Mike Petrilli of the conservative Thomas B. Fordham Institute in D.C. is the member of the “reform” movement for whom I continue to hold out hope. Mike is intelligent–as are other members of the “reform” movement–but unlike most of the others, he is known to question his assumptions from time to time. He occasionally challenges himself and takes a tiny step away from the other advocates of privatization, teacher-bashing, and test-driven ideology. He also has young children and will soon see the consequences on his own children of the terrible ideas that the movement is promoting. I have a fantasy that one day–maybe 10 years from now, maybe sooner–Mike will announce that he has had a change of heart. He will announce, as I did, that he was wrong, that education is about far more than test scores, and that great teachers are not defined by their ability to raise test scores. But that’s my fantasy, and it may never happen.
So here is Mike’s view of 2014. He calls his post “2014: The Year of Universal Proficiency.” His point is that No Child Left Behind included an absurd and impossible command that all schools must be proficient by 2014. That not only did not happen but it will never happen. He wisely warns against setting impossible targets.
He suggests instead that we aim for reasonable targets, for example, that the entire nation reach the proficiency levels achieved by Massachusetts on NAEP:
He writes:
So here’s a modest proposal: Let’s aim to get to 292 within six years. That would be an incredible accomplishment—reaching Massachusetts-level math achievement for the country as a whole. Still, let’s be clear: Just half of the Bay State’s eighth graders are proficient in math; the numbers for minority and low-income students are much, much lower. Even big gains leave us far from “universal proficiency”—much less “universal college and career readiness.”
***
Schools nationwide have been labeled as failures for not getting 100 percent of their students to proficiency. Many of these schools contributed to the nationwide progress that’s discernable on NAEP. Such schools deserve our praise, not our scorn. And they deserve wiser policymaking going forward. Shall we make it a resolution?
Now, here comes my advice to Mike Petrilli: For all schools to reach the levels of Massachusetts, their states would have to make the same grand bargain that Massachusetts legislators and educators made, beginning in 1993: The state agreed to add $2 billion to spending for education in return for educators accepting standards and a testing system (MCAS). The state equalized funding across districts. The state raised standards for entry into the teaching profession. The state invested in early childhood education. Massachusetts developed what most observers (including the Fordham Institute) considered the best state standards in history, English, science, and mathematics.
What did Massachusetts not have: Common Core standards (not yet created); a multitude of charter schools (there were only 25 in the whole state).
There are many other reasons for Massachusetts’ success, including its economy, its many fine colleges and universities, and its long tradition of support for education.
Will other states follow the Massachusetts’ example? Will they dramatically increase spending on public schools? Will they set high standard for entry into teaching? Will they equalize funding to raise up the low-performing schools? Will they invest in early childhood education? Will they put a low cap on the number of charters?
Since these things are not likely to happen; since many states are cutting education budgets; since many states are inviting unqualified entrepreneurs to run schools; since many states have low standards for entry into teaching, it is highly unlikely that all states will equal the NAEP performance of Massachusetts.
Frankly, I don’t think that setting a test score as our national goal is even a worthy goal. I prefer a goal that says “all children will enter school healthy and ready to learn.” And a goal that says, “All families will have food security, access to medical care, and a decent place to live.” And a goal that says “All teachers will be well prepared and well qualified by training and education for the teaching profession.” And a goal that says, “All schools will have a rich curriculum for all children and qualified teachers to teach that curriculum, including the arts, history, civics, geography, mathematics, the sciences, foreign languages, and physical education.” And, all schools will have the staff and resources they need for the children they serve.
If we met those goals, the test scores would take care of themselves.
Besides, there is something unworthy about the idea of directing our national aspirations to meet targets created by the standardized testing industry.
Diane Ravitch's blog 