January 2008
Making the Grade in a Global Economy
By Gene R. Carter, Executive Director, ASCD
It is crunch time for scaling up school reform in the United States. At stake is whether an entire generation of learners will fail to make the grade in a global economy.
Last month the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) released results from its 2006 Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), which focused on science. The U.S. results are disheartening. The average science score of U.S. 15-year-olds trails that of their peers in over half of the 30 developed OECD countries participating in the exam. Interestingly, the percentage of U.S. students who indicated they want to work in a career involving science was higher than all but a handful of the 30 countries. Our education system is not keeping pace with our kids' aspirations.
The American public recognizes the urgency to move our education system into the 21st century. A recent nationwide poll from the Partnership for 21st Century Skills reveals a concern that our country is not preparing our youth with the skills necessary to compete in the global economy and that, without these skills, young people may face tougher challenges earning a living wage and maintaining U.S. competitiveness compared with previous generations.
The public has it right. We must better prepare our students to succeed in an increasingly competitive world. This can't be accomplished with a 20th century education model that uses a one-size-fits-all approach to learning, dilutes and narrows the curriculum, provides inadequate professional development opportunities for teachers, and tests students using limited assessment systems like those found under No Child Left Behind.
ASCD believes a 21st century education should be built on a foundation of personalized, relevant learning that is meaningful and engaging for each student. But such learning won't flourish within the confines of a watered down or narrow curriculum. Higher percentages of U.S. students spend four or more hours a week in science classes and on science homework compared with the OECD averages, but further analysis calls into question the rigor of their curriculum. More U.S. 15-year-olds are enrolled in general science classes than biology, physics, or chemistry courses; U.S. enrollment in those higher-level science courses lags the OECD averages.
Other critical subjects are almost completely left out of the curriculum. According to the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages, only about 44 percent of our secondary students study a foreign language. But rigorous opportunities in the arts, foreign languages, and social studies are uniquely positioned to develop students' 21st century skills and global awareness. In our shrinking world, students must learn from and collaborate with diverse peers of different races, religions, and origins. Learning a second or even third language is required in other countries like China, where students often begin language study in elementary school. Will our students be as prepared to work with people from other countries or to open businesses abroad?
To be globally competitive, we must also embed 21st century learning, such as technology literacy and critical thinking skills, in all the subjects that compose this broader, more rigorous curriculum. To do so, we need educators who are prepared to transform classroom practice. Research shows effective teachers and school leaders are critical to raising student achievement.
Finally, as our curriculum becomes more sophisticated, our assessment systems must follow suit and require students to apply their knowledge to real-world problems that test complex skills. ASCD supports the use of multiple assessments to better measure student learning and to create a globally competitive education system. Finland (the highest-performing country in science on OECD's 2006 PISA) bases its entire assessment system on local performance assessments. And according to Linda Darling-Hammond, an education professor at Stanford University and co-director of the Stanford Educational Leadership Institute, states with performance assessments are among the highest-performing on the U.S. National Assessment of Educational Progress.
Our education systems, schools, and communities will prepare our learners for global competition only if we act, not talk; set fundamentally different, not marginally different, ways; and function as whole schools, whole communities, and a whole nation to ensure a brighter future for our children. We need to educate the whole child for the whole world. Our nation's economic competitiveness depends on it.