|
Common Core National Education
Standards and the Threat to Democracy
Nicholas Tampio
Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2018 Hardcover. ix+201 p. ISBN 978-1421424637.
$24.95
Reviewed by Laurie Béreau Université
Rennes 2
In the US context, national and education are two notions that seldom
collocate. The 10th amendment theoretically precludes the federal government
from meddling in that area: with education not formally identified as a federal
jurisdiction in the Constitution, it has long been considered a state
prerogative. It is no wonder then that the recent push for national standards
in education has been met with resistance. While the first major federal forays
in education derived from a concern for social justice and racial integration, their
philosophy morphed with the neoliberal shift of the 1980s and 1990s. Ever
since, performance and accountability have taken center stage in the discussion
over education, all the more in a globalized economy requiring human capital.
Anxious to compete in this new global environment, the US federal government
has bet on national standards in education to foster improved performance in
the schools. That accountability-driven mindset has translated into a heavy
emphasis on standardized testing, whose results can make or break public
schools. With Common Core : National
Education Standards and the Threat to Democracy, Nicholas Tampio offers a review
of the existing national standards and a critique of their disruptive influence
on democratic vigor. The title singles out the Common Core, an initiative that
emerged in 2010 under the impulse of the National Governors Association. Those
guidelines detail what American K-12 students should know by the end of each
grade in mathematics and English. They were actively promoted by the Obama
administration and its Race to the Top, a competitive federal grant program
incentivizing states to adopt certain reforms including the Common Core
Standards. Tampio actually tackles the “national education standards paradigm” [16]
more generally, including various other initiatives in his argument. The book offers a straightforward organization. The introduction is
followed by two chapters detailing respectively the main arguments in favor of
and against national education standards. The next five chapters cover the implementation
of national standards in a specific field each. Chapter 3, devoted to English
standards, stresses their tendency to favor mechanical functioning over
critical thinking. Tampio is less severe on math standards in chapter 4, but
regrets how their testing format puts English learners at a disadvantage with a
reliance on linguistic skills to explain mathematical reasoning. Chapter 5
dwells on science, the counter-productive compartmentalizing of the
disciplines, the orthodoxical dimension of the standards and their
disconnection from local contexts. The section on history standards echoes
criticisms of English standards and their spiritless formatting. The
standardized testing that has accompanied the implementation of standards in
these four disciplines concentrate most of Tampio’s grievances. Finally chapter
6 covers sexuality, gender and religious standards. Here Tampio focuses on the
political dimension of the standards in a field where he believes parental
involvement is particularly critical. The conclusion reviews the history of the
introduction of standards at the national level and the limits of such
standards, with an epilogue developing local attempts at resisting them. While Tampio briefly reviews the arguments in favor of national standards,
the core of his argument is an exposé of their shortcomings. As suggested by
the title, his point is not to provide a nonpartisan report and Tampio does not
shy away from taking a stand. Part of his interest in the topic stems from his personal
position as a parent prompted to write out of concern for his two sons’
experience in school. This is not to say that his is not an academic work.
Still one might regret the one-sided dimension of the chapter devoted to
arguments for national standards, dwelling on a single source for each and thus
making the arguments quite plain and lacking in depth. The originality of this reflection on national standards lies in
Tampio’s background in political science. Here national standards are primarily
considered through the prism of their compliance with the demands of true
democracy. In that regard, Tampio provides a fresh lens that completes that of
educators such as Diane Ravitch. While Ravitch looks at national standards from
an ideological perspective, pointing out their function as vehicles for
advancing neoliberal corporate education reform, Tampio investigates their
impact on democratic life in the United States. The core of his argument is
that those standards participate in dulling active participation of the people
in government. In his own words, Tampio defines his position as both liberal
and democratic [6]. Borrowing from James Madison’s case against factions,
Tampio argues that national standards amount to unilaterally imposing the will
of a few and disenfranchizing families when it comes to education. National
standards stiffen pluralism, depriving the nation from a vital local input. A discussion of the loss of democratic vitality in the context of
American education logically involves John Dewey. The pragmatist philosopher
insisted on the essential connection between schools and their immediate
environment, a condition for progressive education. Tapping into children’s
surroundings and practical reality is crucial to make them active learners, but
also active citizens. Tampio regularly invokes Dewey and the progressive creed,
regretting the way national standards sever the links between schools and
actual experiences while promoting prepackaged one-size-fits-all standards. Those
standards are detrimental to active engagement from the students and the
development of critical thinking. Parents, teachers and local school board are
best-equipped when it comes to assessing what will work best for specific
children in a specific environment. While Tampio makes a strong case for local control and its virtues in
terms of democratic engagement, little is said to address the risk of such
devolution. The book tends to steer away from the potential matters of
contention that could stem from increased local sovereignty over schools, often
dispensing with them in a couple of sentences. What of instances in which
families and communities would not be equipped to assess and address the needs
of students and / or sufficiently available to act as “energetic” citizens in
the control of the schools? Though full of shortcomings, national standards and
federal initiatives may have a role to play as levelers. What of the
curriculum? Tampio quotes a former Department of Education official arguing
that national standards risk turning curriculum wars into “nuclear holocausts”
[74], pitting conservatives against progressives. Yet the alternative raises
concern about what is taught in schools. Science, history, or sex education,
all granted a chapter, are particularly ripe for clashes. Tampio argues that “communities
should have a right to decide for themselves how to tell their histories” [14].
In that case, the question of the Civil War for instance might receive greatly
divergent treatment depending on the location. While pluralism and vigorous
debate are desirable in education, the input of national experts should not
always be discarded on the grounds of its top-down dimension. How strong can
American democracy be in a context of exacerbated disunity? Such points do not diminish Tampio’s achievement in offering a fresh
perspective on national standards and the role of education in fostering active
political participation. The scale of the United States does make national
decisions alienating while parental involvement is a key ingredient in educational
achievement. The short format, 216 pages, does not lend itself to balance and
comprehensiveness, leaving quite a few blind spots when it comes to the limits
of local control. Still, this work provides an effective introduction to the
debate with its detailed review of the existing standards and food for thought
on the way we engage with education as parents or community members, a
conducive incentive to participation.
Cercles © 2020 All rights are reserved and no reproduction from this site for whatever purpose is permitted without the permission of the copyright owner. Please contact us before using any material on this website.
|
|
|
