The Myth of the Broken U.S. School System

This article by a distinguished professor of Education exposes the use of false negative propaganda about the U.S. public K-12 school system. Apparently school reformers decided over a decade ago that it would be much easier to sell their pet projects for school reform if the American public could just be convinced that our public schools were failing and beyond repair. Then we would have nothing to lose by scrapping the whole "broken" system and trying any reform scheme the reformers could dream up. This would allow reformers to implement revolutionary changes without the need to provide credible evidence that such changes would actually improve student performance.

Here is another article in the Huffington Post that shows how one of the buzzwords of education is used to "deform" our education system.

It is worrisome that the major proponents of revolutionary changes in education are people who have no education credentials and minimal background in actual teaching. This would be like allowing people with no medical training to change the structure of the medical profession. For example, in Louisiana, major education reform designers included an attorney, Paul Pastorek, lobbyists from the Louisiana Association of Business and Industry, legislators, and a governor with no education credentials. The major elements of school reform nationwide fall more into the category of ideology than of legitimate education strategies. Here are the questionable assumptions of American education reform:

1. Standardized testing of students in math and English language arts is the best way to determine the effectiveness of a school.
2. Any school where students perform significantly below average on standardized tests in math and English language arts should be considered a failing school.
3. Firing and replacing the principal and at least half the teachers in a failing school will ultimately produce better student performance.
4. State takeover of so called failing schools and conversion to privately managed charter schools will result in significantly better student performance on standardized tests.
5. The use of taxes dedicated to public schools to provide parents a "choice" of sending their children to charter schools and private voucher schools at public expense will result in better student performance.
6. The main thing preventing at-risk or high poverty students from performing is the low expectations of their teachers.
7. The best measure of teacher performance is performance of students on standardized tests.
8. Any low performing student who is taught by highly effective teachers over a three year period will improve up to grade level without any other assistance.

None of the above strategies are supported by research or experience.

In Louisiana, the Recovery District is a state run bureaucracy designed to take over and turn over so called "failing schools" to education entrepreneurs who establish charter schools to replace the traditional schools. State Superintendent Paul Pastorek who led the takeover effort had a background as a lawyer and no training in education. He brought in Paul Vallas from Chicago whose training was in accounting and finance to run the Recovery District. In a few short years the RSD was declared a big success that should be used as a model for other states. The only problem is that the measure of success was a bunch of carefully selected statistics that seemed to show amazing growth in student test scores and graduation rates. Later it was learned that the growth in test scores was simply a part of teaching to tests and lowered standards which did not show significant improvements relative to other school systems in the state with similar demographics. The "improved" graduation rate was found to have been inflated by listing dropouts as transfers to other states. The graduation rate of the RSD is now listed as the lowest in all school systems in the state and student performance in math and English is in the bottom 20% just as it was at the time of takeover. Some RSD schools have been simply shut down because of lack of support from parents and others have been returned back to the original school systems because of dismal results.

But to make matters worse, other states are still trying to imitate the Louisiana Recovery District by creating Achievement Districts. All have failed or shown little progress in student achievement. This idea for reform was totally bogus, but did help to promote independent charter schools which are now referred to as choice schools.

The concept of school choice which includes the funding of charter schools and private voucher schools with public money has become extremely popular with politicians. That's because of the completely unsupported claim that parents are best qualified to decide which school is best for their child. Corporate reformers have greased the wheels of the choice movement by making generous contributions to politicians.

Now it apparently does not matter whether a school produces academic results as long as parents choose it for their child. For example, a recent study found that the for-profit, online virtual charter schools are the lowest performing schools in the nation, yet there is no move to close or restructure these very profitable schools. Instead, many reformers claim that individualized education plans that can be accessed by a student anywhere with a computer are the true waive of the future. There is not one shred of evidence that this works better than students attending public schools with real live teachers, yet the online schools are lavishly funded compared to the real public schools because their platform for delivery of services is so much cheaper than brick and mortar schools. The only problem is that on average, students show minus one year of progress for every year enrolled in virtual schools. It is true however that some highly motivated, high performing students, do quite well in virtual schools. But that success is due more to the quality of the student than to the school type.

Many of the principles of school reform we see today in America should be classified more as wishful thinking rather than as legitimate alternatives. Reformers have an almost religious belief in certain methods of reform without evidence that they work. For example, it is an absolute article of faith of most reformers that: if we insist on higher standards, our students will increase their performance to meet those standards. There is no evidence for the article of faith of reformers. In Louisiana, and in many other states, the performance of students on the new Common Cores tests has been nothing short of disastrous. In Louisiana, the average passing score on the latest standardized tests has been reduced to an average cut score of only 30%. Students could come close to achieving this passing score by just guessing. Is this raising the bar?

Use of student test scores to rate, pay, and even dismiss teachers has also been an absolute disaster. Many otherwise highly respected teachers have been declared "ineffective" because of flaws in the Value Added Model of teacher evaluation. The widespread use of VAM has already resulted in a growing teacher shortage and a drastic decline in enrollments in colleges of education.

No one has ever been able to verify the theory that three highly effective teachers in a row will raise student performance to grade level particularly when the student must deal with handicapping factors outside the school.

The idea that any parent should have the right to take the state and local school tax allotment for their child and enroll them in any private school or charter school they choose violates the very principles upon which our successful education system was built. That is public schools are funded by all taxpayers and run by school boards elected by all the voters. On average, over two thirds of the Minimum Foundation Funding for each child to attend school is paid by persons who do not have a child enrolled in a K-12 school. The funding of public education for all children no matter the income of their parents is considered as part of our public responsibility. But when we turn the entire school funding for a child over to the parent we are violating the rights of all taxpayers to demand that their tax money be used wisely. Some voucher schools are still allowed to keep public funding for students that would be considered to be attending a failing school. So school reform has produced a double standard that encourages the misuse of our school taxes.

The Atlantic article should be a wake-up call for all Americans. It time to start demanding accountability of the education reformers.

State LDOE Proposing to Test Younger Students

Higher test scores are the only thing Superintendent White and his TFA assistants care about in the operation of Louisiana schools. Now they are apparently pushing standardized testing for kindergarteners as a way of preparing all students for college. A report by Assistant Superintendent, Jessica Baghian to the Accountability Commission seemed to imply that local school leaders want to extend standardized testing to grades K-2. Also, now the LDOE is admitting that the new Common Core standards have widened the achievement gap between middle class and poor students.   Remember when we were told that the new Common Core standards would help close the achievement gap? Another promise based on wishful thinking!

This recent article in Education Week describes the shortcomings of standardized testing. Recent trends show that even though we can expect a small improvement in state testing results as teachers become more familiar with teaching to the new Common Core related tests, student scores will soon plateau. Educators then begin spending inordinate efforts that result in only incremental improvements in successive years. Children just do not respond well to the constant test-prep school environment.

A few years ago, the decision was made to encourage almost all high school students to take college prep courses at the expense of vocational education. It did not work. Louisiana has the lowest number of students in the Southeast region completing 4 year college degrees. Then they maneuvered BESE into adopting the college prep Common Core standards. That's not working. Our students averaged 38% on the PARCC tests last year. Now the LDOE wants to push more testing and test prep to the K-3 grades. All that will do is to kill the joy of learning with boring high pressure test prep. None of this drill and kill strategy works. But the Accountability Commission is being told that if we just tighten the screws on students and teachers at the primary grades, then our students will finally become successful test takers. I'm not buying it.

Schooling should not be primarily about testing. Recent articles about the sacrifice of play activities for little children here and here have demonstrated that unstructured play for very young children is almost as important for proper development and socialization as structured classwork. Yet our so-called education leaders are reducing recess so kids can rehearse more for tests.

I've pointed out before that White is a one-trick-pony who believes that everything in the education of children is about raising test scores, yet after years of college prep and excessive emphasis on testing, our students are doing no better in college.

What about other priorities for our schools in developing well educated citizens? With all the emphasis on academic testing, kids are not being taught how to lead healthy and productive lives. Health problems of our high school graduates led by obesity are actually making about a third of our students insurance risks and therefore mostly unemployable, yet there is less emphasis on physical education and health.

My post below demonstrates that our graduates are no longer being taught the most basic life skills, yet we pretend to be preparing them for college.

Here is the problem with our younger students. Many children in high poverty homes have no books and few reading experiences in their homes. Many of these children are not stimulated to develop a rich vocabulary. Students from poverty start school with only half the vocabulary of more privileged students. Their primary teachers need to be able to spend time reading to their students from books for children that spark their interest in reading. Then the students will see themselves as readers and learners. To just start drilling kids with stacks of worksheets will turn them off to school and learning. Then no amount of testing and test prep will make them better students.

Our Inflexible Standards Harm Students, Teachers, and Our Economy

We don't blame doctors and hospitals if they can't cure all their patients equally. We understand that when a patient comes to a hospital with lung cancer because he has chain smoked for 40 years, or a patient has diabetes because he is obese, doctors are limited in what they can do. Our medical professionals are especially limited if the cancer patient who has a lung removed continues smoking and the diabetes patient is not willing to change his diet.

In the field of education however, our professional educators are expected to produce certain prescribed results for each student no matter the background or life experiences of their students. This "no excuses" philosophy of our education policy makers has led to the labeling of almost all schools that serve high populations of at-risk students as "failing schools". The same policy makers also assume (without evidence) that simply closing down such schools and sending the students to private or charter schools will magically cure the problem. That would be like closing a trauma ward in a hospital because it is caring for too many hard to treat patients. Such a policy also stigmatizes the teachers that teach in high poverty schools as lazy or incompetent even though they may be working diligently to help students overcome their handicaps.

The success of our public schools has been made even more difficult by the adoption of uniform academic standards designed to make all students the same. That sameness is usually referred to as preparing students to be college and career ready. The use of the word "and" connecting these two outcomes assumes that students need to master exactly the same standards for many varied careers as they need for college prep careers. That would be as incorrect as assuming that all ill patients need chemotherapy or insulin therapy no mater what their ailment. But our lawmakers have decreed based on blind faith (not science) that all students should and can master a set of college prep standards even if some want to be welders, some want to be nurses, some want to be truck drivers and some want to be sales reps.  In Louisiana and many other states, all students are expected to become proficient according to the Common Core college prep standards. (Louisiana has only made minor changes in the standards) A recent poll of teachers by the pro Common Core Fordham Institute indicates that the 6-8 grade math standards may not be appropriate for most students. 61% of those teachers said the math standards were unrealistic for their students.

So the student who loves to work with her hands and who has demonstrated a talent for carpentry is forced to spend endless hours trying to master the proofs of theorems in Geometry such as the derivation of Pythagorean theorem using the area of triangles. If she really struggles with math and proofs, she may be denied a high school diploma and the opportunity to pursue her career goals may be limited.

Here is something I actually observed in my own neighborhood: A team of carpenters was busy one morning mapping out the foundation for a new house. They were outlining the corners of the new house using wooden stakes and string. As I approached, I noticed they were all speaking Spanish to each other.  Taking a chance, I introduced myself in English and asked them what method they were using to insure that the corners were square (90 degree angles). The foreman, who was the only one who could speak English, was friendly and told me they were using the 3, 4, 5 rule. That's where you set the stakes and the string to form a perfect 90 degree angle using a length of string 3 ft on one side and 4 ft on the other side so that the diagonal between them is exactly 5 ft long. This method works every time, and gives perfect square corners.

I said, "Oh I see, you are using the Pythagorean theorem."

The foreman who seemed to be reasonably intelligent said "What's that?"

I explained briefly that the 3, 4, 5 rule is an application of a geometry principle discovered by a Greek named Pythagoras. He was amused by my explanation and actually translated it for his crew. But very soon the crew was back to work and probably to this day would not be able to recall the name of Greek whose formula was used to design the method that helped them lay out a foundation.

My point is this: This skilled carpenter understands clearly that the 3, 4, 5 rule will give his house foundation perfectly square corners without knowing anything about the Pythagorean theorem. But if he had to meet the standards we now have for graduation, which includes an understanding of the Pythagorean theorem, he may not have received a Louisiana high school diploma. And if a diploma were a requirement for carpenter training, he may never have had a chance to make a good living as a skilled carpenter.

Of course I am guessing the construction company that hired this crew of carpenters does not require their employees to possess a high school diploma. The skills and motivation to do the difficult job of carpentry are probably more important than any sheepskin. This begs the question: "How many of our Louisiana high school graduates graduate with the minimum skills and motivation to enter an apprentice program to become a skilled carpenter?" I seriously doubt that our high school graduates who may have some knowledge of the Pythagorean are really career ready. I would not trust many of these graduates with a skill saw or even the ability to use a carpenter's level.

So our policy for K-12 education in Louisiana is to track all students into a college prep curriculum. How does that work? Here are the latest results: The average score for all students taking the PARCC tests in 2015 was 38%. The average passing scores on the new tests were set at approximately 30%. So even though the majority of students received a passing score, they actually knew only a small percentage of the material they are supposed to know for success in college. In addition, the passing scores on the end of course tests in high school have been set so low that even students with minimal knowledge can pass them and get a high school diploma.

So what we have done is required college prep standards which students do not actually have to master in order to receive a high school diploma. The majority of our students that graduate are not prepared for college or a career. I call that a failure! It is harmful to students and their teachers.

That's one of the many reasons I ask: "Why do we attempt to track all of our students into such a narrow and highly structured pathway to graduation?" Why do we refuse to understand that there are many differences in the natural abilities, talents and interests of our students? When we prescribe just one set of standards for all students we are denying the value of the wonderful diversity of human beings. This unproven policy is harmful to our students and to our state economy because we are not preparing workers for diverse careers.