Oklahoma State Board of Education Approves Final Draft of New (Non-Common Core) Educational Standards

Unfortunately, ROPE has a good deal of skepticism regarding the new Oklahoma Educational standards approved by the Board of Education today. Let me be clear here, the new standards were approved by the board just today, so none of us (at ROPE) would have had the opportunity to review them at this point. 

It is important to note, however, that while the OSDE press release contained comments in support for the standards from many quarters, none of these were attributed to the experts that were invited by the Standards Steering Committee last February to consult on the standards writing process.

Draft #3 of Oklahoma Educational Standards Released - Neither Stotsky Nor Gray Impressed

Recently, the Oklahoma State Department of Education uploaded draft 3 of the new Oklahoma Educational Standards. There are new things visible on the webpage now besides the standards that appear interesting. Mainly, the inclusion of "external" reviews by several major education reform players: 

The Southern Regional Education Board, The Partnership for 21st Century Learning and the South Central Comprehensive Center. Since the first draft, we have complained that none of the standards reviews have been made public - which is why we began publishing our own - unfortunately, these are all organizations involved in 'education reform' at some level. In fact, we've written papers about the Partnership for 21st Century Learning and the fact that the white papers supporting its mission are steeped in the failed progressive education methods of Dewey. 

The South Central Comprehensive Center has this to say about its funding and mission: The South Central Comprehensive Center (SC3) is part of a national network of centers funded by the U.S. Department of Education (ED) to support the improvement of educational outcomes. If that's not the definition of the Fox Guarding The Hen House, what exactly is? 

Only the Southern Regional Education Board appears to be moderating away from Common Core, but its white paper on College and Career Readiness indicates the need for states to create a 'default high school CURRICULUM' - something that should concern any local control proponent. At any rate,these reviews should be read by the general public with these facts in mind.

Not long after the release of the 3rd draft, Nate Robson of Oklahoma Watch penned a nice article detailing Dr. Sandra Stotsky's thoughts on the new standards which included the statement,

“You’re close to the bottom of the basement, I am sorry to say, because there is no content in them,” said Stotsky. “These are pious statements of academic goals. These are not standards. A standard is a criterion by which you grade something.”

Ouch. Professor Stotsky is now forced to provide basic educational definitions to the Standards Re-Write Committee - not a sterling commendation to say the least - but there is a question here Robson dances around; Why invite three separate 'experts' to testify to the Standards Writing Committee detailing the process for writing excellent educational standards, yet then invite three different ORGANIZATIONS tied to the education establishment to write reviews for the 3rd revision of the standards? Why not just go back to the original sources? It's what Robson did. Maybe that was the unchosen path for a reason. Maybe the department knew the writing committees hadn't been following the expert advice provided the Standards Committee. Maybe they didn't want the experts coming back to salt the ground they'd originally plowed for the OSDE.

The impetus matters not, actually. What matters is that both Stotsky (English) and Gray (Minnesota math) were not generally complementary of the 3rd standards draft to Robson, and this has sad implications for Oklahoma students.

Below are the specific comments provided by Stotsky (Gray's can be found in the Oklahoma Watch article)

1.  Under "Critical Writing"--Most writing standards do not lead to an assessment of the kind of writing done in college or the real world of work.  OK's draft organizes the writing standards under "narrative," "informative," and "argument."  

The “narratives” (most of which is creative writing) are curriculum-relevant chiefly in the early grades and are not desirable in college or the world of work.   "Informative" is fine, but "argument" should be changed to "persuasion" and "opinion" eliminated in the elementary grades.   Only "informative" prepares kids for college and career writing.

More important, why can’t OK require all local school districts to assign and assess a research paper or senior thesis for English and history or science in grade 11 and/or 12 to prepare students in an authentic way for college and career.  That is precisely where authentic research standards, as in the strand in my 2013 document. should be assessed.

2.  The "Critical Reading" standards should NOT be divided into Literary and Informational.  That is pure Common Core and it is very bad for the English curriculum.  The Critical Reading standards should be divided into (1) Fiction, (2) Nonfiction, (3) Poetry, (4) Dramatic Literature), and (5) Classical and Traditional literature.   That's what English teachers have always taught and been trained to teach.

3.  The OK drafting committee must come up with an example of a literary text that could be used (and how) for every single standard so that teachers understand what reading level is required or desirable at every grad level (and what the standard means).  Make it clear these texts are not required; only examples of reading levels.

4.  Get rid of processes for reading and writing in this document.  They are not standards but pedagogy. 

5.  Get this ELA committee to put in Oklahoma-related reading standards at the high school level--grades 11 and 12.   One standard for texts by major authors born in or who wrote about Oklahoma, and one standard for biographies/autobiographies about famous Oklahomans through history.   

The Oklahoma Standards Writing Process Must Not Be Tabled Again

Yet another state school board meeting has passed and yet again the process for creating the state's new education standards has been tabled.

Honestly, I do not know what to think.  Yes, I can call up a number of contacts and get what could be considered a "run down" of the behind-the-scenes drama (if you will) - and I have - yet none of the background noise matters.  Oklahoma is still left wanting for the start of a meaningful process.

HB3399 tells us the standards re-write process began the day the Governor signed the bill.  The Governor signed the bill the first week of June.  The State Department of Education has produced a standards re-write mechanism and the state is becoming aware of this process as I write.

Let's re-cap the events since the passage of the bill:

• NASBE (National Association of State Boards of Education) writes Governor Fallin a letter urging her not to sign HB3399 because it will take away power from the State Board of Education
• PTA, COSSA, OSSBA, Oklahoma Chamber of Commerce (who now no longer have 'education' mentioned on their website in favor of WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT - lovely) and other take out two full page ads in the Daily Oklahoman and Tulsa World urging Governor Fallin not to sign the bill (ostensibly for various reasons)
• Governor Fallin signs HB3399
• Four state school board members, parents and teachers (including the OEA teacher of the year) sign on to a lawsuit to be heard in the Oklahoma Supreme Court alleging NASBE's argument
• The same day the lawsuit is heard, it is struck down in a 8-1 ruling
• June State Board meeting - adoption of PASS and standards re-write tabled
• July State Board meeting - PASS adopted, standards re-write tabled

Reminds me a bit of Sir Walter Scott from Marmion - "Oh, what a tangled web we weave..."

I'm not of the mind to rush into a process to create new Oklahoma educational standards, frankly.  I think the faster we go, the less thoughtful the process.  However, we can't continue to table the process indefinitely. Yes, I realize we will have a new superintendent come November, but he or she will not be installed until January.  Yes, I realize the process could be started and diverted into a new process with the incoming super, however, how long do you stall before you simply run out of time to do what HB3399 tasked in the first place - the creation of new EXCELLENT Oklahoma standards within two years' time?

To be frank, I'm not a fan of the proposed standards writing process.  I think when you get too many cooks in the kitchen your dish more than likely comes out unidentifiable and inedible.  I realize that - unlike the adoption of the Common Core - everyone wants this process to be unimpeachably transparent, but I don't think it takes over 500 people to make that happen.

I have had the pleasure of coming to know Dr. Sandra Stotsky, the premier knower of all things English in the United States - widely credited with having written the best set of educational standards in the country.  What if the Governor showed up to the party and suggested that Oklahoma bring in Stotsky and listen to her describe how she created standards of educational excellence?  What if the Governor suggested we move forward, while discussing different, possibly less cumbersome, methods of creating a standards writing/review plan?

Neither the Governor nor the Board want to be accused of stalling, or rushing, because neither situation will engender positive public sentiment, further frustrating the process.  Because of the leadership vacuum created by the loss of our current superintendent in the primary, strong leadership MUST emerge in order to keep this process moving until January 2015.  It seems perfectly reasonable then, to have the leader of our state chime in and publicly nudge the process forward.  With the people of Oklahoma waiting with bated breath for Common Core to rear its ugly head as it has in Indiana - and with the process already having been stymied three separate times since the passage of HB3399 - gubernatorial suggestion may not only decrease the unease of Oklahomans but increase her sagging poll numbers as well.  No matter what, and like it or not, the law stipulates we move forward, and that we must do in some sort of productive way beginning with the August 28th State Board meeting.  Yes, let's take our time and do this right, but let's at least move forward in a productive way, now.