What Came First?

What came first, the chicken or the egg? What came first, children actually being allowed to learn or Pacing Guides and Benchmarks? Education never ceases to amaze me. What happened to teaching a skill to mastery? Was it taking children too long to process information? I see it on a daily basis, especially in math. Introduce a new concept day one the last ten minutes of class, assign homework for that skill just introduced, spend maybe an hour on it the next day and test on day three. Especially for our children with learning problems, their little heads are spinning. When the test is given, it is a published test that covers the range of the skill, easy to most difficult, and maybe three kids pass the test. Yet, what do we do on day four? Go on to the next skill. It seems so ludicrous to me. It happens day in and day out. We aren't teaching. We are introducing skills and exposing our students to grade level standards. There is no time for processing the information and practice. Good Lord, forget about any review or spiraling to keep that skill in their minute memories. I have tactfully suggested this to a few teachers in the past. My answer has unanimously been, "We have to go with the Pacing Guide. Benchmark is next week." Benchmark often assesses skills that have not yet been taught. Everyone who works with the curriculum knows this. Yet, we continue to follow the Pacing Guide. I don't get it. This is how we will ensure every child will master grade level curriculum?