Thanks to Mercedes Schneider for bringing this article to my attention.
If you have ever wondered why Congress refuses to abandon or revise or do anything to the failed No Child Left Behind, this article explains why.
NCLB declared that all schools would have 100% proficiency by 2014. Even in 2002, after the law was signed, it was already obvious that many members of Congress did not believe that 100% proficiency was possible. As one superintendent in the article says, the law demands that immigrant children who have been in the country for one year must be 100% proficient in reading and math, and that is impossible. Others pointed out that no country in the world has 100% proficiency.
Yet Congress clings to NCLB because no one will say that some children might not be proficient. So a law that is harmful, punitive, impossible, and already a manifest failure, remains on the book.
By the year 2014, all children in grades 3-8 will be proficient in math and reading.
In 2002, I asked my former boss at the U.S. Department of Education, Senator Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, whether he believed that the goal was feasible. His answer, in a public forum at the Willard Hotel in Washington, was: “No, Diane, I don’t believe that, but it is good to have goals.” In this article, he is quoted five years later saying there is no way to abandon that impossible goal:
Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), a former U.S. education secretary and supporter of the law, said Americans don’t want politicians to lower standards.
“Are we going to rewrite the Declaration of Independence and say only 85 percent of men are created equal?” Alexander asked. “Most of our politics in America is about the disappointment of not meeting the high goals we set for ourselves.”
Will we ever have public officials–elected and appointed–who are willing to level with us, to recognize failure of their legislation and programs when it stares them in the face, to get out of the business of telling educators how to educate children? Will we ever have public officials who do what they were elected to do instead of meddling in institutions they do not understand and setting utopian goals that create failure, disruption, and demoralization?
Diane Ravitch's blog 
But didn’t you just write that high school seniors scores on NAEP show that the last decade of school reform has failed?
LikeLike
Joe what in the world do you mean? This article is calling for the repeal of NCLB which is the reform that has failed. Have you had your morning coffee or tea yet?
LikeLike
He beats the same drum even when he doesn’t make sense, which is often.
LikeLike
Petard, meet Hoist.
Hi, do I know you?
Probably, I get around. Have you seen Irony lately?
Yeah, chatting with Myopia and Hypocrisy.
LikeLike
A dad who is also a columnist in Seattle has a word on NCLB:
http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2023545976_westneat07xml.html
We need more “take this reform and shove it” citizen responses.
LikeLike
Pity that the senator could (would?) not distinguish between goals associated with punitive enforcement schemes and aspirations associated with ideals.
LikeLike
I have just recently come upon this blog and have neither the time nor the energy to read all posts and comments so do not know if the following has been addressed. Poorly performing school districts experience education flight, those who are able flee the district and move to districts with better performing schools. Property values in the district go down and school and municipal revenues along with them. If a school district had vouchers so that residents could stay in district and send their children to the local school of their choice, a religious or non-secular private school, wouldn’t they have a greater tendency to remain in the district, keeping property values up along with school and municipal revenues?
LikeLike
Boy, do I remember this. I remember even in the earliest days of NCLB, sitting in some training or in-service and someone would ask a version of, “Isn’t 100% proficiency impossible?” and the presenter or bureaucrat or person from the state DOE would just look right at the questioner and ask, “Well, which children do you want to say we should not teach? Which children should we NOT make proficient?”
And of course there was no answer to that question. I watched it happen multiple time. It was the beginning of my understanding that government could and would ask me to do things professionally that were insanely wrong.
LikeLike
Yes, 100% proficiency is a joke. When the late Senator Paul Wellstone yours truly and some others were challenging this, some folks disagreed. We used hundreds of millions of dollars badly.
LikeLike
Well said. This was an insane idea from the get-go. The problem with the revision of the ESEA is not that people can’t give up on this insane idea–I think that everyone now clearly understands what you and many, many others pointed out about this silly goal from Day 1. The problem is that there will never be a consensus on approaches to K-12 education generally. And there shouldn’t be. Ecologies are healthier than are monocultures. We need a decentralized system. Lamar Alexandar’s response to Ravitch was, of course, ridiculous. It confuses equality and identity.
LikeLike
cx: Alexander, of course.
LikeLike
Sorry, I don’t understand this comment.
LikeLike
I was just correcting a typo, Joe, in my post. 🙂
LikeLike
Understood.
Joe
LikeLike
And ONE LAW to RULE THEM ALL.
LikeLike
Which quickly became:
And ONE SCORE to RULE THEM ALL.
LikeLike
I can remember back in the early days of NCLB when the NYSED presenter was explaining AYP and its use with sub-groups. I believe the minimum number of students in a sub-group was 12. Small Title 1 schools with a diverse population were at a huge disadvantage when it came to meeting AYP goals. Under the law, by example, we had to get 12 new 7th graders in a particular sub-group to perform better than a different set of student from the previous year. We were required to show that the program/teaching was getting better and better by improved scores from new sets of students. Well anyhow, I’m sitting in the auditorium listening to this DOE person explain this crazy idea. I raised my hand and commented that using a sub-group of 12 twelve students posed a serious statistical problem: sample size was way too small to draw any conclusions, especially when we weren’t even comparing the same 12 students. The woman from NYSED glared at me, as if to say how dare you question our policy. Then she gave me the answer I’ll never forget: “Tough”
LikeLike
Peter: well stated.
First time I have heard the “well which children” mislead.
It may take me a while to think up, or more likely, come across, a ready retort to that particular catchphrase of the self-styled “education reformers.” As in:
“The soft bigotry of low expectations” = “The hard bigotry of mandated failure.”
“No Child Left Behind” = “No Child’s Behind Left.”
“Choice” = “Choice But No Voice.” [Thanks, Chiara Duggan!]
“Race To The Top” = “Dash For The Cash” aka “Few Winners Many Losers.”
“Poverty Is Not Destiny” = “Your Poverty Is Not My Destiny” aka “Your Poverty Is My Good Fortune.”
What is common to all the seemingly benign slogans created by the leaders and enablers of the “new civil rights movement of our time” is that they are based on a business plan, not an education model.
So of course, when someone asks how to do the impossible, the response is to provide an answer to a different question, as in “Well, which children do you want to say we should not teach? Which children should we NOT make proficient?” And again, if we proceed as if we are pushing an eduproduct that addresses our need for ROI [= $tudent $ucce$$] and are not concerned about issues of pedagogy and practicality, then the “answer” is not an invitation to continue thinking through and working out a practical and sustainable answer, but rather—
A thinly veiled threat that is meant to shame, shut up and end discussion. *Again, any wonder why I label them “edubullies”?*
And while not conducive [so far] to a short rendering, when you read or hear the old pr saw that “charter schools are just like public schools” simply remember that it’s true except for employee rights, student rights, parent rights, fiscal openness and accountability, regulation and oversight, pay structure, and, well, my fingers grow tired of ‘keyboarding’ [I remember when it was called ‘typing’]. Rheeally!
And really!
Thank you for your comments.
😎
LikeLike
Right, this was about NCLB. But a very recent posting used NAEP data to say that it showed the last decade of reform had failed. One of the features of NCLB also is use of a lot of testing (which I think has lots of limits).
None of you responded to that.
We hear regularly here that standardized tests should not be used as a reliable measure of national or school performance (except if the results show what some of you want to show…like Finland’s superiority). But when the results (like the high school seniors scores show something that people like, then it’s fine to use them.
And of course it’s terrible to use tests to measure teacher performance but it seems just fine to keep students out of certain magnet schools.
LikeLike
Joe, when reformers have used faulty statistics to push misguided policies, most would agree that it’s both fair and sensible to use those same statistics to demonstrate the failure of those policies.
LikeLike
Lots of ways to use stats. We here Finland is wonderful because of great int’l test scores- but both Mass and Mn – that have charters and statewide tests, have higher international test scores than Finland.
Lots of us think there’s lots more to what’s happening in schools than tests measure but it seems like tests are used here when they support a person’s point. I think we need to get beyond that.
LikeLike
Personally, I think (as an educator & newspaper columnist) that we need to get beyond using a single test score to make key decisions about schools students or educators.
LikeLike
That’s old news Joe.
LikeLike
Joe, that’s disingenuous and outright incorrect.
Diane said clearly that she didn’t put any reliance in NAEP scores anyway but since the proponents of testing use it as a bludgeon against public schools why not use their own data against them? Why do you refuse to acknowledge that?
Instead of acknowledging that their test-based reforms have failed utterly they dig in deeper and insist that MORE testing is needed.
Diane is throwing their own words back at them to chew on and try to digest but it is giving them heartburn.
It seems to be a smart move from my perspective, as Bill says above, they are hoist on their own petard.
LikeLike
Actually I disagree with your description. NAEP scores have been cited many different times in many different ways.
Meanwhile, real progress in some public schools often is being ignored.
LikeLike
What in the world do you mean by “my description”? I was quoting you chastising Diane for using NAEP scores as a springboard for criticizing NCLB. She made clear that she doesn’t believe NAEP matters.
You are the one twisting everything and it makes me sad. I’ve tried to be respectful of you and I listen to what you have to say but you have become so defensive and dismissive it is near impossible to communicate with you.
I wish you well. I won’t bother trying to talk with you anymore though.
LikeLike
Actually agree with many of your important points, Joe. At the same time, I disagree with your resistance to use reformer logic against the reformers — flawed though it may be. It’s not hypocritical to say that your reliance on test scores to promote NCLB was improper but based on your own reasoning, NCLB has been a massive failure.
LikeLike
Joe, I think that I see a lot more variation in the posts here than your post suggests. Several folks responded to the NAEP post (I was one of these) saying that the 12th-grade NAEP was meaningless because 12th-graders just don’t care about taking the NAEP well and then went on to describe specific problems with summative standardized testing, which, I know, you are not a big fan of either. I have been critical, often, on these pages, of using these summative standardized tests for any purposes, such as comparing the educational performance of countries and measuring teacher performance and making decisions about placement in magnet schools, and others have as well.
I do wish that we would have more discussion and less rhetoric on issues related to providing different types of schools for different types of students with different proclivities and life trajectories. As I see it, defenders of the common public school model have a responsibility to explain how they think, within that model, the differing needs of differing students can be met. And that, I believe, should be done without nastiness. Some posters here do, in fact, do that.
Let me tell you where I am coming from on this question of alternative schools, including magnets and charters. I have long, long been deeply committed to the idea that one size doesn’t fit all in education. I think that it is our job as educators to identify the unique gifts and interests of individual kids and to help them to find ways to build up on those–to take paths that make sense for them. This is connected to my even more fundamental belief that schooling should be about nurturing intrinsically motivated, lifelong, independent learners. Years ago, I was a big proponent of charter schools because I saw these as a means for providing alternatives for kids who were round pegs in square holes. But I have been sickened by seeing so much graft and corruption in the charter industry, and I am increasingly interested in the idea of providing means, within the public school system, by which more diversity in paths can be provided.
The idea that I want to crush–to crush utterly–is that one size fits all–that students are parts to be identically milled according to an invariant plan for all.
LikeLike
We agree that one size doesn’t fit all, and no single kind of school is best for all students or educators.
I agree that there is corruption in some charters. Sadly the same is true of teacher unions (some people send a weekly dose of that) and in school districts.
I’m fine with district options that are open to all – but in some places districts have been resistant to allowing teachers and parents to do that or to keep the integrity of those programs (much of my work in districts was with alternative & innovative schools around the country that had these experiences long before NCLB & RTT.
Thanks for thoughtful comments.
LikeLike
Many school districts have grown to be breathtakingly bureaucratic, and it’s difficult to do anything new within them. There is a lot of micromanagement, these days, from central offices, district and state, and that stifles innovation. We’re seeing, increasingly, a terrible sameness in offerings. Invariance driven by immutable, invariant standards and standardized tests and district- and state-enforced lesson templates and curricula. I grew up in a small university town and was fortunate enough to go to a public university lab school where many of my teachers/professors had PhDs, a school where there were classes in subjects like Wave Motion and Russian History and Modern European Drama. What a candy store! A friend of mine went another route. He studied at the public vocational/technical school in the same town and became a plumber. He owned a house and a car and a nice boat at a time when all I possessed were a few student loans and some dreams. 🙂
Kids differ.
LikeLike
Bob Shepherd: yes, one-size does not fit all. You nailed it/ya has dado en el blanco.
After five years on ed blogs, I make this tentative very limited observation about how the topic of addressing different students in different settings is handled in the ed debates. This is based strictly on following actual back-and-forth, many times between sharply opposed POVs.
IMHO, for the leading self-styled “education reformers” it basically boils down to this: public schools (even with the best of intentions) are inherently incapable of doing anything right and so must be displaced (forcibly if need be) by—well, anything else, including charters and vouchers and private schools and religious schools, with privatization playing an indispensable role.
One of the ways this manifests itself is in the opposing debate duo of: public schools are too inclusive, large, general, unfocused; or the opposite when occasion calls for it, they’re too exclusive, small, selective, and laser-focused specific. In other words, public schools are damned if they do and damned if they don’t because they’re incapable of doing either option right. A clever deflection—yes?—because this diverts attention from the flexibility that is a hallmark of an approach to teaching and learning that is in the best tradition of American public education.
At this point, I would put this down as another example of how people use different approaches, language and criteria when they approach teaching and learning as a business plan or an education model. *Although a topic for another occasion, this also goes to the heart of what bigger goals are in play, such as whether lifelong learning and critical thinking and citizenship and so on are essential or non-essential.*
Strictly my own POV, but by now I don’t foresee the heads of the so-called “new civil rights movement of our time” faring well in such debates. Exactly why stars of the education establishment like Michelle Rhee and David Coleman flee from public discussions with Diane Ravitch.
“No problem can withstand the assault of sustained thinking.” [Voltaire]
😎
LikeLike
Another great article about how better standards were written in New York and squashed by desperation for RTTT money appears in today’s Journal News. The Journal News in Westchester County, NY is one of the few papers reporting fairly on education issues.
Here’s a little excerpt from the article:
“New York needed to write new educational standards, and Cohen, a Larchmont resident, had agreed to lead the project. He brought the man he had chosen to direct the work, veteran educator Walter Sullivan.
“We left excited,” Sullivan said. “We were going to try to do something special.”
Over two years, with little fanfare, Cohen and Sullivan led a team of New York educators who created what may have been the country’s best standards for English/language arts and English as a second language. They were set to do the same for other subjects.
Then the project died.”
Read the full article here:
http://www.lohud.com/story/news/education/2014/05/10/common-core-derailed-ny-standards/8918925/
LikeLike
Thanks RL,
Most New Yorkers, let alone New York teachers, know about this. Meryl Tisch’s dismissive tone in the article illustrates the oligarchs’ contempt for the “little people” and smug self-righteousness of lining their own pockets through the imposition of inferior standards. I can almost hear her saying, “Let them eat data.”
LikeLike
I meant “don’ t know.” Not enough coffee yet.
LikeLike
It isn’t about 100% proficiency. It is about the sanctions that can be put on the “failing” schools. Failure to reach the goals causes teachers to be fired, schools to be underfunded, schools to be closed, and more funds to be funneled to thieving charter schools administrators. The whole agenda is can seen by looking at the backwards planning. The goal is to privatize education by taking taxes, public monies, and handing it over to managers and hedge funds via TFA and charters. The more billionaires “donate” to charters and TFA, the more money comes back to them. The 1%ers are on advisory boards and “think tanks” and all sorts of affiliations with the words “education” and “excellence” in them. When those TFA scabs generously give of their time, their loans are paid, their salaries are paid, they are gifted with fake, yes FAKE, masters degrees or super or admin degrees and they go into politics or head a charter, where they either aid in the formation of education policies or fill their pockets with misappropriated tax dollars. How do we get our government to stop donating money to TFA? TFA has millions in private donations; it doesn’t need any more tax dollars, yet it will continue to get it until the madness stops.
We are dealing with 2 sets of rules here. The charters aren’t accountable, not for their salaries, not for their results, not for testing, not for quality of education. The charters exist to make profits. Period. Public education is set to be doomed.
How can we stop this train wreck?
LikeLike
“How can we stop this train wreck?” — RL
One way is to publicly shame and ridicule Jeb Bush wherever he appears and to ensure that he does not come anywhere near the White House. He is the author of much of this reform poison and he still wields undue influence here in Florida and around the country. We must begin to stand up and challenge the so-called reformers at every opportunity and drive them back into the shadows they came from.
LikeLike
Yep, the Bushes have certainly profited from education. W signed NCLB, Jeb runs around with his Chiefs for Change, FEE and his other schemes and Neil made serious dough from Ignite software, whose investors included Bush I and Barbara. Neil founded Ignite after the settlement in the Silverado savings and loan scandal. It’s in the family DNA: Prescott Bush was partners with the educational publisher Harold McGraw of McGraw-Hill all the way back to the founding of the resort town of Jupiter, Florida.
See:
and
http://www.schoolsmatter.info/2006/08/mcgraw-hill-bush-graft-and-twig.html
LikeLike
Donna
Good news and bad news.
Bad news: We cant stop this train wreck.
Good news: Train wrecks stop all by themselves
LikeLike
well said, but in the process, before they stop by themselves, a lot of people get hurt, of course
LikeLike
Congress should re-write the law so that it requires 100% of students to have equal opportunities for success. The following goals are all achievable through legislation if we put our money where our mouths are.
All students should have highly qualified teachers as determined by certification in their subject area and through supportive, independent peer review evaluation.
Maximum class size should be legislated at 20 max.
All districts should be required to fund education equally; no unfunded mandates.
All students should be able to learn in clean, healthy, and modern facilities that are properly heated and air conditioned.
All students should have access to state of the art technologies that enhance their learning opportunities.
All students should have educational programs that meet their individual needs, including academic, vocational, and avocational needs and interests.
Well I guess I just proved that one can type and dream at the same time.
LikeLike
Declaring, “All men are created equal” and assuring there are equitable education and vocational opportunities in our nation for each child to achieve “life, liberty and the PURSUIT of happiness” are two different things.
Applying equally high standards to all students and schools without providing a sufficient level of school funding and wrap around services to support student learning is not justice.
Common Core definition of rigor; learning activities that cultivate student grit, such as climbing a rungless ladder.
LikeLike
Okay, here is my analogy and why NCLB should be shipped off to an uninhabitable planet…
Our nation aspires to be crime free so do we make a law that says anyone who commits a crime be executed?
In effect, NCLB is “executing” children when it makes a noble but irrational goal of 100 percent proficiency and then PUNISHES by firing teachers, closing schools and creating top down education policy which actually PREVENTS children from learning if its impossible goal is not met. And really, when you deny a child the skills to become a lifelong learner and make school an environment that reinforces a hatred of supposed learning, you in effect are metaphorically executing children (although some might say in reality when you create a school to prison pipeline you indeed are executing children). Lamar Alexander and any other politician supporting NCLB (that includes those pandering for election votes who stay mum on this controversial issue).. how do you respond to this!
LEAVE TEACHING TO TEACHERS… and ADDRESS POVERTY ISSUES… that is what I say to politicians in bed with big business and the profiteering corporate “ed reform” nonsense. Help educators teach by setting policy that will change our ever-increasing poverty rate.
LikeLike
They can start with a living wage for full time adult workers.
Schools in impoverished neighborhoods need not be poor, substandard facilities in comparison to the state of the suburban school near by.
LikeLike
Agreed.
LikeLike
. . .the state of the [art] suburban school
LikeLike
yes yes yes
LikeLike
How would YOU change the . . . ever-increasing poverty rate?
Possibly tax the rich more?
LikeLike
And how would you do this, Harlan? How would you address the ever-increasing poverty rate, the vast numbers of children in the United States living in poverty, the ever increasing income and wealth inequality, and the ever-decreasing economic mobility in this country?
It’s easy to ask such questions. Let’s hear your answers.
LikeLike
That’s a fair question. And my answer is a painful one, and that is what is sometimes called “welfare reform.” By that I mean revising the incentives currently provided by government to poverty parents. My number one revision would be to REQUIRE work of everyone receiving welfare. No work, no welfare. Wage subsidies would be needed and possibly even government jobs to make that work profitable enough to sustain a person or family.
But that would be my first revision. No work, no welfare, including Medicaid, Section 8, etc. That such an overarching revision would be adopted is not likely, given the dependent voting constituency in the country, whom it is in the interests of Democrat politicians to increase in order to guarantee perpetual political dominance. But until the government stops issuing food stamps, extended unemployment, and gets stricter about disability, I do not see that ANY other measure would begin to pare back poverty. Everyone should have a living WAGE, but that must come from a JOB.
LikeLike
Harlan, most welfare goes to feed children who would otherwise go hungry. And way back in the Clinton administration, very strict work requirements were written into the welfare laws, as well as time limitations for receiving benefits.
I would heartily endorse government work programs of a WPA kind. That’s what was called for in 2007, at the time of the crash. But instead we got bailouts for mobsters.
LikeLike
Harlan, I believe you’ve just proposed a socialist revolution.
LikeLike
Generational poverty, the dependence it breeds, and the hopelessness that follows will never go away at $7.25 an hour.
LikeLike
Not sure if this is on topic, but George H.W. Bush just received a Profile in Courage Award for raising taxes after his campaign ran on a pledge of “no new taxes.” Secretary Duncan likes to trumpet his own courage for persisting with his education policies in the face of resistance…but maybe the real courage would be to openly face the reality that his plans have not been as brilliant as he thought they were.
LikeLike
Courage, Bravery and Valor vs. Affluenza, Avarice and Narcissism
The opposite of courage, is currying favor with the self-serving wealthy, rather they are tech moguls or hedge fund owners.
The opposite of bravery, is batting down children and the people who, work among them.
The opposite of valor, is extracting tax dollars from communities, for the coffers of billionaires, touting jobs they can’t deliver.
In contrast:
Affluenza is a school design rejected by wealthy parents for their children but, endorsed for the children of the 99%.
Avarice is exploitation of tax loopholes by tech moguls and hedge fund owners.
Narcissism and sociopathic behavior is hiding behind foundations to buy the political process.
LikeLike
No Child Left Behind has forced so many children to the metaphorical back of the bus — with its narrowing and dumbing down of the curriculum, and emphasis on standardized testing which helps absolutely no one. It’s time (past time) to get rid of NCLB so that we really can educate all children.
And — to put forth an alternate vision, let’s put social studies / government / civics at the top of the priority list. We need an educated public so that Congress will no longer have the problem of figuring out how to convince the public that “No Child Left Behind” forces many children to be left behind. Look beyond the name — beyond the soundbite. Social studies is what we need — not trigonometry for all. (I’m a math teacher.)
LikeLike
This is by Mercedes, the speaker you liked so much at the rally in LI.
LikeLike
I like this observation by Lamar Alexander:
“Most of our politics in America is about the disappointment of not meeting the high goals we set for ourselves.”
He’s right: most readers of your column (and I) are disappointed haven’t met the goal of providing an equal opportunity for all kids. Most viewers of Fox News and Republicans in the House are disappointed we haven’t drowned the government in a bathtub. We need to have politics based on aspiration instead of asphyxiation.
LikeLike
If he thinks we need more goals to help our country, here’s one : “All politicians will be honest and work for the good of the public educational sector by 2014, not for their pocketbook, or for their financial supporters”.
LikeLike
I wrote about this issue as a symptom of our highly dysfunctional Congress, some time ago. http://systemschangeconsulting.wordpress.com/2013/02/28/the-great-dysfunction-or-lessons-in-how-not-to-govern/
LikeLike
Politicians also want cheap, quick fixes. Over the 42 years of my career, instead of really providing us with the resources we needed politicians went from one fad to another leaving teachers and our pupils, our children, to get by as best we could. They never had the money to lower class size as an example, something critical, especially in inner city schools. But we managed. Now they want a cheap, insecure and compliant workforce, not a teaching profession, in the classroom. They want to identify schools as failing rather than accepting the responsibility for the fact that they are the ones who have failed.
LikeLike
Wrong goal from the git-go. We can see clearly now what should have led the parade in behalf of all creative, life-loving, courageous child futures. We have marched in the wrong direction, determined to disband the democracy that gives us all our possibilities. Company Halt!
LikeLike
I don’t know if I would say, “we” in that statement. A lot of teachers and TRUE child advocates spoke out against NCLB when it was still being debated in congress. I expect, Kathy, that you were probably one of those that spoke out against it, too.
LikeLike
Please state it explicitly, what should have led the parade.
I don’t see that “we” are determined to disband democracy at all, unless by democracy you mean union control of local school boards. THAT I do agree is under attack, and well it should be.
LikeLike
The NCLB act was championed by Ted Kennedy and GW Bush. The underlying philosophy of which was summarized in the now infamous slogan, “End the soft bigotry of low expectations.”
This line was an insult to the many thousands and thousands of tireless, hard working, and well intentioned teachers who devoted their lifeblood to students who lived in some of the poorest and most challenging school systems in America.
Generational poverty, racism, and true hopelessness in these impoverished, mostly inner city districts, formed an unholy trinity that transformed the noble goal of “high expectations” for all, into a political pipedream.
LikeLike
Yes, the whole mess, NCLB and Son of NCLB, was founded on an insult and a lie
LikeLike
The pipe dream continues with the assumption that eradicating poverty will produce successful students. We should do what we can to provide equal opportunity to all, even extra-ordinary opportunity, but do so in the belief that we can save some or many, but not all because not all will be smart enough or motivated enough for academic education.
LikeLike
It’s insane for us to imagine that education should be invariantly academic. Kids differ. So should our schools and programs.
LikeLike
As usual, The Washington Post was way late (2007) in reporting the effects of No Child Left Behind. In 2003, Gerald Bracey ended his 13th annual report on The Condition of Public Education this way:
“And so we end where we began. NCLB is a weapon of mass destruction used to launch a campaign of shock and awe against the schools and against the children. The year that was, was not a good one.”
The next year, he pointed out that “California projects that by the witching year of 2014, NCLB will label 99 percent of its schools ‘failing.’ Minnesota, one of the nation’s highest scoring states, projects that 2014 will find 80 percent of its schools wanting.”
As Bracey and others noted about NCLB’s 100 percent proficiency requirement, “The law effectively guarantees that we cannot obtain 100 percent proficiency because it requires that the tests that measure whether or not we are proficient be keyed to ‘challenging’ standards. But challenging standards are those that, by definition, not everyone can meet. If everyone could, they wouldn’t be challenging.”
It seems that not much has changed since 2003.
LikeLike
Common Core enthusiasts demand more rigor in the classroom and learning activities that cultivate student grit.
When it comes to our disadvantaged and neediest students, seems like grit-building activities include climbing a rungless ladder.
Nearly 1 in 4 children in America are currently living in poverty, and one would expect that a data-driven campaign to raise academic achievement in America would take into account this staggering figure.
The Ed Department has awarded Race To The Top funds to assist states that adopted the Common Core Standards and has established spending priorities and guidelines to support successful implementation of the standards.
At a time when so many students are living in poverty one would expect that priorities would include, additional staff, smaller class sizes, and essential wrap around services to ameliorate the affects of poverty.
Instead the Ed Department has set spending priorities such as upgrading and expanding data collection systems, implementing new VAM teacher evaluation systems, high quality CCSS professional development for teachers, and designing or purchasing curriculum materials and standardized testing programs.
So while teachers across the country attend close reading professional development sessions, students in poorer communities won’t come close to reading a book in the school library because there are no funds to hire a librarian.
While ed reform leaders are proud of their efforts to increase college readiness and raise standards, students in 20% of the public schools in New York City aren’t able to raise their voices in a choir because there are no arts teachers.
“New York City’s comptroller plans to release a report on Monday quantifying what student advocates have long suspected: that many public schools in the city do not offer any kind of arts education, and that the lack of arts instruction disproportionately affects low-income neighborhoods…
Between 2006 and 2013, spending on arts supplies and equipment dropped by 84 percent, the report said. When money is tight, arts education is often one of the first subjects to be sidelined, the report noted. It said the trend had accelerated as schools focused more on meeting accountability standards, shifting their resources from subjects seen as nonessential, like arts, to preparation for English and math tests…”
Childhood obesity has more than doubled in the past thirty years, so one would expect that a data-driven education reform movement would make purchasing new playground and sports equipment a priority rather than buying more computers to administer the new Common Core assessments or purchasing standardized tests that include “authentic” reading passages with numerous product placements including soda.
The Race To The Top priorities appear to be more about assuring that students, teachers, and public schools in our poorer communities get failing grades rather than providing equitable and essential academic support services to help our neediest students achieve higher standards.
LikeLike
JChase
I am in complete agreement with you. I spent months asking for yellow lined paper. They finally tracked some down. They have dry erase markers, but not the other kind. Most schools have eliminated class plays. We no longer have theme days. Birthday parties are not allowed. My school has no playground. They use part of the parking lot on those few days the students are allowed out. Nearly all the things I loved about school as a child have ceased to exist.
LikeLike
“. . . high quality CCSS professional development . . . ”
Now that’s an oxymoron for sure!
LikeLike
Yup, that’s up there with Congressional Ethics Committee and Military Intelligence
LikeLike
Most standardized tests favor strong left-brain dominant skills (i.e. executive function, working memory, verbal reasoning etc.) IQ tests (which test these skills) tell us that 86% of people have IQs under 115. The Common Core State Standards seem to be designed for the 14% who have an IQ above 115 or possibly even 120 (10% of the population). See: http://expressiveepicurean.wordpress.com/2010/01/21/the-curse-of-being-average/
Public policy-makers and elites like Bill Gates apparently think that making school-work more “rigorous” will raise IQ scores. Science and research tell us differently. Magical thinking pipes are what these policy makers are smoking. What the rigor will produce is pain and motivation killing environments. There will be more kids dropping out of school as a result, which will require more public policy to create programs for these students. The larger plan is to divide kids into different groups and schools by the time they are in high school. The freedom to be a late bloomer will be thwarted and anyone who has a divergent mind (right-brain dominant) will be crushed. Students with learning disabilities will be further marginalized and made to feel “broken” or damaged. Immigrants will find this system daunting and unkind as they struggle with a new language. Sad. Sad. Sad.
LikeLike
It’s like Man of La Mancha; “To dream the impossible dream, to reach, the unreachable goal.” And to find someone to blame when we don’t.
LikeLike
Utopian goals. Exactly what is wrong with NCLB, and much more in government. But, people are told that anything is possible for everyone. Not ever, and not while there is any freedom left. One can legislate freedom (i.e. hands off), but one cannot legislate success.
LikeLike
The Common Core State Standards are cognitive goals and EXPECTATIONS of student “growth” and learning. They DEMAND cognitive skills and abilities that must be ACQUIRED by our students, rather than IMPARTED by the teachers.
Our students are not standardized, they possess a wide range of cognitive capabilities and disabilities. These abilities and skills do not emerge and “blossom” at the same rate and in the same way.
Unfortunately, the extra academic assistance and support services that our schools and teachers provide for struggling students, may not be enough to compensate for the absence of learning after school hours.
Many students who are living in poverty begin their schooling lagging far behind in basic skills and vocabulary development. Many do not participate in after school enrichment activities and informal learning experiences at home that help to support and advance student achievement in school.
In effect, our disadvantaged students who are “Racing To The Top” have a much greater academic “distance” to travel to achieve proficiency by graduation and in many cases they must do this with less academic assistance and resources at home.
The Common Core does nothing to ameliorate this problem, because it focuses on the “symptoms” of low achievement in our classrooms rather than the underlying “illness” of poverty in our homes and communities.
It is fanciful to suggest that a steady “diet” or regime of higher academic expectations and standardized tests will reduce poverty and it’s impact on student learning in our classrooms.
This approach makes as much sense as a nation raising the daily calorie intake recommendations and recommended weight for all citizens as a way to combat the effects of hunger and famine.
If a student enters school lagging behind other students in academic skills and abilities, he or she could achieve the same amount of academic “growth” as his/her peers but may still be lagging behind in skills at graduation.
With so many students starting school “behind” and living in poverty, the number of students who require remedial college courses is not reliable EVIDENCE to support CLAIMS that our teachers are ineffective and our schools are failing.
It is foolish to spend millions of dollars on software “solutions” and standardized tests that measure a narrow and shallow set of hard skills, while laying off teachers, closing school libraries, eliminating courses, field trips, and work-based learning experiences that cultivate lifelong learning skills and student self-efficacy.
The Race To The Top funds would be much better spent if they were used to support job shadowing programs, mentoring, and internships for all our students so that they spend much less class time testing and PREPARING for college and careers and much more work experience time applying and PRACTICING transferable work-based skills.
Any Race To The Top funds that are remaining could be used to solve the “problem” of families having to pay for extra college classes by providing Common Core vouchers for 1st year remedial college courses.
LikeLike
I still don’t see the mechanism that keeps it in place.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on TN BATs BlOG.
LikeLike
“With so many students starting school “behind” and living in poverty, the number of students who require remedial college courses is not reliable EVIDENCE to support CLAIMS that our teachers are ineffective and our schools are failing.”
I have raised this before, is the need to offer remedial courses more an admission policy issue rather than a K-12 claim that teachers are ineffective and schools are failing? Are we lowering the admission standards and therefore making it necessary to offer remedial courses? Are we to believe that every student that graduates is college material? I do not recall any remedial courses offered when I attended college.
LikeLike
Ed reformers have a love affair with data, but they only cite and consider the data that supports their cause.
Common Corp. evangelists continue to preach about DATA-DRIVEN instruction while ignoring reliable DATA that reveals standardized tests are not a reliable measure of student achievement and VAM is an equally flawed tool for measuring teacher effectiveness.
Wonder if they will ignore the reliable EVIDENCE and DATA from this recent Gallup-Purdue study that suggests we should reconsider and revise the metrics we use to assess and predict career readiness?
“When it comes to being engaged at work and experiencing high well-being after graduation, a new Gallup-Purdue University study of college graduates shows that the type of institution they attended matters less than what they experienced there…
Instead, the study found that support and experiences in college had more of a relationship to long-term outcomes for these college graduates. For example, if graduates recalled having a professor who cared about them as a person, made them excited about learning, and encouraged them to pursue their dreams, their odds of being engaged at work more than doubled, as did their odds of thriving in all aspects of their well-being.
And if graduates had an internship or job in college where they were able to apply what they were learning in the classroom, were actively involved in extracurricular activities and organizations, and worked on projects that took a semester or more to complete, their odds of being engaged at work doubled as well…
The data in this study suggest that, as far as future worker engagement and well-being are concerned, the answers could lie as much in thinking about aspects that last longer than the selectivity of an institution or any of the traditional measures of college…”
http://www.gallup.com/poll/168848/life-college-matters-life-college.aspx
One would also assume that the DATA from studies regarding college drop out and low completion rates, including a report prepared for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, identified poor academic skills as the primary cause or reason for students who enroll, but fail to graduate college.
As Felix Unger (Tony Randall) warned us, when you assume…
“…This study is designed to test the assumptions many of us make about college students today and why so many of them fail to graduate. It also helps to identify solutions that young people themselves say would help most…
As background to the survey findings, it may be helpful to begin with a clearer picture of “college students” today. Many of us envision young people living in college dorms, going to school full-time, attending ball games and fraternity parties, maybe working a few hours a week or in the summer to bring in a little spare cash…
The facts, though, show quite a different picture:
Among students in four-year schools, 45 percent work more than 20 hours a week.
Among those attending community colleges, 6 in 10 work more than 20 hours a week, and more than a quarter work more than 35 hours a week.
Just 25 percent of students attend the sort of residential college we often envision.
23 percent of college students have dependent children.
…If we truly aim to help this new group of nontraditional students fulfill their aspirations, college and university officials, state and federal policy-makers, employers, foundations and other advocates
trying to ramp up college completion need to take a fresh, clear-eyed look at their current assumptions and practices.
The findings here reveal gaps in the higher education system that serve to undercut the efforts of students who need to work and go to school at the same time. They raise serious questions about long-standing policies that seem profoundly ill suited to students who simply cannot afford to go to school full-time for several
years…”
Source: “With Their Whole Lives Ahead of Them” – Myths & Realities About Why So Many Students Fail to Finish College / Research by Public Agenda, Prepared for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. December, 2009
http://www.publicagenda.org/pages/with-their-whole-lives-ahead-of-them
“…In addition to the diverse pathways students take while working toward their educational goals, students who enroll in college full time immediately after high school no longer represent the majority among post secondary college students (Choy, 2002; Horn & Carroll, 1997; Reeves, Miller, & Rouse, 2011). Rather, many students delay college enrollment, enroll in college part time, and/or have a full-time job while enrolled.
To balance the responsibilities of family, work, and school, these students often take educational routes that require a longer time to a post secondary credential, such as enrolling part time, attending institutions with shorter terms, and occasionally stopping out…
Moreover, institutional accountability measures based on conventional graduation rates may underestimate the complexity and cost associated with improving outcomes and may disadvantage institutions, such as many community colleges, that enroll large numbers of students following nontraditional pathways (Belfield, Crosta, & Jenkins, 2013)…”
Source: Completing College: A National View of Student Attainment Rates – Fall 2007 Cohort / National Student ClearingHouse Research Center
http://nscresearchcenter.org/signaturereport6/#Sig6-Intro-1
LikeLike
Simple. Four letters ruining the ABCs: ALEC. Decimate the middle class, make schools factories that produce puppets who would graduate without the ability to think, to analyze, to possess creativity, to have self-confidence and thus who would–MOST OF ALL–lack the ability to question authority. “Career & college ready?”
Don’t make me laugh! More like dead-end-part-time-job-with-no-benefits-&-necessity-to-get-food-stamps-&-be-on-medicaid-to-barely-survive. Did you all see any recent articles about how the economic situation is causing an increase in population decline (reason given–middle class fearful of job loss, downsizing, job insecurity, thus are afraid to have more than one child {oh, so THAT’s how we’re catching up w/China!!}, which, in turn, is causing more U.S. economic problems, as this has created much less consumer spending)? I found this in the Chicago Sun-Times the other day. Anyway–all fingers point to ALEC. Now, what do we do with this information? Fight back where you live–start by opting out of testing. Pack meetings.
Teach your kids a civics lesson over the summer–in fact, make some U.S. history–involve them in marches (field trips modeled after the one Leonie Haimson had organized at Pear$on’$ Manhattan hdqtrs. several years ago.
Yes, WE can, because WE MUST. And WE WILL–city by city, suburb by suburb, state by state.
LikeLike
We hear so much how powerful teacher unions are, yet we see little evidence their strength is used to actually improve public education.
While we expect organized unions to work to benefit its members, the “vocation” of education is secondary to
pay, tenure and class size.
The reluctance of teacher unions to take on the US Dept.
of Education and the ‘alphabet soup’ of federal programs
it created is reminiscent of the failure of the NAACP and
even the Congressional Black Caucus which refuses to
address social issue that are destroying Black families.
Whether a groups is left or right leaning it should never
test the political climate before deciding to follow its
principled beliefs. ajbruno14@gmail.com
LikeLike
The only comment I can think of is AGGGGGGGGGH!
LikeLike
[…] thought of this this morning as I read Diane Ravitch’s piece about the political reasons that we are stuck with No Child Left Behind hanging over our collective […]
LikeLike