August 16, 2011: Rigor and individualism: Finding the path to academic success

Sometimes an issue resides at such an underlying, fundamental level that it manages to elude proper scrutiny. This is the case with the ubiquitous drive towards higher standards in our public schools, best encapsulated in the axiom, "If you present students with higher standards, they will rise to the challenge."

I personally adhere to this belief, and at the same time I don't feel it contradictory to critically explore whether there are limitations to it. Take for starters that I believe with greater confidence that "lower expectations produce lower results," which is to say that I uphold different principles with different levels of certitude.

I also believe the relationship between rigor and achievement has yet to be thoroughly delineated, and remains something of an assumption. For example, I believe the cause and effect to be true at a general level, but what percentage of successful students constitutes a "general level"? And is that general level acceptable? How is a concept such as rigor quantified anyway?

Ultimately, however, the conjectures above are mere appetizers to the more fundamental and provocative question of how the concept of rigor fits into modern American cultural values, of which our public schools are in many ways a perfect reflection.

There is no value that unites Americans more than individualism. Individualism is so hardwired into soul of our nation that the mere utterance of the word can at once evoke a hippie from Berkeley as easily as a rancher from Texas, or Howard Stern as easily as Rush Limbaugh. Individualism means that we defend to the death both the worth and the rights of individuals. Within this frame of reference, our public schools are American to the core.

Consider first the two bedrocks of American teacher education: multiple intelligences and learning styles. The former refers to the existence of seven different kinds of cognitive abilities, suggesting that every person is "intelligent" in some way whether mathematically, musically, or interpersonally, for example. The latter defines all of us as either visual, auditory, or tactile learners.

In either case, as teachers we are expected to tailor our instructional approach to the maximum degree possible to the learning profile of each individual student. More recently, popular educational experts have been consistently exhorting teachers to select curriculum in every possible context that is "relevant" and "engaging."

That such individualist approaches are written into the DNA of our schools is something of which we should all be proud. Public education is among the most noble of American endeavors precisely because it is an expression of our common aspiration and will to mold all children into productive, lifelong learners, no matter what their background, circumstance, or ability level.

At the same time, I think it is valid to consider how rigor and high standards fit into this model we have built. I find myself wondering at times whether our well-intentioned efforts to tailor our educational approach to each student's strengths and interests is the equivalent of seeking the path of least possible resistance to short-term learning. And if this is so, in what ways does rigor fit into the equation? Is this the kind of educational culture within which we can expect students to rise to academic challenges?

Questions like these about culture don't lend themselves to solutions. Instead, cultures evolve -- and evolve slowly. In a seeming paradox, however, we can also observe that cultures change constantly. And they change due to the thoughts, actions, attitudes and interactions of people. In that sense, there is a vast and largely unexplored space within which principals, teachers, parents and students should be able to engage in conversation about meaningful change.

To me, an obvious first step is for teachers and parents to share a common philosophy about grading. If students are truly to be challenged, then there shouldn't be a sense of entitlement to receiving high grades easily. Secondly, we need to give each other the permission to thoughtfully push students outside their comfort zones, even if it means experiencing frustration.

Where parents and students have already experienced enough frustration in the system as it is, I urge principals, teachers and parents to consciously and explicitly strive to respect each other's authority. This is true when things are going well, but especially so when they are not. Admittedly, respect for authority is not necessarily at the top of the list of American cultural values, but chances for any child's success in school are diminished when he or she learns to divide and conquer.

I debated with myself about the timing of this piece. After all, the topic of classroom rigor doesn't generate a vibe that corresponds well with the hope and anticipation that infuses the start of a new school year. On the other hand, what could be more exciting and meaningful than actively designing a better path forward for our children's lasting academic success?