Dr. David Hopson
As I write this column, we are only hours away from Election Day and the fact that all registered voters will have the opportunity to cast their ballots for the candidates they want to see elected, and in Massachusetts, the ballot initiatives they believe should or should not move forward. Being a presidential election year, the odds are good that voter turnout will be higher than for other elections but still far below what was seen at the beginning of the American experience.
The same could be said about the most democratic of American institutions: the town meeting form of government. If there is a controversial issue on a town warrant, we may see 30 to 40 percent of the voters turn out. If not, we’re often at loose ends trying to reach a quorum. Or in towns with low turnout and no quorum requirements—as with certain special town meetings—having a very small percentage of the voting public make decisions for the entire town. The adage that, “if you don’t vote, you can’t complain” is only practiced by a small percentage of those who do not vote.
As we continue to develop next year’s school budget, I’m astounded that $6 billion has been spent nationally for this election cycle. I’m shocked by both the amount of money and the ways in which this money has been spent. While I don’t watch much TV, and rarely listen to the radio, even my limited exposure has caused me to hear and view primarily negative ads, more often focused on what the other candidate has done wrong rather than what a candidate stands for, what they will do if elected, or what their vision for the state or country is.
Perhaps this emphasis on the 30-second sound bite and catchy phrase is also the reason for the negativism that public education faces today. As a nation, we espouse the need for deep and reflective thinking, of well thought out positions, of applying knowledge to solve problems in a collaborative effort, of being innovative, inventive, and free of bias in our endeavors, yet our politics and momentary focus on issues seem to completely ignore these important facets of public discourse. We also have an educational accountability system that ignores what we espouse to be a good education for the sake of simplicity and low cost, by using multiple choice and short answers as the measure of success. Does anyone really believe that multiple choice questions and short answers elicit a reflective and thoughtful application of facts and knowledge to solving a problem, of being creative and collaborative, of communicating with others and sharing the answers so that we can determine if they are the best solution? In a world that is counting more and more on the application of scientific theory and technology, in a world in which communications and collaboration across continents is becoming a standard for success, and in which the best of the higher education success stories still count on more than simple, easily graded, and statistically challenged tests for determining a student’s knowledge and skills, why are we denigrating our public schools based on such simplistic measures?
Have we gone so far down the road of simplistic measures in both our political discourse and educational measurement that we’ve lost sight of what it means to be a thoughtful and reflective decision maker? Do we truly believe that, with successful private enterprises moving away from only measuring success by the number and specifications of widgets being made, that we should continue to measure the success of politicians and students by using indices more appropriate to the beginning of the industrial revolution? If so, then we should continue down the road of standardizing the education of our children into simplistic sound bites, of cutting funding for public education based upon simplistic generic formulas, and settle for—and agree to—a change from the lofty goals of what we want students to know in order to be successful in the 21st century. If not, then we need to expect more, not only of our students but of ourselves, our political leaders and our business CEO’s, by speaking up and demanding that answers to questions and problems be developed with reflection, creativity, collaboration, and subject to an open and honest review to ensure they are the best solutions available.
