GTA IV

It's extremely rare that I pre-order a game. In fact, I think the last game I pre-ordered was GTA IV. And before that, Street Fighter 2 for the SNES (yes, I'm dating myself). I pre-ordered GTA IV knowing that it would be worth my money. After scouring online for some sort of bonus that didn't involve gamerpics, I found that amazon.com was offering a GTA IV license plate with the pre-order of the Special Edition. I could care less about the art book, but the lockbox and duffle bag, oddly, called out to the organization-freak in me.

I've always had good experiences with amazon.com. Even when I've chosen Super-Saver shipping in the past, I've received my orders within a few days. I ordered a few extra books with GTA IV, including Grand Theft Childhood and Howard Zinn's History of American Empire. The last two were shipped last Thursday, and I haven't received them yet. GTA IV was shipped Sunday, and the fact that the first shipment has taken over 3 business days makes me afraid that GTA IV won't arrive until this weekend. Yes, I could've done the smart thing and actually, y'know, paid for shipping, but I had such faith in amazon.com's free shipping!

Most people are going to be talking about GTA IV this week, and probably for months. I, alas, will be waiting. And with that, I leave you with some filler: the editorial I wrote for the school newspaper:

As I write this, we are a week away from STAR Testing. I wish, realizing that it isn’t likely, that Washington would be evaluated not only by its standardized test scores, but on how well it comprehensively facilitates students in achieving their potential.

Standardized tests seem to be a necessary evil. For national, statewide, and school district comparisons, purely quantitative (numerical) measures are the easiest way to judge schools’ academic achievement. The STAR Test is probably a better measure of economic status, familiarity with English, and test-taking skills than student achievement. The myriad qualitative (non-numerical) measures possible cannot be so easily scored and categorized. If standardized tests are the definition of student success, students’ whose strengths do NOT lie in test-taking should feel like they contribute nothing? I tell students that they are not their standardized test scores, and it’s a shame that some view Washington as its Annual Performance Index.

Similar problems arise when schools are compared against one another only in terms of academic rigor. My school is better than yours because it’s harder? Because it offers more A.P.’s? Because the average GPA is higher than yours? Or lower? The same problem arises here as it does from standardized tests. Students whose gifts do not lie in the traditional academic arena do have something to contribute to the school, even if such a narrow criterion doesn’t recognize them.

Other traditional evaluators include things like school spirit and athletics, both of which are also imperfect. Why is our school greatest? Because our blind faith in our school’s superiority is greater than anyone else’s? Because our students run faster or jump higher than theirs? School spirit and athletic competition tend to increase self-worth at the expense of others’. While these standards not inherently harmful, students whose leadership and athletic abilities are less than ideal don’t feel like they have anything to contribute.

I suggest an alternate method of evaluating Washington, one that I can’t rate. Instead, you will have to, as students, teachers, administrators, paraprofessionals, staff, parents, and counselors. For each student’s interests, abilities, preferences, and goals, how well does Washington help that student be the most s/he can?

One way to try to categorize and evaluate Washington’s success is this area is Howard Gardener’s Multiple Intelligences Theory, which states that people can be intelligent in different ways. Gardner argues that people can be smart in the following ways: verbal/linguistic, logical/mathematic, interpersonal, intrapersonal, spatial, musical, naturalistic, and bodily/kinesthetic. Unlike standardized tests which only reward the first two intelligences, the Multiple Intelligences model recognizes a diversity of gifts. Students are not simply smart and dumb. And instead of fuzzily saying that everyone has something to offer, it concretely categorizes student strengths. We can use the Multiple Intelligences model to see how well Washington helps students maximize their intelligences.

Intelligence	Explanation	At Washington
Verbal/linguistic	communicate and understand language	Most classes, especially English and Social Studies
Logical/mathematic	reason and process numbers	Most classes, especially Math and Sciences
Interpersonal	“read” others and participate fully in groups	Any social interaction, extracurricular clubs
Intrapersonal	“read” oneself	Any individual, introspective activity
Spatial	imagine objects and sense space	Visual arts, architectural design, etc.
Musical	understand, appreciate and create music	Choir, orchestra, band, dance
Naturalistic	relate to and understand the natural world	Biology, physiology, environmental science, etc.
Bodily/kinesthetic	move with dexterity and coordination	Gym class, organized sports, dance

Tragically, the classes most likely to be cut with the budget crisis are those that strengthen musical and spatial intelligence. From an equity standpoint, losing those classes means depriving musically and spatially intelligent students the resources needed to thrive.

There are a nearly infinite number of other ways to judge a school. How respectful and mature are students? How honest are they? How mature are they? How many discipline problems does the school have? How many students apply to attend the school? How many are turned away? How equitable are resources distributed? How are decisions made? How diverse is it, racially, ethnically, religiously, economically, etc.? And how well does that diversity function? All these criteria are rarely used, and in their place is a single battery of tests whose connection to the quality of education is tenuous.