Goals 2000 Language Arts Standards:

And We Thought the History Standards Were Bad!

By: Marda Kirkwood

The out–of–touch educational establishment has given us a set of Language Arts (English) Standards that make the universally condemned history standards look acceptable by comparison. (For those new to the issues, the history standards were so multi–cultural, anti–American, and lacking in academic value, that the US Senate condemned them 99 to 1, the dissenting vote being a Louisiana senator who did not consider the resolution strong enough.) Language Arts Standards is a 132–page document full of fuzzy generalizations and educrat jargon that the New York Times characterized as "a fog of euphemism". It gives us such forgettable phrases as "writing process elements", "literary communities", and "nonprint texts". Even the US Department of Education has little positive to say about the standards. Michael Cohen, senior advisor to Secretary Richard Riley, said, " They don´t communicate clearly to the teachers or provide any suggestion to the parents about what students ought to learn." Is it unreasonable to expect that those whose business is to teach English would be able to communicate clearly? Apparently so.

What is missing from the standards? The important things are missing, like anything remotely prescriptive, such as "expected", "ought", or "should" or any mention of phonics, spelling, grammar, or punctuation. There was not even a recommended reading list.

The National Council of Teachers of English and the International Reading Association, who wrote the standards, also took tremendous (and predictable) license with definitions. Think you know what "text" means? This document´s definition includes printed texts, spoken language, graphics, and technological communications. You certainly know what Standard English is, right? Not unless you said it is "the language of wider communication…that is spoken and written by those groups with social, economic, and political power in the United States." In fact, I bet you thought that "reading" meant decoding the printed word. You poor narrow thinker! It takes in listening and viewing as well! I wonder if this definition will allow the statisticians to tell us that the new standards have reduced the illiteracy rate? After all, literacy has been redefined too.

"Being literate in contemporary society means being active, critical, and creative users not only of print and spoken language but also of the visual language of film and television, commercial and political advertising, photography, and more."

There is so much wrong with this document that it is hard to fit it all in here. Here is just a summary. The philosophy revealed in the standards is supportive of non-conventional spelling, bilingual education, and multiculturalism. Standard English, being the language of the oppressor, is not necessarily to be preferred over slang forms. That would imply that "other varieties of English are somehow incorrect or invalid", which is politically incorrect.

As satisfying as the condemnation of the history standards was for those of us concerned with academic rigor, the non-binding nature of the resolution made it ineffective in stopping them from being implemented. They are now in the hands of 32,000 teachers. The miserable Language Arts Standards are on the same track.

We are indebted to "The Education Reporter" for the summary below.

IRA/NCTE

Standards for the English Language Arts

1. Read a wide range of print and nonprint texts to build an understanding of texts, of themselves, and of the cultures of the United States and the world.
2. Read a wide range of literature from many periods in many genres to build an understanding of the many dimensions of human experience.
3. Apply a wide range of strategies to comprehend, interpret, evaluate, and appreciate texts.
4. Adjust their use of spoken, written, and visual language to communicate effectively with a variety of audiences and for different purposes.
5. Employ a wide range of strategies as they write and use different writing process elements appropriately to communicate with different audiences for a variety of purposes.
6. Apply knowledge of language structure, language conventions, media techniques, figurative language, and genre to create, critique, and discuss print and nonprint texts.
7. Conduct research on issues and interests by generating ideas and questions and by posing problems.
8. Use a variety of technological and informational resources to gather and synthesize information to create and communicate knowledge.
9. Develop an understanding and respect for diversity and language use, patterns, and dialects across cultures, ethnic groups, geographic regions, and social roles.
10. For students whose first language is not English, make use of their first language to develop competency in English language-arts and develop understanding across curriculum.
11. Participate as knowledgeable, reflective, creative, and critical members of a variety of literacy communities.
12. Use spoken, written, and visual language to accomplish their own purposes (learning, enjoyment, persuasion, and exchange of information).

Copies of Standards for the English Language Arts are available from the International Reading Association, (800) 336-7323

Return to CURE's home page.