Hooked on Politics: Texas Public Education

The standardization of curriculum and assessment is beyond a doubt one of the most difficult challenges in our educational system. Assessment of any kind, especially when done on a national or state scale, is wrought with pitfalls and tricky variables. Classroom curriculum is no different. The topics of history, society, language, politics, and even science are all made up of very subjective ideas. Who gets to decide what facts are important and what gets exempted? How do we avoid biased language? How should evolution be approached in the classroom? How should religion be addressed? The problems and concerns are endless. The complexity and bureaucratic doublespeak surrounding this topic in recent news made me want to learn more about the techniques and standards that are actually being implemented right now. In order to focus my research, I decided to start by investigating how Texas assesses and designs its educational curriculum. Texas is the most influential state in terms of education, setting standards and practices that are often adopted by other states.

In Texas public schools, everything hinges upon the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills, or TAKS test. TAKS is the standardized testing system set forth in Texas back in 1999 to replace the TAAS test. Every student in Texas is supposed to pass some version of the TAKS test in order to graduate. The TAKS test is meant to ensure Texas students meet standardized educational goals, now called Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills, or TEKS. These educational goals are set forth by the State Board of Education (SBOE) and became effective in 1998 according to TEA. The TEKS are, theoretically, the starting point and foundation of education in Texas. Curriculum in the classroom is built around the TEKS, and the TAKS test is meant to reflect the students' understanding of concepts in the TEKS. To investigate exactly how we approach education in Texas, we need to understand how the TEKS work. To do that, let's try to understand how the SBOE works.

The SBOE is a distinctly political group consisting of one panel and three committees (Instruction, School Finance/Permanent School Fund, and School Initiatives) with a total of fifteen members. It is the main force behind the design of the TEKS. According to the TEA website, board members are elected to public office and these officials form the SBOE, which "designates and mandates instruction in the knowledge and skills that are essential to a well-balanced curriculum. The Board approves and determines passing scores for the state-mandated assessment program" (SBOE History and Duties). While Board members are elected by public vote, the governor of Texas appoints the Chair of the Board. On July 10, 2009 Governor Rick Perry appointed Gail Lowe to the position of Chair, replacing Don McLeroy after the Texas Senate did not confirm McLeroy's reappointment as chair (Burka, "Lowe and Behold"). Ms. Lowe is a Republican from Lampasas, Texas and is co-publisher of the Lampasas Dispatch Record newspaper. She believes the SBOE "provides a good check and balance [to the TEA], and allows more public input than what the TEA bureaucracy would allow." According to Ms. Lowe, seven Board members vote conservatively, four vote moderately, and four vote liberally ("Officials discuss" 1). These political affiliations are a major influence on the education of kids in schools across the nation.

The SBOE has made national news lately for many overtly political changes made in the state curriculum. Let's start by looking at the conservative agenda since they are the voting majority. At a meeting on March 11, David Bradley, a Republican licensed in insurance and real estate sales and chair of the School Finance/Permanent School Fund committee, recommended that students learn about the "unintended consequences" of Title IX, a law which made it illegal for federally funded schools to discriminate against women. One consequence, he said, is the downfall of boys' wrestling programs in schools. Bradley also rejects "the notion by the left of a constitutional separation of church and state." He goes on to claim, "I have one thousand dollars for the charity of your choice if you can find it [separation of church and state] in the Constitution" (Vine 125). Arguments like these are motivated by a political agenda, not by a genuine concern for kids and education.

On the other side, according to The New York Times, liberals lament the absence of minorities, specifically Latinos, in the state's curriculum and McLeroy's desire to teach students about Republicans who voted for civil rights. The Times also mentions the disappearance of Thomas Jefferson, famous for his belief in separation between church and state, from a list of influential writers. Instead of being concerned with how well the education system works, both liberals and conservatives appear to be concerned only with each other. At the risk of sounding cliché, what about the children? Isn't our goal to educate them instead of fighting over what propaganda we want to teach them?

In 2009, the SBOE proposed changing the term "capitalism" to "free enterprise system" and describing the U.S. as a "constitutional republic" instead of a "democracy." ("Officials discuss" 5). While these minute rhetorical discrepancies may be heated topics for adult politicians who haven't stepped into a high school classroom for years, our actual high school students are facing much different and much more immediate challenges every day. In regard to some of the proposed changes in classroom curriculum Ms. Lowe says "[w]e can't expect students to know about these things if they are not taught" ("Officials discuss" 5). I wholeheartedly disagree. Yes, we can expect students to know things we haven't taught them. In fact, I count on it.

Finding jobs, paying bills, and buying food are becoming very real issues for many graduates. We just don't have time to argue semantics any more. Besides, I believe that many of our nation's kids are smart enough to understand that language can be tricky, and words can change meaning over time or even have slightly different meanings for different people. I believe our students are smart enough to understand that conservatives and liberals can interpret facts differently. In fact, I believe they need to understand these things to compete in our new global market. Let the students decide for themselves whether we live in a constitutional republic or a democracy. Let them decide whether they believe our economy is capitalist or a free enterprise system.

Rather than wasting our time and money arguing over textbook semantics and indoctrination, we should focus on helping students think for themselves. Equipping students with the skills to understand rhetoric and indoctrination would simultaneously equip them with skills to defend themselves against it. This is important because I'm pretty sure indoctrination and rhetorical manipulation doesn't stop after high school. These kids will grow into adults, who are constantly bombarded with advertisements, political campaigns, television shows, magazines, and other media.

Education is not regurgitation. Find teachers and an administration who can inspire kids to think for themselves and we won't have to worry about indoctrination. As educators, I believe we're missing the point.

Works Referenced

Burka, Paul. "Center of Gravity." Texas Monthly March 2010: 10-14. Print.

---. "Lowe and Behold." Texas Monthly.com. Texas Monthly, Sept. 2009. Web. 3 May 2010.

McKinley, James C. Jr. "Texas Conservatives Win Curriculum Change." NYTimes.com. The New York Times 12 March 2010: U.S., Education. Web. 5 May 2010.

"Officials discuss school curriculum, funding." Lampasas Dispatch Record.com. Lampasas Dispatch Record [Lampasas, TX] 7 Aug. 2009: 1, 5. Web. 3 May 2010.

"TAKS, Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills: Exit Level English Language Arts Administered March 2009." TEA: Texas Education Agency. Texas Education Agency, 2009. Web. 25 Apr. 2010.

TEA: Texas Education Agency. Texas Education Agency, 2010. Web. 30 Apr. 2010.

Texas State Board of Education. "Texas Administrative Code (TAC), Title 19, Part II Chapter 110. Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills for English Language Arts and Reading." TEA: Texas Education Agency. Texas Education Agency, 23 Feb. 2010. Web. 25 Apr. 2010.

Vine, Katy. "The State Board of Ed's Final Exam." Texas Monthly May 2010: 124-125. Print.