a few exceptionally well-trained men and women. It is no longer.

The risk is not only that the Japanese make automobiles more efficiently than Americans and have government subsidies for development and export. It is not just that the South Koreans recently built the world’s most efficient steel mill, or that American machine tools, once the pride of the world, are being displaced by German products. It is also that these developments signify a redistribution of trained capability throughout the globe. Knowledge, learning, information, and skilled intelligence are the new raw materials of international commerce and are today spreading throughout the world as vigorously as miracle drugs, synthetic fertilizers, and blue jeans did earlier. If only to keep and improve on the slim competitive edge we still retain in world markets, we must dedicate ourselves to the reform of our educational system for the benefit of all–old and young alike, affluent and poor, majority and minority. Learning is the indispensable investment required for success in the “information age” we are entering.

Our concern, however, goes well beyond matters such as industry and commerce. It also includes the intellectual, moral, and spiritual strengths of our people which knit together the very fabric of our society. The people of the United States need to know that individuals in our society who do not possess the levels of skill, literacy, and training essential to this new era will be effectively disenfranchised, not simply from the material rewards that accompany competent performance, but also from the chance to participate fully in our national life. A high level of shared education is essential to a free, democratic society and to the fostering of a common culture, especially in a country that prides itself on pluralism and individual freedom.

For our country to function, citizens must be able to reach some common understandings on complex issues, often on short notice and on the basis of conflicting or incomplete evidence. Education helps form these common understandings. . . .

Indicators of the Risk

The educational dimensions of the risk before us have been amply documented in testimony received by the Commission. For example:

  • International comparisons of student achievement, completed a decade ago, reveal that on 19 academic tests American students were never first or second and, in comparison with other industrialized nations, were last seven times.
  • Some 23 million American adults are functionally illiterate by the simplest tests of everyday reading, writing, and comprehension.
  • About 13 percent of all 17-year-olds in the United States can be considered functionally illiterate. Functional illiteracy among minority youth may run as high as 40 percent.
  • [Using a much more accurate measurement of functional illiteracy (in that employers have a financial interest in being very accurate —which other methods of determining functional illiteracy do not have), that is, defining functional illiteracy as being unable to hold an above-poverty-level-wage job, 48.7 percent of U.S. adults — more than 93 million U.S. adults — are functionally illiterate.]
  • Average achievement of high school students on most standardized tests is now lower than 26 years ago when Sputnik was launched.
  • Over half the population of gifted students do not match their tested ability with comparable achievement in school.
  • The College Board’s Scholastic Aptitude Tests (SAT) demonstrate a virtually unbroken decline from 1963 to 1980. Average verbal scores fell over 50 points and average mathematics scores dropped nearly 40 points. . . .
  •  Both the number and proportion of students demonstrating superior achievement on the SATs (i.e., those with scores of 650 or higher) have also dramatically declined.
  •  Many 17-year-olds do not possess the “higher order” intellectual skills we should expect of them. Nearly 40 percent cannot draw inferences from written material; only one-fifth can write a persuasive essay; and only one-third can solve a mathematics problem requiring several steps. . . .
  • Business and military leaders complain that they are required to spend millions of dollars on costly remedial education and training programs in such basic skills as reading, writing, spelling, and computation. The Department of the Navy, for example, reported to the Commission that one-quarter of its recent recruits cannot read at the ninth grade level, the minimum needed simply to understand written safety instructions. Without remedial work they cannot even begin, much less complete, the sophisticated training essential in much of the modern military.

These deficiencies come at a time when the demand for highly skilled workers in new fields is accelerating rapidly. For example:

  • Computers and computer-controlled equipment are penetrating every aspect of our lives–homes, factories, and offices.
  • One estimate indicates that by the turn of the century millions of jobs will involve laser technology and robotics.
  • Technology is radically transforming a host of other occupations. They include health care, medical science, energy production, food processing, construction, and the building, repair, and maintenance of sophisticated scientific, educational, military, and industrial equipment.

Analysts examining these indicators of student performance and the demands for new skills have made some chilling observations. Educational researcher Paul Hurd concluded at the end of a thorough national survey of student achievement that within the context of the modern scientific revolution, “We are raising a new generation of Americans that is scientifically and technologically illiterate.” In a similar vein, John Slaughter, a former Director of the National Science Foundation, warned of “a growing chasm between a small scientific and technological elite and a citizenry ill-informed, indeed uninformed, on issues with a science component.” [As almost everyone agrees, reading is the foundation of all knowledge. There are very few courses in school which do not require reading for class-work, homework, and testing. Without the ability to read, scientific and technological progress is beyond most students.]

But the problem does not stop there, nor do all observers see it the same way. Some worry that schools may emphasize such rudiments as reading and computation at the expense of other essential skills such as comprehension, analysis, solving problems, and drawing conclusions. Still others are concerned that an over-emphasis on technical and occupational skills will leave little time for studying the arts and humanities that so enrich daily life, help maintain civility, and develop a sense of community. Knowledge of the humanities, they maintain, must be harnessed to science and technology if the latter are to remain creative and humane, just as the humanities need to be informed by science and technology if they are to remain relevant to the human condition. Another analyst, Paul Copperman, has drawn a sobering conclusion. Until now, he has noted:

Each generation of Americans has outstripped its parents in education, in literacy, and in economic attainment. For the first time in the history of our country, the educational skills of one generation will not surpass, will not equal, will not even approach, those of their parents.

It is important, of course, to recognize that the average citizen today is better educated and more knowledgeable than the average citizen of a generation ago–more literate, and exposed to more mathematics, literature, and science. The positive impact of this fact on the well-being of our country and the lives of our people cannot be overstated. Nevertheless, the average graduate of our schools and colleges today is not as well-educated as the average graduate of 25 or 35 years ago, when a much smaller proportion of our population completed high school and college. The negative impact of this fact likewise cannot be overstated.

Hope and Frustration

. . . On the personal level the student, the parent, and the caring teacher all perceive that a basic promise is not being kept. More and more young people emerge from high school ready neither for college nor for work. This predicament becomes more acute as the knowledge base continues its rapid expansion, the number of traditional jobs shrinks, and new jobs demand greater sophistication and preparation.

On a broader scale, we sense that this undertone of frustration has significant political implications, for it cuts across ages, generations, races, and political and economic groups. We have come to understand that the public will demand that educational and political leaders act forcefully and effectively on these issues. Indeed, such demands have already appeared and could well become a unifying national preoccupation. This unity, however, can be achieved only if we avoid the unproductive tendency of some to search for scapegoats among the victims, such as the beleaguered teachers. . . .

Excellence in Education

We define “excellence” to mean several related things. At the level of the individual learner, it means performing on the boundary of individual ability in ways that test and push back personal limits, in school and in the workplace. Excellence characterizes a school or college that sets high expectations and goals for all learners, then tries in every way possible to help students reach them. Excellence characterizes a society that has adopted these policies, for it will then be prepared through the education and skill of its people to respond to the challenges of a rapidly changing world. Our Nation’s people and its schools and colleges must be committed to achieving excellence in all these senses.

We do not believe that a public commitment to excellence and educational reform must be made at the expense of a strong public commitment to the equitable treatment of our diverse population. The twin goals of equity and high-quality schooling have profound and practical meaning for our economy and society, and we cannot permit one to yield to the other either in principle or in practice. To do so would deny young people their chance to learn and live according to their aspirations and abilities. It also would lead to a generalized accommodation to mediocrity in our society on the one hand or the creation of an undemocratic elitism on the other.

Our goal must be to develop the talents of all to their fullest. Attaining that goal requires that we expect and assist all students to work to the limits of their capabilities. We should expect schools to have genuinely high standards rather than minimum ones, and parents to support and encourage their children to make the most of their talents and abilities.

The search for solutions to our educational problems must also include a commitment to life-long learning. The task of rebuilding our system of learning is enormous and must be properly understood and taken seriously: Although a million and a half new workers enter the economy each year from our schools and colleges, the adults working today will still make up about 75 percent of the workforce in the year 2000. These workers, and new entrants into the workforce, will need further education and retraining if they–and we as a Nation–are to thrive and prosper.

The Learning Society

In a world of ever-accelerating competition and change in the conditions of the workplace, of ever-greater danger, and of ever-larger opportunities for those prepared to meet them, educational reform should focus on the goal of creating a Learning Society. At the heart of such a society is the commitment to a set of values and to a system of education that affords all members the opportunity to stretch their minds to full capacity, from early childhood through adulthood, learning more as the world itself changes. Such a society has as a basic foundation the idea that education is important not only because of what it contributes to one’s career goals but also because of the value it adds to the general quality of one’s life. Also at the heart of the Learning Society are educational opportunities extending far beyond the traditional institutions of learning, our schools and colleges. They extend into homes and workplaces; into libraries, art galleries, museums, and science centers; indeed, into every place where the individual can develop and mature in work and life. In our view, formal schooling in youth is the essential foundation for learning throughout one’s life. But without life-long learning, one’s skills will become rapidly dated.

In contrast to the ideal of the Learning Society, however, we find that for too many people education means doing the minimum work necessary for the moment, then coasting through life on what may have been learned in its first quarter. But this should not surprise us because we tend to express our educational standards and expectations largely in terms of “minimum requirements.” And where there should be a coherent continuum of learning, we have none, but instead an often incoherent, outdated patchwork quilt. Many individual, sometimes heroic, examples of schools and colleges of great merit do exist. Our findings and testimony confirm the vitality of a number of notable schools and programs, but their very distinction stands out against a vast mass shaped by tensions and pressures that inhibit systematic academic and vocational achievement for the majority of students. In some metropolitan areas basic literacy has become the goal rather than the starting point. In some colleges maintaining enrollments is of greater day-to-day concern than maintaining rigorous academic standards. And the ideal of academic excellence as the primary goal of schooling seems to be fading across the board in American education.

Thus, we issue this call to all who care about America and its future: to parents and students; to teachers, administrators, and school board members; to colleges and industry; to union members and military leaders; to governors and State legislators; to the President; to members of Congress and other public officials; to members of learned and scientific societies; to the print and electronic media; to concerned citizens everywhere. America is at risk.

We are confident that America can address this risk. If the tasks we set forth are initiated now and our recommendations are fully realized over the next several years, we can expect reform of our Nation’s schools, colleges, and universities. This would also reverse the current declining trend–a trend that stems more from weakness of purpose, confusion of vision, underuse of talent, and lack of leadership, than from conditions beyond our control.

The Tools at Hand

It is our conviction that the essential raw materials needed to reform our educational system are waiting to be mobilized through effective leadership:

  • the natural abilities of the young that cry out to be developed and the undiminished concern of parents for the well-being of their children;
  • the commitment of the Nation to high retention rates in schools and colleges and to full access to education for all;
  • the persistent and authentic American dream that superior performance can raise one’s state in life and shape one’s own future;
  • the dedication, against all odds, that keeps teachers serving in schools and colleges, even as the rewards diminish;
  • our better understanding of learning and teaching and the implications of this knowledge for school practice, and the numerous examples of local success as a result of superior effort and effective dissemination;
  • the ingenuity of our policymakers, scientists, State and local educators, and scholars in formulating solutions once problems are better understood;
  • the traditional belief that paying for education is an investment in ever-renewable human resources that are more durable and flexible than capital plant and equipment, and the availability in this country of sufficient financial means to invest in education;
  • the equally sound tradition, from the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 until today, that the Federal Government should supplement State, local, and other resources to foster key national educational goals; and
  • the voluntary efforts of individuals, businesses, and parent and civic groups to cooperate in strengthening educational programs.

These raw materials, combined with the unparalleled array of educational organizations in America, offer us the possibility to create a Learning Society, in which public, private, and parochial schools; colleges and universities; vocational and technical schools and institutes; libraries; science centers, museums, and other cultural institutions; and corporate training and retraining programs offer opportunities and choices for all to learn throughout life.

The Public’s Commitment

Of all the tools at hand, the public’s support for education is the most powerful. In a message to a National Academy of Sciences meeting in May 1982, President Reagan commented on this fact when he said:

This public awareness–and I hope public action–is long overdue…. This country was built on American respect for education. . . Our challenge now is to create a resurgence of that thirst for education that typifies our Nation’s history.

The most recent (1982) Gallup Poll of the Public’s Attitudes Toward the Public Schools strongly supported a theme heard during our hearings: People are steadfast in their belief that education is the major foundation for the future strength of this country. They even considered education more important than developing the best industrial system or the strongest military force, perhaps because they understood education as the cornerstone of both. They also held that education is “extremely important” to one’s future success, and that public education should be the top priority for additional Federal funds. Education occupied first place among 12 funding categories considered in the survey–above health care, welfare, and military defense, with 55 percent selecting public education as one of their first three choices. Very clearly, the public understands the primary importance of education as the foundation for a satisfying life, an enlightened and civil society, a strong economy, and a secure Nation.

At the same time, the public has no patience with undemanding and superfluous high school offerings.

In another survey, more than 75 percent of all those questioned believed every student planning to go to college should take 4 years of mathematics, English, history/U.S. government, and science, with more than 50 percent adding 2 years each of a foreign language and economics or business. The public even supports requiring much of this curriculum for students who do not plan to go to college. These standards far exceed the strictest high school graduation requirements of any State today, and they also exceed the admission standards of all but a handful of our most selective colleges and universities.

Another dimension of the public’s support offers the prospect of constructive reform. The best term to characterize it may simply be the honorable word “patriotism.” Citizens know intuitively what some of the best economists have shown in their research, that education is one of the chief engines of a society’s material well-being. They know, too, that education is the common bond of a pluralistic society and helps tie us to other cultures around the globe. Citizens also know in their bones that the safety of the United States depends principally on the wit, skill, and spirit of a self-confident people, today and tomorrow. It is, therefore, essential–especially in a period of long-term decline in educational achievement–for government at all levels to affirm its responsibility for nurturing the Nation’s intellectual capital.

And perhaps most important, citizens know and believe that the meaning of America to the rest of the world must be something better than it seems to many today. Americans like to think of this Nation as the preeminent country for generating the great ideas and material benefits for all mankind. The citizen is dismayed at a steady 15-year decline in industrial productivity, as one great American industry after another falls to world competition. The citizen wants the country to act on the belief, expressed in our hearings and by the large majority in the Gallup Poll, that education should be at the top of the Nation’s agenda.


We conclude that declines in educational performance are in large part the result of disturbing inadequacies in the way the educational process itself is often conducted. The findings that follow, culled from a much more extensive list, reflect four important aspects of the educational process: content, expectations, time, and teaching.

Findings Regarding Content

By content we mean the very “stuff” of education, the curriculum. Because of our concern about the curriculum, the Commission examined patterns of courses high school students took in 1964-69 compared with course patterns in 1976-81. On the basis of these analyses we conclude:

  • Secondary school curricula have been homogenized, diluted, and diffused to the point that they no longer have a central purpose. In effect, we have a cafeteria style curriculum in which the appetizers and desserts can easily be mistaken for the main courses. Students have migrated from vocational and college preparatory programs to “general track” courses in large numbers. The proportion of students taking a general program of study has increased from 12 percent in 1964 to 42 percent in 1979.
  • This curricular smorgasbord, combined with extensive student choice, explains a great deal about where we find ourselves today. We offer intermediate algebra, but only 31 percent of our recent high school graduates complete it; we offer French I, but only 13 percent complete it; and we offer geography, but only 16 percent complete it. Calculus is available in schools enrolling about 60 percent of all students, but only 6 percent of all students complete it.
  • Twenty-five percent of the credits earned by general track high school students are in physical and health education, work experience outside the school, remedial English and mathematics, and personal service and development courses, such as training for adulthood and marriage.

Findings Regarding Expectations

We define expectations in terms of the level of knowledge, abilities, and skills school and college graduates should possess. They also refer to the time, hard work, behavior, self-discipline, and motivation that are essential for high student achievement. Such expectations are expressed to students in several different ways:

  • by grades, which reflect the degree to which students demonstrate their mastery of subject matter;
  • through high school and college graduation requirements, which tell students which subjects are most important;
  • by the presence or absence of rigorous examinations requiring students to demonstrate their mastery of content and skill before receiving a diploma or a degree;
  • by college admissions requirements, which reinforce high school standards; and
  • by the difficulty of the subject matter students confront in their texts and assigned readings.

Our analyses in each of these areas indicate notable deficiencies:

  • The amount of homework for high school seniors has decreased (two-thirds report less than 1 hour a night) and grades have risen as average student achievement has been declining.
  • In many other industrialized nations, courses in mathematics (other than arithmetic or general mathematics), biology, chemistry, physics, and geography start in grade 6 and are required of all students. The time spent on these subjects, based on class hours, is about three times that spent by even the most science-oriented U.S. students, i.e., those who select 4 years of science and mathematics in secondary school.
  • A 1980 State-by-State survey of high school diploma requirements reveals that only eight States require high schools to offer foreign language instruction, but none requires students to take the courses. Thirty-five States require only 1 year of mathematics, and 36 require only 1 year of science for a diploma.
  • In 13 States, 50 percent or more of the units required for high school graduation may be electives chosen by the student. Given this freedom to choose the substance of half or more of their education, many students opt for less demanding personal service courses, such as bachelor living.
  • “Minimum competency” examinations (now required in 37 States) fall short of what is needed, as the “minimum” tends to become the “maximum,” thus lowering educational standards for all.
  • One-fifth of all 4-year public colleges in the United States must accept every high school graduate within the State regardless of program followed or grades, thereby serving notice to high school students that they can expect to attend college even if they do not follow a demanding course of study in high school or perform well.
  • About 23 percent of our more selective colleges and universities reported that their general level of selectivity declined during the 1970s, and 29 percent reported reducing the number of specific high school courses required for admission (usually by dropping foreign language requirements, which are now specified as a condition for admission by only one-fifth of our institutions of higher education).
  • Too few experienced teachers and scholars are involved in writing textbooks. During the past decade or so a large number of texts have been “written down” by their publishers to ever-lower reading levels in response to perceived market demands.
  • A recent study by Education Products Information Exchange revealed that a majority of students were able to master 80 percent of the material in some of their subject-matter texts before they had even opened the books. Many books do not challenge the students to whom they are assigned.
  • Expenditures for textbooks and other instructional materials have declined by 50 percent over the past 17 years. While some recommend a level of spending on texts of between 5 and 10 percent of the operating costs of schools, the budgets for basal texts and related materials have been dropping during the past decade and a half to only 0.7 percent today.

Findings Regarding Time

Evidence presented to the Commission demonstrates three disturbing facts about the use that American schools and students make of time: (1) compared to other nations, American students spend much less time on school work; (2) time spent in the classroom and on homework is often used ineffectively; and (3) schools are not doing enough to help students develop either the study skills required to use time well or the willingness to spend more time on school work.

  • In England and other industrialized countries, it is not unusual for academic high school students to spend 8 hours a day at school, 220 days per year. In the United States, by contrast, the typical school day lasts 6 hours and the school year is 180 days.
  • In many schools, the time spent learning how to cook and drive counts as much toward a high school diploma as the time spent studying mathematics, English, chemistry, U.S. history, or biology.
  • A study of the school week in the United States found that some schools provided students only 17 hours of academic instruction during the week, and the average school provided about 22.
  • A California study of individual classrooms found that because of poor management of classroom time, some elementary students received only one-fifth of the instruction others received in reading comprehension.
  • In most schools, the teaching of study skills is haphazard and unplanned. Consequently, many students complete high school and enter college without disciplined and systematic study habits.

Findings Regarding Teaching

The Commission found that not enough of the academically able students are being attracted to teaching; that teacher preparation programs need substantial improvement; that the professional working life of teachers is on the whole unacceptable; and that a serious shortage of teachers exists in key fields.

  • Too many teachers are being drawn from the bottom quarter of graduating high school and college students.
  • The teacher preparation curriculum is weighted heavily with courses in “educational methods” at the expense of courses in subjects to be taught. A survey of 1,350 institutions training teachers indicated that 41 percent of the time of elementary school teacher candidates is spent in education courses, which reduces the amount of time available for subject matter courses.
  • The average salary after 12 years of teaching is only $17,000 per year, and many teachers are required to supplement their income with part-time and summer employment. In addition, individual teachers have little influence in such critical professional decisions as, for example, textbook selection.
  • Despite widespread publicity about an overpopulation of teachers, severe shortages of certain kinds of teachers exist: in the fields of mathematics, science, and foreign languages; and among specialists in education for gifted and talented, language minority, and handicapped students.
  • The shortage of teachers in mathematics and science is particularly severe. A 1981 survey of 45 States revealed shortages of mathematics teachers in 43 States, critical shortages of earth sciences teachers in 33 States, and of physics teachers everywhere.
  • Half of the newly employed mathematics, science, and English teachers are not qualified to teach these subjects; fewer than one-third of U. S. high schools offer physics taught by qualified teachers.


To see the recommendations from this study, go to

Why Children Aren’t Excelling in Literacy


f_0wp57.jpgAn August 10, 2010 Articlesbase Article by Ann Foster

The Literacy crisis worldwide and particularly, in Australia is not only related to those children who are failing the national testing regime, it is also related to the Literacy results across all areas of achievement. In America, this realisation was expressed in a report titled, A Nation Deceived. In this report, the authors focus on how schools hold back America’s brightest children. Australians need to take heed!

In analysing Literacy results at the local level and then conferring with other educators, I have arrived at the following conclusion. Some children’s results at all levels of achievement are falling. Underlying assessment reveals that students are failing to listen with appropriate comprehension, use language to adequately discuss their thoughts and understandings, and read and write at a level that is commensurate with their innate ability.

A cross analysis and personal research reveals that this is due to a range of complex issues. At this point, discussion will elaborate on the problems that are related to the area of reading.

Reading is a multifaceted task that involves decoding, and comprehending at a fluent level of delivery. These two areas of reading also integrate with syntax which is simply known as grammar or knowledge and understanding of the order of words. At the most basic level, children know that when they speak there is an order of words that is acceptable usage. It is at this most basic level of Pre-school and Prep that the skills being tested in Year Three in Australia are initially developed. It is through the years from birth to Year Three that funding for resources needs to be concentrated.

As children increase in age they need to be reading at complex levels which force them to comprehend in a spiralling range of difficulty. Explicit teaching is needed in order to decode and comprehend these texts. This delivery must encompass not only activation of world knowledge but knowledge about how texts work and the author’s purpose. This knowledge is then refined into understanding that the phonological, grammatical and semantic integration of the text at a whole text level, a paragraph level, a sentence level and finally at a word level is vital to comprehension. It is the integration of these three components of reading that teachers need to explore with their pupils. Children need to have texts exposed so that they can view the beauty that lies below the superficiality of just words. At the same time, teachers need to be able to model and demonstrate this information effectively to their students.

In summary, it is in the early years of education that we need to concentrate our resources and efforts. As a nation, our politicians need to take note that early childhood is where funding is necessary to resource the nation to excellence. We all know that we can do it. The media has to stop blaming teachers and support those who are building platforms for success. Run success stories and deny an imbalance of space for those who want to complain.

We not only require dedicated teachers, we require teachers who have attended Universities where the discussed skills are given priority. We require teachers who are readers themselves and who understand the knowledge that they are to relay to their students. Finally, we need a monitoring of teaching practice so that at the end of the day, we are not discouraged by the diminishing results of the students who will be the next generation to lead our country in a complex and global world.

Critical Research Can Help to Identify Quality Teaching in Literacy Education


f_2wp53.jpgAn August 13, 2010 Articlesbase Article by Arsenalo

In response to our most recent literacy crisis, the U.S. government and professional collaborative such as the National Reading Panel (National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, 2000) and the National Research Council (2005) have called for more scientific research in literacy education. That is, policymakers and certain members of our field feel as though the only valuable research is conducted via randomized experiments that tell us, essentially, how certain curricular reforms affect aggregate achievement as measured by the same sorts of problematic standardized outcomes or by scores on artificial assessments designed by teams of university researchers.

Although standardized measures provide an important perspective on the performance of young people in schools, it is only one perspective, and taken out of context this perspective can be extremely problematic — both in how it positions certain groups of students and in how it limits the discussion of possible alternatives to traditional classroom literacy practices (Pressley, 2001). In the end, we are still left with very few images of the powerful literacy classroom to help us understand the challenges that teachers and students face and the conditions that turn tragedies into triumphs.

In essence, research in K-12 literacy education needs to elucidate life in classrooms for the poor and for members of historically marginalized groups, and it needs to shed light on what is happening in powerful learning spaces for students — when literacy instruction is both identity affirming and academically enriching. I argue for a specific conception of research — what I and others call critical research — as an example of the kind of work that needs to be undertaken in our field if we are going to be able to provide information (to teachers, teacher educators, and policymakers) that will lead to changes in practice and outcome that eliminates the education opportunity gap. By education opportunity gap, which I distinguish from achievement gap, I am referring to the work of Asa Hilliard (2003), who argued for a shift in perception of the achievement gap away from searching for deficiencies in student intelligence toward questioning the measures of achievement and the actual opportunities to learn that have been provided for students. In other words, the challenge is ours, as a field, to figure out how to better educate students. Regardless of terminology, Hilliard contended that higher quality teaching is needed to produce excellence in classrooms for students that have been historically underserved.

Quite simply, these students need to achieve higher forms of excellence if they are to exist as powerfully informed and affirmed humans. Hilliard, in this vein, was tapping into a long history of African American education that associated literacy learning in schools with the project of human freedom (Anderson, 1988; Perry, 2003). Critical research, I argue, can help us to identify quality teaching in literacy classrooms even as it helps us to refine (or even redefine) our notions of curricula, pedagogy, literacy, and achievement.