Politics

---

American public schools are facing an academic crisis that began in the 1960s. As a result, during the 1980s, many new educational reforms were introduced. However, none of these reforms were as revolutionary as outcome-based education. It was promoted as the “quick fix” of all America’s educational problems. Since educators were being held accountable for the educational crisis by taxpayers, they had to find a solution to the ills that inhabited our public education systems. Outcome-based education was apparently the solution. This new approach to education would be a drastic change to the format normally used in our educational process. Basically, outcome-based education would change the primary focus of the learning process. William Spady, the major promoter of OBE, suggested three goals to follow in creating this new curriculum. He believed that all students could learn, but the learning would not necessarily be the same day and time. Mr. Spady also believed that once a student was successful in one area he would automatically achieve success in another area. Ultimately, he believed that the school should control all the conditions of success by creating the right learning environment. This would be accomplished by fitting the school to each student’s learning style. (4) Therefore, by meeting all of Mr. Spady’s goals, the crisis in America’s schools should be eliminated. Of course, time has proven him wrong.

What is outcome-based education (OBE)? The goal of outcome-based education is to replace traditional academic, content-oriented instruction with the assessment of specified outcomes that basically limits the level of knowledge obtainable by individual students. These outcomes are mandated, affective standards which emphasize emotions and attitudes. (1) The classroom teacher will become the student’s coach. Each student should strive to meet pre-determined outcomes. OBE will focus on the future instead of the past. Testing will be criterion-based instead of comparing students’ abilities with each other. Mastery of each outcome is mandatory. (4)

OBE advocates have stressed the centralized control of education. Prime supporters of this new educational movement are the Democratic Party and the National Education Association. Since schools are accountable to society, they should accommodate society by teaching what society needs. Some examples of successful programs are in Japan, France, and Germany. Also, OBE advocates believe that students should be socialized in diverse institutions which are multiracial and tolerant to all people in society. Therefore, our society has been indoctrinated into being global-minded instead of being concerned with ones own nation. (1)

Opponents to OBE are religious and political conservatives. All Americans accept that the major values of our country are freedom and diversity. However, the attempt by advocates of OBE to homogenize the education and beliefs of all students is totally unacceptable. Therefore, their actions speak louder than their words. They want diversity, but they are endeavoring to place all students into one collective group. Also, the emotional training that they recommend actually usurps traditional moral authority from parents and churches. But, probably the most disturbing aspect of OBE is the influx of eastern religions into our public school systems at the same time that Christianity is forbidden. Get the picture! (1)

One final problem with outcome-based education is the provision for centralized child welfare services with logistical assistance from state child welfare services. Apparently, an underlying motive behind using OBE in public schools is to gain total control of our children. If the state or one of its representatives even alleges that parents are abusing their children in some manner, social workers can remove the child from their home without a hearing or legal recourse. Do these tactics bring back memories of Stalin and Hitler? They chose to remove children from their parents and to indoctrinate the children to the politically correct ideology of that day. (1)

Thousands of parents have angrily objected to the premises of outcome-based education. Deceptive language has been used that does not explain the concepts of OBE clearly. For example, “new basics” has promoted the teaching of attitudes and outcomes instead of the traditional academics of reading, writing, and arithmetic. Also, the new terms of “higher order thinking skills” or “critical thinking” basically pertain to questioning traditional moral values of parents and religious institutions. Although the success of all students has been stated as the main objective of OBE, the proponents have failed to explain their true meaning of “success.” To them, “success” has evolved to mean “less than excellence, mediocrity.” (2)

Students have become guinea pigs in outcome-based education’s social experiment. There has been no reliable proof that OBE works. But, many state school systems have forced schools and teachers to adopt it in their curriculums and lesson plans respectively. In the 1970s, the Chicago Experiment led by Benjamin Bloom promoted a curriculum similar to OBE. These ideas for education were eliminated in 1982 because they were viewed as a failure. However, Mr. Bloom will be remembered for his statement concerning the purpose of education. He said that “the purpose of education is to change the thoughts, feelings, and actions of students.” (2)

Outcome-based education has dumbed-down and stifled individual achievement. Each class has mandated levels of mastery that all students can meet easily. Challenged students are not challenged. Instead, they are not expected to go any further academically than the lowest intellectual student. Cooperative learning has been used to group students in politically correct groups, such as by race, ethnicity, gender, or class. Many times group grades have replaced individual grades. Competition and all measurable criteria must be eliminated, too. Groups may not be permitted to move to another level until all students in the group have mastered the material. According to Robert Slavin, a cooperative learning researcher, “If some students take much longer than others to learn a particular objective, then…either corrective instruction must be given outside of regular class time, or students who achieve mastery early on will have to waste considerable amounts of time waiting for their classmates to catch up.” (2) As a result, faster students have stopped working to their potential because the incentive and motivation is no longer there. Mediocrity, as stated earlier, has replaced the desire to excel. Obviously, all students are destined to lose in this type of educational learning situation.

The outcome-based education system has changed the academic approach used formerly by the traditional system. Objective, factual material has been replaced with subjective, attitudinal material. According to Bill Spady, “The traditional subject-based curriculum disappears from OBE.” The OBE report card would look different, also. On it, grades would be replaced with check marks. Also, the study of individual subjects would be replaced with refocusing on general skills, attitudes, and behaviors. The assessed outcomes are filled with training for world citizenship, population control, radical environmentalism, and government solutions for every problem. Thus, politically correct, government ideals are stressed. (2)

The outcomes of OBE are concerned with values, attitudes, and opinions. Emotions and feelings have replaced knowledge and skills. Students are required to meet objectives that relate to self-esteem, ethical judgment, and adaptability to change. Also, students are required to meet behavior-change goals and mandated government attitudes. Therefore, students are being trained to conform to the social norms mandated by state-supported schools. However, schools that use outcome-based educational strategies have dropped the former mission of providing an academic education. Of course, these new strategies have caused major concern to parents. They are concerned about the methods that might be used to correct incorrect behaviors. Many of these new change procedures are psychotherapeutic. Teachers who are not licensed psychologists have introduced their students to individual and group therapy. In fact, some states have provided civil and criminal immunity to their teachers. This freedom to analyze and assess our children has been the major area of concern and confusion for many parents. (2)

There are four steps used in the instructional preparation for OBE. First, deciding on the outcomes is very important. According to Spady and Marshall, “Outcomes are clear, observable demonstrations of student learning that occur after a significant set of learning experiences….Typically, these demonstrations , performances, reflect three things: (what the students knows; what the students can actually do with what he or she knows; and the student’s confidence and motivation in carrying out the demonstration. A well-defined outcome will have clearly defined content or concepts and be demonstrated through a well-defined process beginning with a directive or request such as ‘explain,’ ‘organize,’ or ‘produce.’” Content, context, and competence are the three dimensions to be used in the development of the outcomes. Second, benchmarks are important in the development of the instructional plan, also. Benchmarks are skills that must be demonstrated. Third, deciding on contents and teaching strategies is an area of concern. The teacher must decide what experiences the students will need to master. Finally, forms of assessment must be selected. According to Willis and Kissane (1995), two techniques for student assessment are standard-referenced assessment (similar to criterion-referenced assessment, but with a clearer description of expected performance), and student portfolios which document the student’s progress. A major concern with assessment is deciding when to assess each student and deciding the number of attempts that each student should be given to demonstrate his/her abilities. However, outcome-based education does promise to help students achieve at much higher levels of mastery. But, with its deterrence from traditional, objective education, it is very doubtful that mastery levels would exceed the level of learning gained from cognitive, factual knowledge. (3)

Outcome-based education has become a new paradigm for learning. Four specific questions should be considered as a new curriculum is being developed. They are: “What do you want the students to learn? Why do you want them to learn it? How can you best help students learn it? How will you know what they have learned?” Therefore, instructional planning for OBE has reversed the process normally used for traditional academic planning. All expected outcomes are chosen first. Then any support materials, such as curriculum materials, instructional materials, and assessment materials, are selected last. Thus, decisions that are related to curriculum and teaching are made in relationship to the expected outcome. (3)

According to J.M. Towers (1996), there are four necessary points to be considered in relationship to the operation of OBE:

1. The material that is to be learned must be clearly identified.

2. A student must demonstrate achievement.

3. Different strategies must be used in order to properly assess the student.

4. Each student must be given enough time in order to reach his maximum potential.

Without these stated points, students would not be able to take full advantage of the outcome-based education problem. It appears on the surface to be a great way for a student to reach his potential. However, the success of the student depends on the material that the educator chooses for him to learn. Also, the proper strategies must be used or the student might not meet his achievement level. Of course, how much time is enough? (3)

Ultimately, federal and state governments have usurped the control of local authorities. As a result, state and federal educational leaders have written the behavioral outcomes and developed the curriculums that are being used. They have also trained the teachers and assessed the level of performance of the students. Therefore, since the state departments of education set the goals to be implemented, the local districts have been given permission to decide the steps used to comply with state-mandated criteria. Also, teachers have been given directives not to teach traditional academics. If they do, teachers would be fired from their jobs. Then state governments would be given the authority to take control of those schools. Evidently, Neo-Nazism has replaced our blood-bought, democratic freedoms with state-supported, humanistic philosophies. (2)


References


1. “Outcome-based Education” Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. 17 May 2005.

2. Schlafly, Phyllis. “What’s Wrong with Outcome-Based Education?” Eagle Forum. 18 May 2005.

3. Acharya, Chandrama. “Outcome-based Education (OBE): A New Paradigm for Learning” Center for Development of Teaching. 19 May 2005.

4. Closson, Don. “Outcome Based Education” Probe Ministries. 21 May 2005.

---

PLEASE ENCOURAGE AUTHOR BELOW LEAVE COMMENT ON ARTICLE