The One-Question Test
by
Linda
Schrock Taylor
by Linda Schrock Taylor
DIGG THIS
In 1812 (forty
years before the passage of our first federal compulsory school
laws), Pierre
DuPont de Nemours published the book, Education in the
United States. Dupont, one of the founders of the DuPont fortune,
known to be brutally honest and direct, spoke of the phenomenal
literacy rate in the United States; was amazed by the difference
he saw when compared to European literacy. Dupont said that less
then 4 people out of every thousand in the new nation could not
read and do numbers well.
In 1992 (one
hundred and forty years after the passage of compulsory schooling
laws) Regna Lee Wood, Director of Statistical Research for The National
Right to Read Foundation, published the article, "That's
Right – They're Wrong." In that very important piece, Wood
compared the literacy rates of World War II recruits with those
of the Korean War. She discovered that,
AFQT scores
indicated that illiteracy (defined by the War Department as inability
to read 4th-grade lessons, or today's 5th-grade
lessons) among millions of prospective recruits with at least
four years of schooling soared from almost zero (0.004) during
World War II to an unbelievable 17 percent during the Korean War.
("That's
Right – They're Wrong" National Review, 9/14/92)
Such information
should be considered as explanations are sought for the massive
failure of our schools in these years since World War II; a massive
failure that has occurred just within my lifetime. We should also
consider whether those "4 people out of every thousand"; that "0.004";
might be a more accurate reflection of the true occurrence of severe
handicapping conditions in the general population.
Might "4 out
of 1000" be the actual number of unfortunate individuals born with
true handicaps so severe that the achievement of literacy is simply
not possible? The observations of Dupont, and the statistics examined
by Wood, certainly suggest a very different – and a vastly smaller
– group of nonreaders than does the current educational Alphabet
of Excuses (AE) for school failure – ADD,
ADHD, ODD, BD, EI, LD, SLD, HI, VI, EMI, MR, MI, CI, AU, TMR, POHI…
No Child Left
Behind should be identifying and using research like that done by
Regna
Lee Wood. Actually, NCLB should have done its homework before
it forced narrow certification and ever-broadening assessment guidelines
on each school and every teacher in the land; before it acted on
such a massive scale to violate the sovereignty of local jurisdictions
to make the educational decisions that best serve the local people
who are actually the ones financing their local schools.
NCLB should
have attempted to discover: the full impact of basic literacy upon
the total educational experience and life of each individual. NCLB
should have discovered: exactly how literacy was so skillfully brought
about back when the purported 996 out of every 1000 Americans were
literate.
NCLB laws;
accepted by lock-step and/or ignorant administrators; enabled by
uninformed and/or incompetent school board members; have failed
to identify the vital issue upon which all other aspects of schooling
rest; the one single element; the Rosetta Stone – READING!
With that foundational
academic need in mind, the effectiveness of any school can be assessed,
and the decision made as to whether a school should remain open,
– based upon whether a school passes or fails The One-Question Test:
"Does said
school absolutely, positively, insure that 996 out of every 1000
children are literate prior to the end of third (3rd)
grade?"
(Now, this
is the kind of outcome-based education that America needs and has
needed for at least seventy-five years.)
One-roomed
schoolhouse teachers were able to teach reading to almost every
child. More importantly, back then the goal was to have every child
literate by the end of first grade – in an era when
homes owned few books other than the Bible;
Webster's "Blue-backed
Speller"; a reading book filled with wisdom, intelligent stories
and big words; and a slim arithmetic book.
Children came
to school – many without breakfast – carrying a lunch pail that
might hold something as simple as a butter sandwich (made more nutritious
by being provided by the hard work of the parents rather than by
funds stolen from the taxpayers to feed someone else's child). The
children often came from extremely poor homes; many where chickens
and more, might have shared the dwelling on bitterly cold winter
nights. The children often came in rags or hand-me-downs. But…the
main difference between schools then and schools
now is that then schools taught almost all children
to read. The schools back then leveled the population
UP!
For this massive
increase in illiteracy, coming so soon after the prior
war, our welfare-growing, prison-building, America can thank Sight
Words and Dick and Jane, including all their offspring and clones,
including Whole Language, Balanced Literacy, and any other avoid-systematic-phonic-instruction
fads.
Most children,
who learn to read well in our current educational climate, learn
to read in spite of the teaching. Until such time as teachers
are trained to skillfully and effectively teach phonics, spelling,
writing and reading, this method of not-so-benign neglect,
which fails the majority of the children, will continue to be used
with each generation, with ever-worsening results. That steady decline
has been the norm since the sight word fad usurped educational
decisions and destroyed the meaning of scholarship.
The educational
culture must drop pet theories and favorite fads in order to properly
train teachers to skillfully teach reading, spelling, and writing
skills. Educators would be wise to seek out the few remaining one-room
schoolhouse teachers and ask them to teach the professors at all
the schools of education How to Really Teach Reading.
My Great-aunt Mildred, who taught for fifty (50) years, probably
knows, herself, more about reading instruction, than most graduate
schools of education currently know collectively!
Those graduate
degrees are quite impressive on paper, but too often the schools
of education only require that professors who train future teachers
in How to Teach Reading have "an earned PhD and three (3)
years of classroom experience." Three years!! Almost every teacher
spends the first three years getting organized and learning more
from the kids than the teachers were able to get taught. Yet, inexperienced
teachers are actively recruited to train America's future teachers!
It is no wonder that American education has lost its footing on
the shifting sands of fads and theories. PhD research papers abound,
as each tries to outdo the next.
I confronted
one such theorist at Michigan State University. He had made up a
flyer to advertise the graduate class that he would be teaching.
On the flyer he explained that the outcome of the class would be
that the students would know about a lot of different theories of
reading. I acted naïve and explained that I wanted to learn
how to teach reading so I was wondering if his class would provide
me with the skills I would need. He danced around my question, never
answering it. He knew full well that I would waste my time and my
money, yet be unable, at the completion of the class, to teach a
nonreader of any age how to read.
Graduate degrees
are given for the study and research of theories (pet or otherwise).
In all likelihood, a teacher with a master's degree in Reading will
still lack the skills and knowledge necessary to effectively do
the job for which such teachers are certified, recruited and hired.
Still, the certification process, as well as NCLB, refuses to acknowledge
that literacy is the cornerstone of education; which is the foundation
of scholarship; which is the basis of intelligent, logical thought
and decision making.
Instead of
asking the only question that matters, NCLB flounders in
ever-widening circles of failure and rights violations, fruitlessly
searching for potential demons to exorcise: Physical education teachers;
Physics majors; Career counselors; Early childhood teachers… On
and on the search goes – at all levels; throughout all subject areas;
losing all effectiveness, and most certainly all focus, in that
process.
There is only
one question!
"Does your
school insure that 996 out of every 1000 students are literate prior
to the completion of third grade?"
One question
– yet fifty-one departments of education; scores of colleges of
education; thousands of school districts; are unable to pass the
most important test of all.
Unless foolish
and progressive (a misnomer if ever there was one) fads are
thrown out of schools, and teachers return to the explicit and accurate
teaching of phonics, any attempt to save the schools will be meaningless
rhetoric. Until the first weeks of school, at every grade level,
in every building, are used to teach reading until 996 of every
1000 children are literate enough to be successful in all other
areas of study, all else is a sham.
The future
of America is at stake, yet the Fascist educational establishment
is uninterested in actually educating the populace. Our schools
educate for ignorance. The deck has long been stacked against teaching
children to read early and well.
Remember…Thomas
Jefferson said that if a nation expects to be ignorant and
free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and
never will be, and prepare for the end of America as a sovereign,
civilized and free country.
October
16, 2006
Linda
Schrock Taylor [send
her mail] is an educational
consultant, homeschooling mom, and public school special ed teacher.
She is available for presentations, inservices, and workshops.
Copyright
© 2006 LewRockwell.com
Linda
Schrock Taylor Archives
|