Here’s the context that had me thinking about this:
The AP US History battle is not over. Stanley Kurtz at the National Review has been reporting on the changes going on at the College Board, in which they have been creating a new set of learning objectives, and covered content, for the exam, with a decided leftward tilt, which have prompted substantial dissent. Recent reports had been that the College Board had conceded the point, and made the curriculum even-handed, but a post from Monday says this, well, window-dressing, basically.
Now, for the first time, AP European history, and soon AP U.S. Government and Politics, AP World history, and every other AP course will be governed by a lengthy and controlling curricular framework issued by the College Board, with revised textbooks and teacher-training materials to match. Before the College Board decided to issue detailed curricula for all of its courses, its de facto monopoly over AP testing didn’t much matter. Now, by moving to take substantial control over the content of all AP courses, the College Board is effectively putting a national curriculum in place. That curriculum leans left.
The APUSH changes announced this summer do little to alter that fact. I’ve argued (here and here) that the APUSH revisions amount largely to cutting the most controversial statements, while retaining the fundamental leftist thrust of the guidelines.
Paul Mirengoff at the Powerlineblog, sheds more light on the situation, in the form of a letter from a reader who was involved in teaching and grading AP courses/exams:
[The College Board] makes money by having students take exams. It is a rather corrupt bargain. School administrators make their schools look good by claiming “X % of our students take AP exams.” [The College Board] makes money by having more students take exams. Taxpayers foot the bill.
Thus a huge number of students take the exams without any reasonable chance of passing. I would say that 75% of students in past years should never have taken the US History exam. But that’s not good for business.
Over the past few years, [The College Board] has subtly pressured graders to increase student scores. This year the pressure is no longer subtle. Graders have been told to “give students the benefit of the doubt” and “set the bar very low.” (Those are actual quotes.)
But that’s not all. The whole structure of the exam’s scoring has been changed specifically, I believe, to increase scores. The old exam, for all its flaws (and NAS notwithstanding, there was always a lot of political bias toward the left) tested content and it was surprisingly rigorous by today’s standards of education. That’s why so few actually passed the exam. . . .
In short, being factually correct, understanding the context of the documents, etc., isn’t being graded (though some of us are violating that injunction). The exam has gone from a history exam to an exam that tests pedagogy, from “does this student know something about U.S. history?” to “does this student know how to take a test?”
In light of this, is continuing to try to reform the AP system really the right thing to do?
Why not, instead, try to break the monopoly?
How?
Three choices (choose one or all):
1. Develop competitor exams,
2. Develop online module-based learning, and
3. Develop dual-enrollment programs.
None of these are easy. All of these require political action at the local level, demanding changes from school boards (who are likely perfectly happy with the situation, especially because unions would balk at anything that removes a student from a classroom) as well as at the state level, depending on the state.
What would a competitor exam look like? It’d be challenging to implement, because you’d need buy-in from universities — perhaps someplace like Hillsdale could take the lead with an exam, with instructional materials. Could they offer transferable credit for the exam? I don’t know. And who would be the customers? Individual students, or whole classrooms at “rebellious” schools?
What would online learning look like? Again, some university would have to create the system, offer transferable credit, and would have to do so at a price that’s competitive with the $100 or so for taking an AP test. What’s the appeal? Moving away from assessment based on a single test. Shortly after I finished my actuarial exams, the Society of Actuaries moved to an online module system for some of its exams. Rather than passing a “course” (as they call them) by means of a single 4 or 6 hour exam, for some topics, anyway, one now works through instructional material on- and offline, with multiple assessments throughout the course, as well as a final assessment. Now, I don’t know how this works in practice, but the SOA seems to think it’s a better approach for the topics they’ve converted to this method. In the high school context, of course, no one wants to do extra work, but this could be designed for a classroom setting.
And what would dual-enrollment programs look like? This is by far my preferred choice. My high school district is implementing a dual-enrollment program, in partnership with the local community college, and alongside other school districts in the community college’s attendance area, but unfortunately, they’ve chosen a disappointing set of classes: two math and one science class for non-majors, a speech class, an art appreciation class. With respect to all of these, they’ve chosen classes which would count as electives/general education requirements only, and are not prerequisites for later study, so there’s little risk to the student if the rigor and instruction isn’t quite what it should be. I was unable to figure out what the final of the six pilot program classes, composition, was meant to be about — would this truly be a replacement for an AP English Composition class + exam, and produce the equivalent transferable credit?
A well-designed dual-enrollment program ought to take every subject for which there is an AP level class, and replace it with a dual-enrollment offering, in which the high school teacher is sufficiently qualified to teach the same curriculum, and evaluate the students with the same metrics, as their counterparts at the local community college or other sponsoring institution. AP history – replaced! AP calculus – gone! AP composition, biology, etc. – all transformed into dual-enrollment classes of sufficient rigor to truly transfer to any institution and prepare the student for higher-level work.
Now, I fully expect that the immediate reaction of the administration would be: why? Why not keep the exams? Setting up dual enrollment would be more work. But it would benefit the students. As it is, they study furiously for an exam in May, with lots of “teaching to the test” and as much learning about the particular nature of that test as the subject itself. Then they’re rewarded more for their ability to test-take in high-stakes circumstances than they are for their subject knowledge. (And, yes, I’m one of those who’s immensely skilled at test-taking, and it’s carried me pretty far.) Then, after the exam is over, they goof off until the end of the year, because the exams occur in the first two weeks of May. And universities are skeptical enough of the results that there’s no consistency (other than state mandates such as Illinois) in what result is required to transfer, and whether the class/exam is truly sufficient to allow the advanced placement its name promises. In reading the various articles about AP I’ve read plenty of comments about kids who took AP math/science exams but were not truly prepared, and struggled and/or failed at the next level class.
Having said all this, yes, I ought to reach out to my local school board and prod them to take that next step. Will I? Well, let’s see. . .
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In