By Scott Baldauf, writer of The Christian Science Monitor
The Christian Science Monitor
In Green Bay, Wis., "benchmark" is the new buzzword among educators.
Students there are now required to meet higher standards in math, science, and social studies. Teachers are getting new training. School officials are reaching out to involve parents in helping their children reach academic goals. And Uncle Sam is footing the bill.
It is all part of a federal program, called Goals 2000, to provide funds for state initiatives that help establish and raise academic standards in the nation's schools. The aim is to shift the balance from an emphasis on critical thinking to learning facts. And according to Gayle Frame, Goals 2000 coordinator for the local school district, the federal money has made all the difference. "If people came into our schools, they'd see us setting specific benchmarks for students ... and holding students accountable," says Ms. Frame from her Green Bay office. Her colleague, Fred Stieg, backs her up. "Twenty years ago, I asked myself, 'What is an A?' Now, there's a standard to take to the parent and tell them how their child is doing." At a time when President Clinton is pushing for national standards and testing as part of his education initiative, Goals 2000 may get closer scrutiny. Some educators point to successes in Wisconsin, Washington, and Colorado as evidence that the federal government can have a positive role in guiding locally run schools. But it may be too soon to give a grade to the program. Some states, like Wisconsin, have worked for years on creating a core curriculum. Others, such as New Hampshire, Wyoming, and California are just getting started. And there is still little agreement on how to measure their success. Anything but standards "Goals 2000 has been a mixed bag. It's impossible to call it either a success or a failure," says Diane Ravitch, an education professor at New York University and a former Department of Education official in the Bush administration. "I think it's helped some in that it's made standards important. The problem is that many places are using the money to do anything except standards." When Goals 2000 was enacted in 1994, the Democratic Congress set academic goals as well as guidelines. Recipients of federal funding were required to work toward a set of goals: Children will start school ready to learn; students in fourth, eighth, and 12th grade will demonstrate competence in English, math, science, civics, and other subjects; teachers will improve their skills; and schools will promote parental involvement. Although most educators agreed with these goals, some state and local school officials saw the possibility of federal intrusion on local control of schools. They worried that federal bureaucrats, not local teachers or parents, would decide the most important events, discoveries, or works of literature for their children to learn. As a result, a few states rejected Goals 2000 money. When Republicans took control of Congress in 1995, many of these guidelines were softened. The result, ironically, is a $340 million standards program that sets very few standards of its own on how that money is spent. …