I wrote earlier today about clueless policymakers who think they are helping struggling students by raising standards. They believe fervently that the students will try harder and get higher test scores if the passing mark is raised.
A reader responded:
A similar policy is being rolled out in LAUSD. The total number of credits needed for graduation have been reduced so that students can retake and retake courses they have failed. However, the stakes are even higher because a “D” is no longer considered a passing grade. Again, there is no pilot program to base the efficacy of such a move. As class sizes increase and services are cut, there is no plan to address the cause of poor performance that leads to failure in high school.
Many feel that this policy will actually increase the dropout rate and/or create pressure on schools to demand that teachers inflate student grades in order to get a positive evaluation.
When this policy eventually fails, as it most certainly will, who will take the blame? Most likely, the school board will have new members and the district will have hired a new superintendent. So, who will be left to take the blame? Could it be the teachers?
This is becoming a national story. First, they cut the budget. Then they lay off teachers. Then they increase class size and cut out the arts and other things not tested. Then they say the schools are failing. And the reason: Not enough effective teachers.
Diane
What school boards?
The district where I teach is gradually removing the electives and arts from our lower performing schools. First, we are a Pre-K-12 school. The art teacher and one business teacher was not replaced when they retired last year. The band/music director and remaining business teacher now splits their time between 2 schools so are only on our campus for 3 hours a day. This year our construction/carpentry/fine arts teacher is retiring and there has been no mention of advertising for a replacement. He gave the district a 3 month notice of retirement. Our family/consumer science teacher is being encouraged to transfer to one of the other (better schools.) Once this happens we will have only PE as an elective.
My point to this whole passage is that I teach many struggling students and now they will have nothing to take except more core classes. These struggling students will be enrolled in multiple math, history, or science (me) classes. I am afraid that we are setting these students up for failure. As the only high school science teacher, I teach at least 5 different classes everyday. I also proctor an online class. This is 6 different preps that I must plan for every day. Sometimes it gets very overwhelming for me so I can only imagine how hard it is for my students.
This is an international problem – the same rhetoric is being espoused by the current New Zealand government.