You are on page 1of 6

Norma Iglesias

English 1010-050
Jim Beatty
December 9, 2015

Diversity in Teaching Breeds Depth in Thinking


Diversity in education is a critical component of a broad, imaginative approach to
teaching and is crucial in order to cultivate critical thinking in students. Effective teachers
respond and react to their students comprehension, curiosity and readiness, often proactively.
Consequently, creativity and innovation are required to adapt the curriculum and strategy to the
specific class at hand and to make to topics understandable and interesting so students grasp
concepts, question ideas and want to learn more. This style of teaching cannot be standardized.

Common Core Standards Initiative


The Common Core State Standards were developed in 2009 as a result of concern over
student performance, and a lack of standardization among states . A major goal was to ensure
that all students, regardless of where they live, are graduating high school prepared for college,
career, and life. This state-led effort was launched in 2009 by state leaders, including governors
and state commissioners of education from 48 states, two territories and the District of Columbia.
(Development)
State education standards have been around since the early 1990s and by the early 2000s,
every state had developed and adopted its own learning standards that specify what students in
grades 3-8 and high school should be able to do. Every state also had its own definition of
proficiency, which is the level at which a student is determined to be sufficiently educated at
each grade level and upon graduation.

The governing body of the Common Core State Standards claims that the initiative
focusses on developing the critical-thinking, problem-solving, and analytical skills students will
need to be successful, and that the new standards provide a way for teachers to measure student
performance throughout the school year and ensure that students are progressing successfully
toward their academic careers.
However, as always what is tested is what is being taught and students are, above all else,
being taught to take tests. In the context of this standardized testing, high-order thinking skills
are specific skills supporting the testing format, including rote memorization, as opposed to
analysis and critical thinking. Marcia Clemmitt reviews this in her report Teaching Critical
Thinking: Should schools do more to foster analytical skills?, and claims that in depth analytical
and critical thinking involves investigating a text or concept. It goes beyond decoding and
comprehension, to challenging ideas, constructing pertinent arguments and examining
influences (392). It clearly follows that, although memorization and test-taking skills are useful
and even necessary, they do not facilitate the process itself of deep examination, analysis and
interpretation of complex concepts and arguments, all of which constitute critical thinking.

Proponents of Standardization
In her article, How and Why Standards can Improve Student Achievement: A
Conversation with Robert J. Marzono, Marge Scherer presents an argument for implementing
standards in education, while at the same time admitting the challenges. Marzano, a highly
respected educator and vocal proponent of standards, claims that the mandate for standards in
teaching and testing results from the need for more frequent feedback regarding student progress
because of concerns regarding performance. This information comes directly from the classroom
in the form of assessment and reporting, and is seen by proponents as an easily obtained and

monitored feedback mechanism. At the same time, Marzano admits the process of identifying
standards has been clumsy, and their implementation difficult. Additionally, in spite of claims by
policymakers that they are not telling teachers how they should teach, some have gone so far as
to strongly recommend a repertoire of instructional strategies to increase student learning, and
even prescribe specific classroom practices they feel generally increase achievement. (Scherer)
Taken together, these initiatives boil down to a call for standardization in teaching itself.
Such standardization of the teaching process will thwart creative teaching strategies which are
crucial to effectively respond and react to student readiness and comprehension, engender
curiosity, in-depth examination and critical thinking in the classroom, and will directly result in a
compromised quality of teaching. Once again, although standards have a definite application in
teaching and assessment, the overuse of either standards or standardization in education will
hinder innovative, thought-provoking teaching approaches.

Standards and Standardization - Not the Same


The main tool of the Common Core Standards Initiative is regular, frequent standardized
testing. The content of these tests are linked with a Common Core curriculum taught by teachers
who assess student learning through a series of standardized exams and who are evaluated with a
common formula that uses scores on these exams as a measure of teacher quality and
effectiveness. These standards themselves are not the problem, which actually lies in the
merging of standards with standardization by the Common Core Initiative (Brooks).
Standards are defined in the dictionary as a level of quality, achievement, etc., that is
considered acceptable or desirable or as a rule of principle that is used as a basis for
judgement. As such, they are certainly valuable in the classroom when applied appropriately.
For example, standards are effective in education to outline content, determine minimum

requirements, and monitor student comprehension, giving feedback to both students and teachers
regarding how the learning is progressing. However, the definition of standardization is to
change (things) so that they are similar and consistent and agree with rules about what is proper
and acceptable, and one synonym for standardization is uniformity. Thus, standardization,
by definition, calls for uniformity in teaching, and it is arguable whether this initiative will allow
schools to foster critical-thinking skills or will constrain teaching by forcing reliance on
standardized tests as a way to measure education quality and success. (Clemmitt) It has in fact
become apparent, that an initiative which enforces standardization in teaching and assessing will
precipitate uniformity and squelch diversity in teaching.
Although standards in teaching are valuable tools, robust and stimulating teaching and
learning is not achieved by simply meeting objective standards, but by the interactions in the
classroom between the teachers and students - a process which is as individual as the people
involved. A teacher can set up a classroom which stimulates the students curiosity and captures
their interest, and a student who is enthusiastic about the content at hand will be genuinely more
interested in learning, and will actually learn more than one who feels he or she is simply
fulfilling predetermined requirements. (Brooks)
The Common Core Initiative has provided educators across the country with a common
language - standards, which can serve as a basis for evaluating content and minimum
requirements. However, effective education and standardization are antithetical to each other.
Educators should be supported in pursuing and employing innovative teaching approaches
always in response to the comprehension and readiness of their students, empowering and
enabling students to examine and evaluate ideas, events and arguments in their contexts. This

style of creative, responsive and diverse teaching, rather than repeated testing, will enable
educators to truly cultivate critical thinking in their classrooms.

Work Cited

Brooks, Jacqueline Grennon and Mary E. Dietz. The Dangers and Opportunities of the
Common Core. Educational Leadership. 70.4. (Dec 2012/Jan 2013): p. 64-67.
Academic Search Premier. Web. 4 Nov. 2015.

Clemmitt, Marcia. Teaching Critical Thinking: Should Schools Do More to Foster


Analytical Thinking? CQ Researcher 25.14 (2015): 315-331. CQ Researcher. Web. 4
Nov. 2015.

Development Process. Common Core Standards Initiative. 2015. Web. 4 November 2015.

Scherer, Marge. How and Why Standards Can Improve Student Achievement: A Conversation
with Robert J. Marzono. Educational Leadership. 59.1 (2001): 14-18. Academic Search
Premier. Web. 17 November 2015.

You might also like