Regarding National versus Local Education Standards:
They Can All Be Geniuses Here's the problem; Joey in New York goes to school under New York standards that make Joey in the top 10% of students nationally. Mike in Mississippi goes to school with locally mandated standards , also modified by "No Child Left Behind", but is in the lowest 10% of students nationally. Both are educated under a national standard for some aspects of their education, but markedly different standards based on local politics, unions and other forces. How does that make sense? Educational academics , politicians, parents, and teachers struggle with ideas like "What are the right Standards?" Why? Because the U.S. is being surpassed rapidly by educational achievement of students in other countries, even countries whose education systems were minimal as recently as a generation ago. We even import hundreds of thousands of talented engineers, scientists, technicians, researchers, managers and others because the U.S. can't and hasn't developed enough of our own people to fill the demand. There's a new education model coming, one based on standards that are formulated for a global economy. High, measurable standards in the Sciences, in Reading Comprehension, in Thinking and Reasoning ability, in the Humanities, in Philosophy, and in all the knowledge and thinking processes of a Millennium Student. It can and should be universal in application; complete in practice. Teachers and others who fight these necessary standards are on the wrong end of the sword; they will be, must be, replaced with educators who revel in exceeding any standard, who would like nothing more than having their entire class be one hundred percent college graduates; better still graduate and PhD degree earners. Technology-based education, even based on Cloud-education at home are definite avenues. In that case standards are
meaningless; most children will achieve at levels far beyond any envisioned standards. How? Because the great equalizer of mediocrity can't and won't hold back most children whose Curiosity Quotient (CQ), drives their IQ, and their achievement to levels such that many could graduate college at age 16 , with graduate degrees at 18 or 19, PhD's at 22 or 23. Computer-assisted, Artificial Intelligence Interactive education, programmed learning, advances a pupil based on their achievement and comprehension, individually, not as a group weighted by the anchor of "get them to the minimum" in which half the students (or less) exceed the Median, and half (or more) don't reach even that mediocre level. When expectations (standards) are low, so are the results .Social and educational naysayers notwithstanding, technology-based education removers much of the "human, policy and politics-based impediments to our students. We all have the ability to learn, it's a survival characteristic, built into our genes. Some learn at slower rates than others, but technologybased education enables even the slowest to move much faster than they have before, AND not hold back those who can advance faster. Gifted and Talented programs are a way to recognize that current systems don't provide a process, a methodology for letting the best and brightest advance according to their skills and motivation. And, at the same time provides a method for those who learn slower, or are challenged, to do better, get more attention from educators/coaches/mentors. Technology-based education allows the Gifted to move as fast as their knowledgeacquisition and motivation allows; similarly,the very "patience of the Computer-assisted education assists the slower learners by it's willingness to be consistent. In this case where educators play a vital role in "mentoring" slower students with much more effectiveness, because they have more time.
Which brings up the next part; Educators need a new educational framework: One in which they learn to teach students to think, to rationalize, to organize, to plan; to apply their increased knowledge levels to problem solving, to life, to society. Computers and Structured Leaning take over the drudge of Imparting facts, the rote-ness of the Basics. Educators now have the time to evaluate progress of each student, access that student individually from their oversight position, and counsel, reinforce, and motivate. These are the real Educational Standards we need. The next generation can all be geniuses. Barry Dennis Woodstock, Maryland