The newspaper I grew up reading is hostile to my profession of teaching. In an editorial today about the new state standards, The Daily Oklahoman urges lawmakers to reject them for revision based on inexpert opinion and little research.
Let me be up front and say that I served on the committee that wrote the English standards. I have taught for eleven years in seventh through twelfth grades. I have my master’s degree in English, and I’m a past president of the Oklahoma Council of Teachers of English. As an Oklahoma Writing Project teacher consultant, I’ve presented numerous workshops to teachers around the state.
Now, as to The Oklahoman’s critique of the standards:
Jenni White, a critic of public education, admits that has not read the new English standards. She has no authority on this issue. Her organization, ROPE, feels public education is not worth restoring. White’s children do not attend a public school. She has no horse in this race. Why listen to her?
Tara Huddleston, a teacher worried about the standards’ lack of substance, is not clear in what needs to be improved. What is so vague about the English standards?
As to the lack of exemplars which Huddleston claims are needed, they are not standards. Standards are clear learning targets. Exemplars are student samples that demonstrate levels of mastery of the standards. Oklahoma has not yet implemented the new English standards, so how can we have authentic student samples of work based on standards that have not yet been passed, let alone implemented? The Common Core State Standards included exemplars, but our state kicked out Common Core. Teacher can locate exemplars because they are professionals. If it is deemed important enough, I’m sure the State Department of Education could eventually release a supplemental document of exemplars, but the standards themselves should still be passed.
Dr. Stotsky, a critic of Oklahoma’s English standards who wanted to be paid to write our standards for us, is from Arkansas. Why are we listening to an out-of-state expert when there are already plenty of organizations and individuals supporting the new Oklahoma standards? The Oklahoma Council of Teachers of English and the Oklahoma Writing Projects are just two of dozens of organizations that support the new standards.
There are eight main English language arts standards with a reading and writing strand within each standard. The eighth standard is independent reading and writing, a lofty idea that I admit is not testable. But what is worthy and important is not always testable. Developing students into lifelong readers and writers can only create a better Oklahoma.
The exact language of the reading strand of standard 8 is “Students will select appropriate (emphasis added) texts for specific purposes and read independently for extended periods of time.” This language is the same for grades 5-12. Dr. Stotsky claims there is “nothing to suggest an increasing level of reading difficulty” in this standard, but isn’t an “appropriate” text (book) different for a fifth grader than a senior in high school?
Additionally, on page 12 of the final draft of the standards, it is explicitly stated that English language arts are recursive and thus will be repeatedly taught, grade after grade, with the idea that “the skills are repeated with an implied expectation that they are attributed to increasingly more complex (emphasis added) texts.” Therefore, reading material will become more challenging as students progress through school, according to Oklahoma’s new standards.
Even so, if one of my on-level sophomore students wants to read a book written at a fifth grade reading level (Hatchet by Gary Paulsen, a book that I did not read until I was a senior in high school), I am not going to discourage this young man. Sometimes readers need a challenge, but sometimes they just want to get lost in a story, a fine step in becoming a lifelong reader.
The Oklahoma English language arts standards are ready for the classroom. Our legislature should pass them, plain and simple.