Leaders of the “Pathways to Prosperity” project at Harvard University's Graduate School of Education are proposing a reorganization of middle school through high school education that would allow many students to prepare better for careers that do not require a 4 year college degree. (click here for the Education Week article on this) The authors of this paper believe that by attempting to prepare all students for 4 year colleges, our educational systems have failed vast numbers of students, who instead need preparation for careers requiring less than a bachelor's degree. What a surprise that top educators from one of the most prestigious Universities in our country would actually agree with many guidance counselors and experienced teachers who have pointed out that the present system is causing many of our students to drop out before they are prepared for a career of any kind!
Those who would condemn the Harvard proposal as an attempt at reviving the dreaded “tracking” of disadvantaged students should first review the credentials of the primary authors of this proposal. Robert B. Schwartz is a prominent champion of higher academic expectations for all students who said he began to doubt the wisdom of a 'college for all' approach to education. Ronald Ferguson, the director of Harvard's Achievement Gap initiative, is a national expert on improving learning opportunities for disadvantaged children.
According to the Harvard study, half of the new jobs created in the next ten years will require Associate degree training or less. Many of these jobs are expected to be solid, well paid jobs, but they won't be available to the students who have dropped out of school before obtaining a diploma.
Other “experts” on education reform such as Arne Duncan and Paul Pastorek have unfortunately decreed that all students need basically the same curriculum through high school in order to prepare all for college and careers. That curriculum turns out to be basically a fairly dry college prep program that contains little practical skills training but much of the pure academic math, English, science and foreign languages. These “experts” believe we should ignore pleas by many students who complain that such pure academic courses are boring, frustrating, and irrelevant to their career aspirations.
Maybe its OK to ignore student complaints about the alleged irrelevance of the curriculum since these kids are too young to know their own educational needs.
“Just complete the curriculum the experts have prescribed for you, then you can decide about going into technical, Associate degree or 4 year degree programs,” they knowingly advise.
Sounds great, but for thousands of students in Louisiana and many other states, this elitist plan results in disengagement, high stakes test failure and dropout. The problem in Louisiana is that we tend to flunk our or run off students who are turned off by pure academic requirements. Our message to them is "if you don't succeed in the college prep plan, we don't believe you deserve a high school degree." How do we explain to the thousands of dropouts that this was for their own good? The Harvard proposal points out that the design of most European schools provides numerous practical pathways to careers that appeal effectively to more students.
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Thursday, January 27, 2011
The Purpose of State School Takeover
Several newspaper stories have been written in recent days about the Red Tape Reduction Act for public schools. Click here to see the latest one. All of the news stories miss the real point of the legislation. The full title of this legislation was The Red Tape Reduction and Local Empowerment Waiver Program. This title was intentionally misleading. The law does not reduce red tape for local school systems. Instead it requires local schools that apply for the waiver to follow a complex set of directives and rules issued by the State Department of Education. A review of the details of the new law reveals that it only empowers the State Department of Education, not local school systems!
This law was intended primarily as a way of allowing local school systems to avoid state takeover of low performing schools. It turns out that the highly paid staff of the State Department of Education have no clue about what to do with low performing schools. Of the nine schools taken over and converted into charter schools in the Baton Rouge area in recent years, all now have lower average LEAP high stakes test scores than before takeover. Some have seen drastic declines in test scores. (Click here to see the Advocate story on this issue) I believe the State Superintendent does not want to take over more schools but he still wants to be able to dictate all sorts of “reforms” to local school systems. His reputation as a reform superintendent depends on constantly shifting the blame for low performance to local school officials.
It is obvious that the only purpose of the threat of state takeover of schools is to embarrass local school superintendents and school boards that happen to have schools serving high poverty communities. The theory is that the fear of public exposure of low performance will embarrass local school officials and light a fire under lazy teachers and administrators who have allowed this low performance.
How has this system worked for Louisiana? Overall there has been some improvement of test scores in many takeover schools. But since almost all public schools started implementing intense test preparation programs, scores on the LEAP have gone up in most schools, traditional and takeover. Does the improvement in LEAP scores mean that our students are better educated? Not according to Education Week Magazine which recently awarded Louisiana an “F” for student achievement as measured by the NAEP test. Some might say, "that's not fair, our students are being prepared for the LEAP not the NAEP!" Others would say that the NAEP measures the same learning. The point is the NAEP is the only way we have of comparing our students' achievement with that of other states. It also shows the pitfalls of teaching to the test.
Personally, I don't think that the editors of Education Week Magazine are such experts at grading the educational systems of the different states. A couple of years ago one of their statements on the issue of state ratings proposed that the optimum state graduation standards would require that all students be prepared for college as a requirement for graduation. That's what Louisiana has done. As a result Louisiana got high marks from Education Week for accountability and standards. Unfortunately there seemed to be no plan for the students who fail the college prep standards and usually end up dropping out.
The main thrust of accountability in Louisiana has been to increase the pressure on the teachers and administrators of low performing schools. At the end of this school year the State Superintendent and BESE will ratchet up the pressure on educators by implementation of the letter grade system for all schools. Any school with a school performance score of less than 65 will get an "F". BESE member and charter school advocate Chas Roemer who proposed this plan may not have realized that his grading system would result in most state takeover charter schools receiving a "D" or an "F".
The only important question is: Are our students better off after all this emphasis on LEAP testing? A quick look at the NAEP scores from 2003 to 2009 reveal almost no progress on the same subject matter tested by the LEAP. ACT scores are also stagnant. The dropout rate at our colleges is one of the worst in the nation. It does not look like college prep for all is doing the trick.
Its ironic that just as China is revamping its elementary-secondary school system to emulate the creativity and problem solving approach once used by U.S. schools, we are now changing schools to emulate their outdated system of testing and rote learning. That's the conclusion by Jonathan Plucker, an educational psychologist who recently returned from studying the educational system in Shanghai. Dr. Plucker is concerned that the current reforms of U.S. education are stifling the very creativity in teaching and learning that has made our educational system great.
This law was intended primarily as a way of allowing local school systems to avoid state takeover of low performing schools. It turns out that the highly paid staff of the State Department of Education have no clue about what to do with low performing schools. Of the nine schools taken over and converted into charter schools in the Baton Rouge area in recent years, all now have lower average LEAP high stakes test scores than before takeover. Some have seen drastic declines in test scores. (Click here to see the Advocate story on this issue) I believe the State Superintendent does not want to take over more schools but he still wants to be able to dictate all sorts of “reforms” to local school systems. His reputation as a reform superintendent depends on constantly shifting the blame for low performance to local school officials.
It is obvious that the only purpose of the threat of state takeover of schools is to embarrass local school superintendents and school boards that happen to have schools serving high poverty communities. The theory is that the fear of public exposure of low performance will embarrass local school officials and light a fire under lazy teachers and administrators who have allowed this low performance.
How has this system worked for Louisiana? Overall there has been some improvement of test scores in many takeover schools. But since almost all public schools started implementing intense test preparation programs, scores on the LEAP have gone up in most schools, traditional and takeover. Does the improvement in LEAP scores mean that our students are better educated? Not according to Education Week Magazine which recently awarded Louisiana an “F” for student achievement as measured by the NAEP test. Some might say, "that's not fair, our students are being prepared for the LEAP not the NAEP!" Others would say that the NAEP measures the same learning. The point is the NAEP is the only way we have of comparing our students' achievement with that of other states. It also shows the pitfalls of teaching to the test.
Personally, I don't think that the editors of Education Week Magazine are such experts at grading the educational systems of the different states. A couple of years ago one of their statements on the issue of state ratings proposed that the optimum state graduation standards would require that all students be prepared for college as a requirement for graduation. That's what Louisiana has done. As a result Louisiana got high marks from Education Week for accountability and standards. Unfortunately there seemed to be no plan for the students who fail the college prep standards and usually end up dropping out.
The main thrust of accountability in Louisiana has been to increase the pressure on the teachers and administrators of low performing schools. At the end of this school year the State Superintendent and BESE will ratchet up the pressure on educators by implementation of the letter grade system for all schools. Any school with a school performance score of less than 65 will get an "F". BESE member and charter school advocate Chas Roemer who proposed this plan may not have realized that his grading system would result in most state takeover charter schools receiving a "D" or an "F".
The only important question is: Are our students better off after all this emphasis on LEAP testing? A quick look at the NAEP scores from 2003 to 2009 reveal almost no progress on the same subject matter tested by the LEAP. ACT scores are also stagnant. The dropout rate at our colleges is one of the worst in the nation. It does not look like college prep for all is doing the trick.
Its ironic that just as China is revamping its elementary-secondary school system to emulate the creativity and problem solving approach once used by U.S. schools, we are now changing schools to emulate their outdated system of testing and rote learning. That's the conclusion by Jonathan Plucker, an educational psychologist who recently returned from studying the educational system in Shanghai. Dr. Plucker is concerned that the current reforms of U.S. education are stifling the very creativity in teaching and learning that has made our educational system great.
Thursday, January 20, 2011
CNN Charter School Advocate Blames Schools
CNN's Education contributor, Steve Perry was interviewed recently by a CNN reporter about the achievement gap between minority and non-minority students. Perry was asked to comment on a recent study by the Council of Great City Schools which shows a continuation of this achievement gap for the years since No Child Left Behind was implemented. (Click on the above highlighted link to access the full study) His conclusions about student achievement and the causes of low student achievement are outrageous at best and slanderous of public schools at worst. Here are the two incredible conclusions made by Perry in the interview:
By allowing Perry to make these false interpretations of critical educational data, CNN is doing a severe disservice to the cause of improving our educational system.
School Takeover Efforts Continue
The latest scheme to take over public schools and convert them to privately managed charters was announced by Governor Jindal to a meeting of the Louisiana Association of Business and Industry (LABI). Jindal said his administration plans to introduce legislation that would allow the formation of new charter schools sponsored by individual businesses. These private companies would hold major positions on the board of directors of the charter and their employees would have preferential treatment in enrolling their children to attend these new charters. There is no indication yet whether these new schools would be state authorized charters or locally authorized. Jindal claims the legislation will be patterned after similar plans already in operation in several other states.
This new charter scheme could be more destructive of our public education system because unlike some of the Recovery District charters, such schools may be in a better position to “cream” the best and most motivated students from local school systems. As we have seen in New Orleans and other places, the most effective way to create a better performing school is to recruit better performing students. Once such higher performing students are attracted away from a local school system, it becomes that much harder for the local public school system to thrive. The remaining public schools will have difficulty raising their performance scores and will have trouble retaining voter support for the school system's tax base. This is just one more step in the destruction of our public school system which has traditionally been run by democratically elected representatives of the people. I believe we are headed toward a much less democratic system where opportunities for the poor to receive a good education will be severely limited. This will be very bad for the entire nation, because it will result in less opportunity, more poverty, more crime, more welfare, and more class warfare.
Red Tape Reduction Act is A Red Herring!
The Jindal and Pastorek controlled BESE is agonizing over why no school systems have grabbed at the opportunity to utilize the Red Tape Reduction Act as a way to retain and improve local schools. If you want to know what is really in the law and why it is objectionable to those who believe in local elected control of local schools, just click on this link to our May 18 post to review our analysis of the law.
- When asked by the reporter about the affect of environment on the low achievement of some students, Perry stated flatly that the students' poor performance had nothing to do with the students' backgrounds. The main problem he said is that many underprivledged students are usually assigned to “some of the worst schools”. The Great City Schools study which was conducted by highly qualified researchers in no way supports Perry's charge. The study instead cites several socioeconomic factors affecting minority students' readiness for learning. Perry went on to say that we need to consider vouchers or regional zoning of schools as a way of getting these kids into better schools. Apparently Perry is not aware that such an approach was tried by Arne Duncan when he served as Superintendent of Chicago schools. Duncan closed many schools with low student test scores and sent the students to schools that were considered better. Studies of the performance of those students after their transfers showed that they continued to perform exactly as they had at their previous school. To state that the student's environment or poverty level has nothing to do with performance is to contradict all recent credible studies of this issue including the most recent Council of Great City Schools study.
- Perry then went on to conclude that the performance of 38% proficient or above for the non-minority students was also unacceptable. He proceeded to give an interpretation of the NEAP test results which is in total contradiction to the design and meaning of NEAP scores. He said 38% proficient shows that our schools are failing all students. He seems to assume that proficient or above is the only acceptable performance. Diane Ravitch who served for 7 years on the governing board for NEAP has described the proficient rating as an above average score or approximately the same as a “B” rating. There is a lower rating of “basic” that translates into a “C” grade according to Ravitch. This would mean that many more of these students would be considered as having achieved at least a satisfactory or grade level score. This interpretation is also backed up by the achievement ranking of these students as measured by the PISA international assessment. Ravitch has pointed out that the same misinterpretation of grade level or acceptable performance was made in the film Waiting For Superman.
By allowing Perry to make these false interpretations of critical educational data, CNN is doing a severe disservice to the cause of improving our educational system.
School Takeover Efforts Continue
The latest scheme to take over public schools and convert them to privately managed charters was announced by Governor Jindal to a meeting of the Louisiana Association of Business and Industry (LABI). Jindal said his administration plans to introduce legislation that would allow the formation of new charter schools sponsored by individual businesses. These private companies would hold major positions on the board of directors of the charter and their employees would have preferential treatment in enrolling their children to attend these new charters. There is no indication yet whether these new schools would be state authorized charters or locally authorized. Jindal claims the legislation will be patterned after similar plans already in operation in several other states.
This new charter scheme could be more destructive of our public education system because unlike some of the Recovery District charters, such schools may be in a better position to “cream” the best and most motivated students from local school systems. As we have seen in New Orleans and other places, the most effective way to create a better performing school is to recruit better performing students. Once such higher performing students are attracted away from a local school system, it becomes that much harder for the local public school system to thrive. The remaining public schools will have difficulty raising their performance scores and will have trouble retaining voter support for the school system's tax base. This is just one more step in the destruction of our public school system which has traditionally been run by democratically elected representatives of the people. I believe we are headed toward a much less democratic system where opportunities for the poor to receive a good education will be severely limited. This will be very bad for the entire nation, because it will result in less opportunity, more poverty, more crime, more welfare, and more class warfare.
Red Tape Reduction Act is A Red Herring!
The Jindal and Pastorek controlled BESE is agonizing over why no school systems have grabbed at the opportunity to utilize the Red Tape Reduction Act as a way to retain and improve local schools. If you want to know what is really in the law and why it is objectionable to those who believe in local elected control of local schools, just click on this link to our May 18 post to review our analysis of the law.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
