<p>*......Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm and 12 other governors Sunday announced a plan in Washington, D.C., calling for more rigorous high school courses and diploma requirements for students. </p>
<p>The plan is aimed at better preparing students for success in the workplace, said Liz Boyd, Granholm's spokeswoman. </p>
<p>"Essentially what you're hearing is a renewed commitment of what we need to do to prepare students for jobs in the 21st century," Boyd said. </p>
<p>The agreement requires: </p>
<p>** High school standards and tests be aligned with the skills required in college and the workplace. </p>
<p> All students take a test of their readiness for college or work. </p>
<p> All students take a core curriculum that prepares them for college or work. </p>
<p>Laudable goals, but imposing more testing requirements without changing teaching in the classroom would be pointless. It will take a while to re-do curricula and reeducate the educators (how many English teachers could teach grammar and composition, for example?). There is certainly room to raise expectations and make the work more rigorous. Personally, I don't think this initiative will get far in the current economic climate.</p>
<p>Sounds like more of what we already have in place in Texas. Sounds good on the surface, is a bureaucratic nightmare and eventually becomes a case of the tail wagging the dog. If I sound jaded, I am. When bureaucrats get involved, the kids just seem to lose. The problem is that step #3 exists in direct conflict with step #1 because they will adjust the curriculum not to prepare the students for college or work, but to prepare them for the test, because their job security will inevitably be linked to it.</p>
<p>I read about this with interest this morning b/c my state (Louisiana) is one of the 12. I cringed reading it for many reasons. Sounds like NCLB, II. When will they understand that not every student needs a college prep curriculum? and not every student tests well?</p>
<p>Governor Granholm's statements are very nice - maybe she can support her own sentiments by not cutting public school funding in her own state of Michigan. Additionally, they entice kids to take their meaningless MEAP test by promising college money and then threaten to eliminate the college money when they get to college age. The claim is that the state is short of funds, but what did they do with the extra money they had when they were running a surplus? Did they save any for the inevitable "rainy day"? No, they spent it.</p>