The Ongoing "Education Wars"

     As school begins this fall, most parents have little awareness that an education war is raging over how and what their children are taught, and how education should be delivered in America’s schools. The war has formed a fault line running through teacher’s lounges, PTO’s, school boards, professional organizations, legislatures, colleges and universities, and the various academic disciplines. It is a war between the “traditionalists” and the “progressives.”
     Two divergent underlying philosophies are causing the “war.” The traditionalists believe that children should be given a strong foundation, rich in content, in a structured environment by teachers trained in their disciplines. Important, relevant facts should be learned and memorized so they become the foundation for higher-level thinking and problem solving.
     In contrast, progressives believe that children are capable of directing their own learning given the proper guidance, stimulation, and learning environment. Student failure is often blamed on social structures and restrictive traditional classroom practices that they say suppress the natural inclinations of a child toward learning.

Click here for a chart that compares some of the practical differences between the traditional and progressive education models.

     The 1983 publication of A Nation at Risk, which identified education failures in the nation’s schools, was used as a catalyst for the progressive movement. Classrooms across the country were flooded with “new reforms” that were deemed to be “solutions.” Many of these unproven theories were designed by developmental psychologists, professors in schools of education, and government bureaucrats. Local property taxes ballooned to pay for implementation of “the new reforms.” However, monies were often diverted from the classroom to retrain teachers and administrators to use the new teaching methods, standards, and accountability strategies.
      The response to A Nation at Risk also resulted in a major shift in education governance. Education policy-making became more centralized - away from the locally elected school boards and local superintendents toward the State Boards of Education and the State Secretaries of Education. In 2001 the federal government usurped much of the states’ power when Congress passed the largest, most intrusive education law ever – No Child Left Behind – with implementation authority resting with the U.S. Secretary of Education and his Department. Now every public school in the country must put into practice federal mandates that are being funneled through State Departments of Education.
      However, the real education war is taking place in the classroom. The public spotlight has revealed the Reading Wars (between phonics and whole language) and the Math Wars (between traditional and constructionist math), and the media is just beginning to explore the brewing controversy over the new federal U.S. Civics Standards. Education reform failures are most evident in America’s homes as many parents find that their children cannot write a coherent sentence, read a grade-level book, or do basic math.
      Today, most public and some private schools use progressive teaching methods, textbooks, and education practices. In fact the progressive takeover of American schools is so prevalent that even schools labeled “traditional academies” usually have adopted progressive pedagogy.
      Disappointing student test results and skyrocketing education costs are now forcing educators, politicians, and parents to examine not only failing classroom practices, but also the underlying philosophies.
      In order to improve education, school boards and administrators must be gatekeepers. They must demand that new reforms and practices be based on scientific, empirically based research that indicates efficacy. Those promoting new reforms with claims of improved student achievement should be required to produce the research that substantiates their claims. Reform adoption should not be based on opinion surveys, focus group data, or soft advocacy research.
      Local education leaders may find some help through the Coalition for Evidence-Based Policy, working in collaboration with the U.S. Department of Education to identify proven education reforms. Grover Whitehurst, Assistant Secretary for Educational Research, stated, “The success of education programs depends ultimately on the ability to evaluate which programs are working as intended and which are not. With rigorous evidence on effectiveness we can begin to focus our resources on programs that work.” What Works Clearinghouse is a new government-related website that will provide educators, policymakers, and the public with a central, independent source of scientific evidence of what works in education. It can be found at www.w-w-c.org.
      Until systemic changes are made, parents can help insure an appropriate education for their child by learning about the practices being used in their child’s school and classroom. Parents who prefer a more traditional program may be able to work within the public education system, or they may opt to enroll their child in more traditional private, parochial, charter, or cyber schools or home school. By making important, educated decisions, parents can be sure that their child is not left behind.