« April 23, 2008 | Main | April 24, 2008 »
April 23, 2008
Essay Question: Are We Beating Back the Tide?
"'Nation at Risk': The best thing or the worst thing for education?" asks Gregg Toppo in USA Today. Good question, and an interesting article. Toppo reports on some of the policy developments that came in the wake of that report's denouncement of a "rising tide of mediocrity" in education - things like a rise in federal education spending, and what Paul Houston of the American Association of School Administrators denounces as "a cottage industry of national reports by people saying how bad things are." But what about the kids? What's happened to them in the 25 years since "A Nation at Risk" raised the alarm? (A look in on the topic 10 years ago - 15 years after the initial report - offered continued cause for concern.)
So, in a nod to the rigors of AP and the rhetoric of Reagan, we ask:
Are our children better educated now than they were 25 years ago? In your answer, discuss issues such as assessment, accountability, access, choice, funding, teacher quality, curriculum, standards, or other education efforts and issues and their relative relevance to the question.
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.edspresso.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-t.cgi/1822
Comments
Work Still to Be Done
Once again veteran education reporter Greg Toppo puts a big issue in context for us, and once again one of the leading members of the education BLOB, Paul Houston of the American Association for School Administrators, finds fault with an honest and intense appraisal of education progress in the country. Houston, whom I like personally very much and with whom I've had many contentious but reasoned debates, represents a perspective that says "we are doing everything we can do help kids, whose problems start somewhere before we get them and continue throughout school despite our best efforts. So applaud this great democratic institution that succeeds with at least 50% and in some cases 80% or more, rather than criticize us, because after all, we're just like the cobbler who when fixing the broken shoes can only do so much."
Here's the reality. We know from data, observation and decades of research that indeed the family is the most important factor in the life of a child. We also know that a really good school can make up for familial deficiencies. Another piece of knowledge that exists, for those who want it, is the data on how well even the worst-off children perform when they are educated in an environment of high expectations and accountability for results - meaning that the people who work in those schools are impacted in some way by the students' success - or failure. And finally, on top of what we know about the role of the family, the role of the teacher, the role of high expectations, leadership and educational environment, we know that when parents are able to make a choice about where their child is educated, it helps that child find the right fit, it engages that family in ways that years of monopoly domination have not, and it encroaches on the comfort zone of otherwise complacent administrators who suddenly have to account for why someone may or may not choose to take their business elsewhere.
These options - and the informed decisions to take advantage of them - are only fully possible when broad, meaningful achievement data exists, and the kind of data that we have now because of No Child Left Behind shines some light on how students are doing from year to year against public, defined standards. When 'A Nation at Risk' was issued, all that parents and teachers - much less the general tax-paying public - knew regarding academic performance was drawn from norm-referenced test scores, which compared our kids to other kids, not against what they objectively should be able to do in a subject at a particular point in time. So if some of our students were above the 50% mark on a test, it meant they were doing better than 50% of the other kids who took the test, which essentially tells us nothing. But it made my parents think I was pretty smart, because I was always in the 90th percentile. And I always got mostly As, too, in a "great" school serving "great" families and neighborhoods. And so when I went off to college, a fairly competitive one, I was stunned and dismayed to discover, as I sat next to students from other schools and states, that I knew little compared to most, about and in fundamental subjects.
I learned then that my education had been mediocre, but like most parents in the nation, mine were contented by impressive but misleading numbers and happy children. It took me months to catch up on knowledge that I should have learned before college. I'm still learning what I missed. (That was also the time of high school electives, where a photography class could replace English for some - a route many of my friends took, who then ended up not going to college because they were thought to not be college material by the-powers-that-be, who made that determination with little substantive data to go on.)
'A Nation at Risk' exposed and addressed these issues at the highest levels. They reported on what no one had been willing to recognize or say - and the Commission on Excellence that issued that critical report was not a right wing anti-public education cabal. The commissioners were scientists (Nobel Laureate in at least one case), economists, historians, educators. And they noted then what people like them, with objectivity and no vested interest in the system, note today: that despite progress, we still send vast numbers of students to college in need of remedial education, and those that never make it to college, much less graduate high school, represent an untenable deficiency in the way we do education - which we must solve. To do that, we must continue to uncover what works and what does not, and issue reports and commentaries to amplify the problems. Without acknowledging that we must change laws, minds and cultures, as CER's mission beckons, no policymaker or citizen on any level will find a need to do anything. That's why talking about what's wrong is okay, Paul Houston, and you and others like you must welcome the talk and respond with action, rather than simply defend the status quo. That's when your plaudits will come. Until then, none of us should stand around looking for thanks and praise when there is work to be done.
Posted by: Jeanne Allen | April 23, 2008 11:30 AM
