The Myth of
Equal Content
Uniform assessment will only improve ducation if we ensure quitable access to learning opportunities.
William H. Schmidt
and Leland S. Cogan
In the United States, we have long regarded public schools as the great equalizer, providing all students with access to the same high-quality education regardless
of their ethnicity, family background, or
socioeconomic status. The ideal is that
any student willing to work hard and
take advantage of the opportunities
schooling provides can go as far as his
or her abilities allow.
Indeed, U.S. society delights in the
stories of those who triumph over
adversity through their own talent and
effort. Such stories affirm the myth of
American individualism. Correspondingly, we view failure as the result of a
lack of effort, talent, motivation, application, or perseverance. In the case of
schooling, we assume that unequal
achievement outcomes are not the result
of unequal access to education opportunities, but rather the result of an
unequal distribution of individual abilities and ambition.
Is this assumption justified? Or is it
simply a satisfying myth that eases the
national conscience?
Unequal Access to Content . . .
The U.S. education system is, in fact,
not one system but at least 50 different
state systems, each with its own set of
standards establishing what students
should learn and what teachers should
teach. This every-state-for-itself
approach leads to far too many topics
being packed into standards, as illustrated by the curriculum standards from
two U.S. districts that participated in
the 1999 Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). In
one district, the curriculum calls for
students to be introduced to concepts of
perimeter, area, and volume in 4th
grade as one topic among 14 that are to
be taught that year. This district then
