Afterword

On March 10, 2009, President Obama unveiled an ambitious education agenda in a speech to the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce (Obama, 2009). Ranging from investment in early childhood education to making college more affordable, from raising standards to developing new assessments, from more charter schools to teacher merit pay, the president made it clear that he wants massive reforms to the American education system. He also promised to "make No Child Left Behind live up to its name by ensuring not only that teachers and principals get the funding that they need, but that the money is tied to results" (Obama, 2009). His Secretary of Education Arne Duncan has also toured the nation to talk about the new administration's agenda and hear about NCLB from the field.

As of this moment, I am both encouraged and concerned. I am encouraged because President Obama recognizes we live in a time that is different from the past and that we must give our children "the knowledge and skills they need in this new and changing world." I am encouraged because he recognizes that these skills and knowledge are not the same as the ability to "fill in a bubble on a test," and thus he called for "standards and assessments that [measure] whether they possess 21st century skills like problem-solving and critical thinking and entrepreneurship and creativity"(Obama, 2009). I am also encouraged by his intention to invest in innovations and new ideas for schools. I am further encouraged by his recognition of the problems of NCLB.

But I am also very concerned. I am concerned about how his administration defines "the knowledge and skills" our children need. Although Obama did talk about "critical thinking and entrepreneurship and creativity," all of the examples he cited to show how American students are behind are the test scores and curriculum in math and reading. I am most concerned that his proposal to end the "race to the bottom" problem, that is, states lowering their standards to meet NCLB mandates, serves as the impetus for national standards. As he challenges and motivates "states to adopt world-class standards that will bring our curriculums to the 21st century" with billions of dollars in "race to the top" funding, it may result in national exercises of writing standards for a limited number of subjects.

The probability of another round of standards and testing movement of the Clinton era is very high although neither President Obama nor his Secretary of Education Arne Duncan has uttered the word. Their faith in standards as a solution to America's education problems is well evidenced: "The solution to low test scores is not lowering standards—it's tougher, clearer standards," said Obama (Obama, 2009). And this faith is shared by the nation's state leaders. For example, in December 2008, the state education policy makers pledged to use international benchmarking as a way to make the "efforts to raise standards, advance teaching quality, and improve low-performing schools" more effective (National Governors' Association, Council of Chief State School Officers, & Achieve, 2008, p. 6). A report jointly released by the National Governors Association, Council of Chief State School Officers, and Achieve Inc., called state leaders to take five actions to ensure a world-class education for American students:

Action 1: Upgrade state standards by adopting a common core of internationally benchmarked standards in math and language arts for grades K–12 to ensure that students are equipped with the necessary knowledge and skills to be globally competitive.

Action 2: Leverage states' collective influence to ensure that textbooks, digital media, curricula, and assessments are aligned to internationally benchmarked standards and draw on lessons from high performing nations and states.

Action 3: Revise state policies for recruiting, preparing, developing, and supporting teachers and school leaders to reflect the human capital practices of top-performing nations and states around the world.

Action 4: Hold schools and systems accountable through monitoring, interventions, and support to ensure consistently high performance, drawing upon international best practices.

Action 5: Measure state-level education performance globally by examining student achievement and attainment in an international context to ensure that, over time, students are receiving the education they need to compete in the 21st century economy. (National Governors' Association, et al., 2008, p. 6)

As I have discussed in much detail elsewhere in the book, the faith in high standards as a solution is misplaced. Theoretically national curriculum standards for each subject can be useful, but unless we can develop sound standards for all subjects and knowledge we think our students should have, unless we can develop and implement valid and reliable assessment for all standards, unless we can enable our students to choose from a wide range of offerings, and unless we can attach equal value to a broad range of knowledge and skills, national standards will do more harm than good. As a recent study of the standards-based reform in the United States shows, after some 20 years of experiments, all the expected positive outcomes of standards-based reform remain elusive, while unintended and undesirable consequences have all borne out (Hamilton, Stecher, & Yuan, 2008).

The essence of this book is about what high-quality education is. In my thinking, education is much more than the memorization of prescribed skills and knowledge bits. And education, to slightly modify John Dewey, is not (only) a preparation for life; education is (also) life itself. Furthermore, education is about helping each and every child to realize his or her potential, not molding them into economic working beings for a state. In this spirit, I offer this book to our political leaders, educators, and parents who are designing and implementing education for our sons and daughters, who will live in a time that is different from ours.

May 2009