What grade to teach benchmarks? New Information to Consider
An open letter to the Portage School Board from Melanie Kurdys
| From: Melanie Kurdys |
| To: Mr. Tom Eddy, Dr. Kevin Hollenbeck, Mrs. Shirley Johnson, Mrs. Linda Lueth, Mr. Allan Reiff, Mr. Jerry Whitaker, Mrs. Ann Woolley |
| Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2003 2:39 PM |
| Subject: What grade to teach benchmarks? New Information to Consider |
In the new science program, a primary driver is to move Earth Science benchmarks from grade 5 to grade 8 and from grade 8 to grade 10. The logic, as presented by Leanne Larson at the Nov 24 Board Meeting, is in support of No Child Left Behind building level accountability....that students should be taught and tested within the same building.
First of all, NCLB legislation does not link teaching and testing into building level accountability. More reasonably, it does recommend that students should know what is taught before moving on.
Secondly, there is no evidence that our students do not remember what they are taught. If you recall, our MEAP scores for 2001 were highest in the area of Earth Science. Recent drop offs in scores have some other cause, not a sudden inability of our students to remember what they are taught.
Even more important is the position of the National Science Board. In their Report "Preparing Our Children: Math and Science Education in the National Interest" (NSB 99-31) there is specific reference to when benchmarks should be taught. The message is, the younger the better.
The TIMSS study, which compares the US students to students from other countries, found 13 countries perform significantly better in math and science. They then discovered that US students are generally taught topics two years later than students of these high performing countries. The thinking is that the students are then able to keep learning more, so US students, even if they take the same number of years of science or math courses, US students learn two years less material!
By moving our benchmarks up to higher grades, we are weakening the opportunity for students to move beyond and achieve their best. Please don't let this decision within the new science curriculum move ahead without serious consideration and your leadership. It is a mjor step backward.
To comment on this comment, click here.