National Standards and Local Control - The Paradox of American Education

An interesting article in The Christian Science Monitor questioned federal standards set by lawmakers for students in light of the debate over the effectiveness of the SAT. The article posits that there is an issue in imposing a "one size fits all" testing standard when our school systems is rooted in local control. In fact, there is no set national curriculum for our schools. Is it fair, then, to impose national testing standards (a la No Child Left Behind) or a nationwide aptitude test for college admissions?

Looking at No Child Left Behind, the law calls for a national standard of 100% proficiency for all students by 2014; however, proficiency is measured differently by each state. A student who may fail to make proficiency in Massachusetts may otherwise be considered proficient in Indiana. The disparity in these standards reflects, though, the basic premise of our school system - local and state control. 

It is universally recognized that there need be a benchmark by which to compare students from different school systems; however, the SAT is often lambasted for its ability to measure students' aptitude on a national scale. Even large blocs of students in the midwest have turned to the ACT as their preferred test of choice. Much of the flak the SAT receives, though, stems from the apparent paradox of our educational system - national standards for locally-controlled schools. 

This left us wondering at INAP - what would our educational system look like if school districts set their own standards, much like states do for student proficiency already?

Article referenced:

http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0611/p08s01-comv.html

Kevin Prior

INeedAPencil Summer Associate

Harvard College 2011