The Late Great United States of America

Opinion

By David Hinz


In order for Democracy, or in the case of the United States of America, a Representative Republic to succeed you need an educated and informed electorate. We can no longer make that claim in this nation. Fifty years of liberal "outcome-based" education have so dumbed down the electorate, as to make issues almost entirely moot -- while elevating appearance over substance. The electorate is no longer interested in substance.

This election, like so many in recent years will not be won in reasoned debate, but by feel-good rhetoric on 30-second soundbites -- cast during American Idol and re-runs of Friends. It will not be won by voters contrasting the stands taken by each candidate on issues affecting the nation, but instead, by the charisma and style with which the candidate delivers his generalizations and platitudes -- saying nothing with the greatest charm.

For those unfamiliar with the concept of outcome-based education, it can be best summed up by the following two quotes. First, from Wikipedia:

Outcome-based education (OBE) is a recurring education reform model. It is a student-centered learning philosophy that focuses on empirically measuring student performance, which are called outcomes. OBE contrasts with traditional education, which primarily focuses on the resources that are available to the student, which are called inputs. Unlike many pedagogical models, such as project-based learning or whole language reading, OBE does not specify or require any particular style of teaching or learning. Instead, it requires that students demonstrate that they have learned the required skills and content.

Each independent education agency specifies its own outcomes and its own methods of measuring student achievement according to those outcomes. The results of these measurements can be used for different purposes. For example, one agency may use the information to determine how well the overall education system is performing, and another may use its assessments to determine whether an individual student has learned required material.

According to that Wikipedia article, outcome-based education simply frees up educators from examination from authorities to prove that students have achieved according to specified expectations. Students learn at their own levels, and are graded according to their own expectations. This lowering of individual expectations is what is wrong with the concept, and what has resulted in the dumbing down of education in the United States.

The May 1993 Phyllis Schlafly Report covers this problem well:

OBE advocates continually use double-entendre expressions that parents assume mean one thing but really mean something different in the OBE context. When they talk about "new basics," for example, they are not talking about academics such as reading, writing and arithmetic, but OBE attitudes and outcomes. When they talk about "higher order thinking skills" or "critical thinking," they mean a relativistic process of questioning traditional moral values.

The following statement from OBE literature is typical: "OBE schools are expected to become `success based' rather than `selection oriented' by establishing the instructional management procedures and delivery conditions which enable all students to learn and demonstrate those skills necessary for continued success." OBE salespersons don't tell parents that "success" for all children means "success" in demonstrating only the dumbed-down outcomes that the slowest learners in the class can attain. OBE means "success" in mediocrity rather than excellence.

That report goes on to demonstrate the failures of outcome-based education before, only under another guise:

The best test of an OBE-type system was Chicago's experiment in the 1970s with Professor Benjamin Bloom's Mastery Learning (ML), which is essentially the same as OBE. ML was a colossal failure and was abandoned in disgrace in 1982. The test scores proved to be appallingly low and the illiteracy rate became a national scandal. Bloom, the father of ML, is well known for his statement that "the purpose of education is to change the thoughts, feelings and actions of students." (All Our Children Learning, page 180.)

Dr. Bill Spady, sociologist and director of the International Center on Outcome-Based Restructuring, defined the connection between OBE and Mastery Learning in an article entitled "On Outcome Based Education: A Conversation with Bill Spady" (Educational Leadership, Dec. 1992-Jan. 1993): "In January of 1980 we convened a meeting of 42 people to form the Network for Outcome-Based Schools. Most of the people who were there — Jim Block, John Champlin — had a strong background in Mastery Learning, since it was what OBE was called at the time. But I pleaded with the group not to use the name `mastery learning' in the network's new name because the word `mastery' had already been destroyed through poor implementation."

So, the people who are pushing for outcome-based education today, know it has been a dismal failure in the past, and yet push for its implementation. Their cowardice in renaming it to cover past failures speaks volumes about their motives.

This stampede away from excellence has resulted in not one, but several generations of voters who cannot name their Congressional Representative, a single Supreme Court Justice, or even the candidate running for president from "the other" party. The vast majority of the American electorate can no longer differentiate between candidates on issues -- they know nothing about the issues. They identify with "Party" knowing only that the Republican Party is the party of the rich and the Democrats are for the little guy. Their vacuous understanding of principles and founding philosophies demonstrates the absolute abdication of education today.

Our dumbed down electorate knows nothing about Kelo v New London, or why it has stripped them of personal freedoms. A kilo to them is a measurement of their favorite recreational drug -- something that affects them on a personal level -- not an infringement on the US Constitution. As long as Surviver has a new and entertaining season, all is well with the world.

The electorate cares nothing about Comprehensive Campaign Finance Reform. They have been taught that all politicians are corrupt, and that it is money in politics that causes that corruption -- not to be confused with morality and integrity of the people elected to office -- and so they are fine with that. They understand nothing about the further erosion of the Bill of Rights that foolish Rightwing pundits clamor about when discussing the issue -- if they even hear about the issue at all. If The Daily Show fails to mention it, it will go unnoticed anyway.

It will not be the candidate with the most workable answers who will be elected president in 2008, but the candidate who is packaged in the most attractive wrapper. New and Improved is a Madison Avenue slogan for selling soap, and it has worked for generations in persuading housewives to buy their product.

Unfortunately, the buying public has been so dumbed down that it is unable to differentiate between empty campaign rhetoric and toilet bowl cleanser. This is a pity, because after the next election, we are going to need that toilet bowl cleanser.