Caledonia Argus

Profile of Learning is on its way out

Posted: 1/14/03

by T.W. Budig
ECM capitol reporter

A veteran teacher once said itís time to retire when you start to see things twice.

This pithy observation was made in reference to educational initiatives which often seem as faddish as go-go boots and about as durable.

Currently the latest educational initiative, the Profile of Learning, stands in danger of being junked or at least morphed into something more political palatable.

Just last week, anti-Profile activists were at the Capitol and in a celebratory mood. Odds seem favorable for both the House and Senate to pass a Profile repeal and Gov. Pawlenty seems willing to sign.

Two questions emerge out of all of this: what went wrong with the Profile and what standards will replace the ìshow-me-what-you-knowî standards of the Profile.

As for the first, Judy Schaubach, president of Education Minnesota, the 70,000-strong teachers union, pointed to a number of failings with implementing the Profile.

For one thing, she explained, the Profile was suppose to be phased and instead was suddenly dropped on the school districts.

Because school districts werenít ready, many teachers tried enmeshing Profile packages from Children, Families, and Learning with their own lesson plans.

This was tough to do.

Also, Minnesota has a tradition of local control, she noted. Top down initiatives meet with resistance.

All in all, the convulsive history of educational reform has produced a wariness in the classroom, Schaubach indicated.

ìThis is a way teachers get very skeptical about change,î Schaubach said, adding the best approach to the Profile is to keep the good, toss the unworkable.

(Teachers are divided over the Profile, Schaubach noted).

But assuming the Profile is repealed, how substantial will it be?

Sen. LeRoy Stumpf, DFL-Thief Rivers Falls, believes the repeal will be more cosmetic than sweeping.

Stumpf, chairman of the Senate E-12 budget division, predicts the name ìProfile of Learningî will be swept by lawmakers into the educational collective unconscious, holding ground for such concepts as open schools, behavioral learning, and most regrettably, the Dewey Decimal System.

It will be hard simply to toss the current standards out, said Stumpf. Rather, he sees lawmakers granting the commissioner of Children, Families and Learning broad rulemaking powers and a middle ground being established.

Then thereís the matter federal standards and the hundreds of millions of dollars adherence or rejection of the standards could gain or lose, Stumpf noted.

Sen. Michele Bachmann, R-Stillwater, wants federal standards kept out of Minnesota standards. Bachmann, one of the Senateís most passionate opponents of the Profile, argues federal standards reflect leftwing political correctness.

We want academic standards, not political, Bachmann argues.

A current House Profile repeal bill would charge a task force to work with the Children, Families and Learning commissioner to draw up new standards and report back to the Legislature by mid-April.

Schaubach, for one, worries standards could emerge that are too narrow. She argues for standards rich in the arts and also one that includes career education.

Others argue for standards drawn from core academics.

So what comes after the Profile is as least as important a debate as the debate to repeal.

Almost certainly, when children left grammar school 400 years ago ó when Shakespeare left school ó they likely could write at a higher degree of proficiency than children leaving grammar school today.

Then again, there was just so much known about the ether back then and everyone knew the best defense against plague was to place a cone containing spices over your nose.

Things are a bit more complicated today.

If the Profile of Learning has shown anything, itís that top-down initiatives tends to be cumbersome ó no mystery. They also can be financially crippling, as the federal governmentís partial funding of special education has proven.

Perhaps the boldest educational initiative is to let local school districts develop their own standards and the educational means to achieve them.

In an ideal world, said Bachmann, that is what should happen. But itís politically unrealistic, she notes.

The senatorís right. Which is probably too bad.

Top of Page