Former Secretary of Education Arne Duncan and even President Obama have done a victory dance about the “historic” rise in the graduation rate, but Robert Pondiscio of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute says that it is the “phoniest statistic” in American education.
Pondiscio writes:
According to federal data released late last year, and dutifully trumpeted ever since (including in last night’s State of the Union address), the nation’s high school graduation rate has hit an all-time high, with 82 percent of the Class of 2014 earning a diploma. “As a result, many more students will have a better chance of going to college, getting a good job, owning their own home, and supporting a family,” crowed then-Secretary of Education Arne Duncan.
Isn’t it pretty to think so?
In fact, Secretary Duncan might be right for now. Confidence and good will are baked into a high school diploma. It is an academic promissory note that signals to college admissions staffers, employers, and others that the holder has achieved some reasonable level of academic proficiency. But it’s also a faith-based system. It only works if people believe it stands for something tangible.
Regarding the recent spike in graduation rates, good luck figuring out what it stands for. Not improved student proficiency, certainly. There has been no equally dramatic spike in SAT scores. Don’t look for a parallel uptick on seventeen-year-old NAEP, better performance on AP tests, or the ACT, either. You won’t find it. The only thing that appears to be rising is the number of students in need of remedial math and English in college. And the number of press releases bragging about huge increases in graduation rates.
Read the article to see the many links.
He adds:
To be sure, there are very good reasons for credit recovery: We should want students who fall behind on credits due to illness, pregnancy, or some other disruption to have the opportunity to catch up and graduate. Neither the child nor society benefits if we place barriers in the way of graduation. But problems with credit recovery are legion. There’s no clear definition of what it is, no good or consistent data on how often it’s used, and no way of knowing whether it’s academically rigorous or merely a failsafe to paper over failure and drag unprepared kids across the finish line to boost graduation rates.
The potential for abuse is rampant, whether through less-than-rigorous credit recovery schemes or (as in many of the cases detailed in the New York Post) a teacher holding his nose and passing a student for the sake of expedience. Has the student earned her diploma, or is she merely being handed a diploma as a parting gift?
The even bigger problem is that we might just be stuck with it. Refusing to confer even a debased, potentially meaningless credential on an eighteen-year-old is tantamount to publicly pronouncing him a failure—unfit for post-secondary education, entry-level employment, or military service. As one child advocate lamented to Chalkbeat this week, “Panera Bread asks if you have a high school diploma. What are the options for these kids?”
So here is the dilemma:
In years past, young people without a high school diploma could sell get a job, and often a job in a factory with decent wages. But no more. The factories have been outsources, and most employers expect a high school diploma, which they use as a proxy for “shows up for work every day.” Thus, the student without a high school diploma may be permanently unemployed or consigned to menial labor. As states ratchet up the standards for high school graduation, as they base them on end of course exams in Algebra and other tough subjects, more young people will drop out or have diplomas that signify attendance. Face it: the push for higher standards debases the high school diploma. The alternative is to have large numbers of young people who are permanently unemployed and unemployable.

‘The alternative is to have large numbers of young people who are permanently unemployed and unemployable.”
I don’t think you give employers enough credit for being intelligent. The world of work will catch up to the scheme eventually. It might take a generation but they’ll eventually realize that there’s not much to a HS diploma (or equivalancy) and they will begin testing employees on an IQ-like test as part of the application, even for Walmart.
This is a lot of why low-wage employers want to retain a sub-$10 hourly rate. If you can’t distinguish between who will show up on time every day and who will not, what’s the point of the credential? They’ll make up their own credentialization, involving mass testing/sorting of some other kind.
LikeLike
I have observed employers screening for jobs at restaurants and for senior care. The forms and questions may call for a high school diploma by they are clearly using other indicators of “competency” one is handling the paper and pencil or keyboard to answer questions prior to an interview where self-presentation skills matter.\. Of course the tech promoters want competency based assessments to become the norm, with certificates, badges, diplomas serving as a souvenier more than credential.
LikeLike
In a rational, non-PC world, employers would already be using aptitude tests for prospective employees, like the military has always done with great success. But a 1971 U.S. Supreme Court ruling effectively prohibited such tests because of the “disparate impact” on politically favored groups. A politically incorrect percentage of minorities performed poorly on those tests, and were thus not being hired. No employer will risk a disparate impact lawsuit these days; that’s why so many employers require college degrees for jobs that don’t in any way genuinely require a college education. The degree is a screening device used to weed out those less likely to succeed on the job.
A few years ago, the Obama Justice Department studied this issue of requiring not-needed college degrees, but ultimately decided not to pursue litigation. No reason was given, but it’s easy to guess why. The college-industrial complex wants everyone to believe that all kids MUST go to college to have any chance at economic security. If high school grads could be hired for most jobs without spending 4+ years in college, the higher ed. world would rapidly downsize, threatening the financial security of, and campaign contributions from, a reliable Democratic constituency.
LikeLike
There’s no need to worry about employers testing an applicant’s ability to do the job: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griggs_v._Duke_Power_Co.
This is the same decision that made the college degree a signaling device to employers.
LikeLike
Every private sector tech job at a large company I applied for required a screening test. I also administered them on the employer side. But in one case I earned a rare perfect score, but another lower scoring candidate got the job due to connections. Ironically, the rejecting company laid off the entire division few weeks later and eventually folded. On the employer side, the tests were a factor, though a small one. No manager wanted to get stuck with a bad hire and the tests did a poor job compared to speaking directly with a candidate, peer reviews, and some research. However, the fact the military relies on these “aptitude” tests does not bring me comfort.
LikeLike
Mathvale, you obviously don’t have the first clue about the aptitude tests the military uses, so you take an uninformed, ideologically-based swipe at them. Those tests are highly reliable in predicting success rates in education for foreign languages, cybersecurity, mechanics, and much else. Psychologists and other specialists developed them, not the boogeyman testing companies that Edworld hates. Free advice: know what you’re talking about before you show your ignorance.
LikeLike
Hmm, interesting, John Webster. I’ve re-read MathVale’s post a couple times now and I didn’t really see much in there about military aptitude testing. Based on my close reading, it appears that s/he’s talking about his/her own experience with aptitude testing in the private sector. I hope your own aptitude tests didn’t point you in any direction that involves reading comprehension.
LikeLiked by 1 person
An actual close reader would have discerned that my comment focused on MathVale’s implied criticism of aptitude testing in the military, not aptitude testing done elsewhere. Almost of the military’s aptitude testing is done for technical jobs in the enlisted ranks. For example, to qualify for study at the Defense Language Institute, an enlisted person (or more rarely, an officer) has to score highly enough on the Defense Language Aptitude Battery for specific categories of languages, with some categories requiring higher scores to qualify. There are no exceptions to this rule. People with 140+ IQs sometimes don’t do well on the DLAB, while others with 100 IQs sometimes score very highly. Long experience has shown the high reliability of those tests for predicting success in language learning. Likewise for many other career-specific military jobs.
MathVale refers to situations where aptitude tests are given to candidates who seem to already have enough education credentials to be eligible for face-to-face interviews. The candidates’ qualifications are primarily their prior credentials, in the classroom or at other jobs, i.e. they have shown at least a reasonable level of technical ability. The military is primarily testing young people without much background (usually none) in the jobs for which their aptitude is being tested. They don’t have the time or money to train just anybody who thinks they want to study a given area. That’s very different from four year colleges, where the aptitude test to study, say, foreign languages is whether the tuition checks clear or not.
For the record, I scored at the very top ranking for reading comprehension tests in high school and beyond. Unlike most commenters on this blog, I also don’t comment on topics I know little about.
LikeLike
Consider this into the calculation… In California this year, diplomas were handed out retroactively:
CASHEE http://hotair.com/archives/2015/09/13/california-issuing-free-diplomas-to-high-school-students-who-flunked-out/
LikeLike
Consider this into the calculation…
In California this year, diplomas were handed out retroactively:
CASHEE http://hotair.com/archives/2015/09/13/california-issuing-free-diplomas-to-high-school-students-who-flunked-out/
LikeLike
“…academic promissory note….”
‘Nuff said. Just another “education = economics” argument.
Anyway, a high school diploma never has been a “promissory note”. Certainly not for college (except maybe a few state schools which back in the day used to be mandated to accept all state high school graduates, but those colleges intentionally tried to flunk out students precisely because they didn’t trust the diploma). Not really for employers either – they typically want to see some experience for anything beyond a basic entry-level position.
Just more “schools are failing” arguments. Low graduation rates = schools are failing!!! Our country is in peril!!! High graduation rates = schools are fudging that, the diploma doesn’t mean anything, schools are failing!!! Our country is in peril!!!
LikeLike
Dienne: you’ve pointed out what is crucial—
Mr. Pondiscio is simply reverting to basics, reminding rheephormistas near and far what the proper rheephorm mindset is, meaning “the soft bigotry of low expectations regarding anything to do public schools.”
Nothing but a restatement of worst business practices in the form of stacked/forced ranking that reinforces inequity and hierarchy.
Thank you for your comments.
😎
LikeLike
Worse still, Dienne, not only does the language view education through the lens of business, but through the lens of debt, credit, interest and liens.
LikeLike
When I was in high school many decades ago, at least 75% of the students in my high school who received high school diplomas were not “college ready” by today’s standards.
Only half went to any college. Of those, 75% went to community colleges. Only the top 25% of those who received high school diplomas — if that — went to state universities. The top few students might go to an Ivy League school. It was an excellent cross section of what America looked like.
Even the students who went to Harvard did not have anywhere the math knowledge that the typical student is expected to have today to be deemed “college ready”. Trig was highest level math, and not AP classes were something only east coast private schools offered.
Most of those “non-college ready” students actually went to college and did fine. They have excellent careers as psychologists, graphic designers, marketing executives and even running their own company. And just think, not a one could pass a Trig exam. Or do any math beyond basic Algebra.
Come to think of it, one student who probably would never have been deemed “college ready” by the tough standards today, despite being perfectly smart, is teaching young gifted students who already know more math, science and engineering than 99% of the idiots who have invented those standards.
No one should be allowed to bemoan the low standards in high school without being forced to prove themselves by passing a specially-designed test to check their own college readiness.
LikeLike
“Only half went to any college. Of those, 75% went to community colleges. Only the top 25% of those who received high school diplomas — if that — went to state universities.”
How the heck do you know these statistics?
LikeLike
FLERP! if my post was unintelligible, I apologize. I was talking about my own high school, which was pretty typical for the time – parents both affluent and low-income used it. The published rate of students going on to post-graduate education was about 50% but that included community colleges with 2 year programs. Very few students left the state for college, and most didn’t leave the community.
If only they had been told they couldn’t graduate high school until they proved their agility in trigonometry and geometry and finding evidence to prove the author’s intent, I’m sure they’d have been better off. At least, that’s what the reformers say. More likely many of them would never had obtained that high school degree that allowed them to build reasonable lives for themselves.
LikeLike
I guess it was to be expected that the so-called reformers would feign disgust and decide to “expose” the juiced graduation rates brought about by their own live-or-die-by-the-test policies.
It literally is a perpetual motion machine: so-called reformers call for “objective” measures of student achievement, i.e. tests and graduation rates, which are then used as weapons against schools with high numbers of students who live in poverty. When the threatened and intimidated admins at those schools duly follow Campbell’s Law and juke their stats, so-called reformers pretend to be shocked that gambling is taking place in the casino, and call for even more punishment.
LikeLike
It’s especially ironic when the same people approve of the notion that charter schools should be for the “strivers” and so what if they are getting rid of all their “non-college track” students.
I thought that charters were supposed to show us all how to make all those students college ready. Instead, they raised standards and got rid of all the kids who couldn’t meet them.
LikeLike
Tough crowd.
Thanks for the notice, Diane. Glad we see eye to eye on this–even if your loyal readers question my motives. Hope you’re well. — Robert
LikeLike
Diane’s been exposing the bulls— around here for nearly four years. We’re just very well informed. And you might even say we have those skills you claim you want for all students – like critical thinking.
LikeLike
Rob
You know full well why those graduation rates have been raised nation wide. Your support for punitive education reform under NCLB and the USDOE/ADWP is the only reason they have gone up so significantly. Everyone knows student intelligence, student motivation, and family support of education CANNOT be legislated. Yet under threat of federal action, SINI and FOCUS status have been tied to graduation rates for over a decade. What would you expect to happen? The entire foundation of the data driven reform movement, really the status quo now, has been built upon threats and punishment. Even desperate educators can stoop to desperate solutions when the pressure gets turned up. Try looking in the mirror next time you wonder why the system you helped destroy is in tatters.
LikeLike
Hi “NYS Parent”
A point of clarification, please. When you refer my “support for punitive education reform under NCLB and the USDOE/ADWP” were you referring to this piece of mine?
http://edexcellence.net/articles/lets-tell-the-truth-high-stakes-tests-damage-reading-instruction
Or maybe it was this one, where I noted it “seems fanciful to think we can expect teachers to commit themselves wholeheartedly to reaching higher standards while holding the threat of test-based performance reviews over their heads.”
http://edexcellence.net/articles/holding-a-wolf-by-the-ears
More recently I derided the President’s testing reduction talk as meaningless nonsense and wrote, “if you use standardized tests to make high-stakes judgments about schools and teachers, they are no longer a mere diagnostic. The testing tail wags the schooling dog.”
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/knowledge-bank/2015/10/26/obamas-school-testing-talk-is-meaningless
Or maybe it was when I noted that tying tests scores to individual teachers functionally demands bad practice? Like here:
http://edexcellence.net/articles/esea-and-the-return-of-a-well-rounded-curriculum
If these were not the cites you had in mind where I described my support for punitive education reform, could you kindly let me know which ones you had in mind? I’m a little fuzzy.
Your neighbor,
“Rob”
LikeLike
With all due respect, sir, not a “[t]ough crowd” but one that believes and acts on the idea of fair play—
If we hold our own feet to the fire and keep nothing back in our criticisms of public schools, then don’t expect us to hold our tongues when it comes to corporate education reform.
As for your comments below, strictly speaking for myself, I think that by basically recycling Arne Duncan’s CHOOSING THE RIGHT BATTLES speech to the April 30, 2013 annual meeting of AERA* you are doing nothing more than going along with the current rheephorm attempt to relabel old failed policies and mandates in new shinier bottles.
*Link: http://www.ed.gov/news/speeches/choosing-right-battles-remarks-and-conversation
And actions speak louder than words. For example, as a fanboy of Michelle Rhee—quite unintentionally of course—pointed out in no uncertain terms on this blog, a résumé may say you took your students from the 13th to the 90th percentile but it ain’t gonna happen in reality. No matter how many times its spun, the patrons and enforcers and enablers of self-styled “education reform” are stuck with the yawning chasm between their high flying words and their often toxic deeds.
Just because a member of the education establishment asserts something, it ain’t necessarily so.
That said, thank you for attempting to make yourself clear by coming on to “Diane Ravitch’s blog A site to discuss better education for all.”
IMHO, credit where credit is due.
😎
LikeLike
Mr Pondiscio,
When you say “The only thing that appears to be rising is the number of students in need of remedial math and Ebglish in college” I reflect on The Accupuplacer Test. Last spring I viewed the company’s online sample questions for a relative. I wondered whether high school English teachers were even addressing what’s required for the Sentence Skills multiple choice items. If secondary English focuses more on nonfiction, literature, and the writing process, students might not attain high scores. Yes, I’d like to think every student would have mastered the fine points of agreement (their cf its), introductory phrases, and the like but not every student will become a copy editor. Teens may have been performing satisfactorily at what they were asked to do in high school English but not score high on these MC tests. Has anyone conducted research whether writers who compose with correct usage and mechanics necessarily score high on these types of MC items?
Thank you
LikeLike
A word about “college ready”…
Terrified by my high schoolers transcripts that reflect the chaos that his school operates under due to all this “reform”, I had occasion to speak to a university admissions officer.
I brought up my son’s plight.
Not only did he nod knowingly, he said the university faces an odd conundrum in the wake of “reform.” In order to feed the US news and World Report college ranking beast, they were being forced to become far more “selective” and accept only kids with much higher high school GPAs than in the past, (To get ranked as “selective”) they also were now “accountable” for the matriculation rate- how many kids got a degree.
His problem? Statistically speaking it has never been the straight A high school students that have graduated in the largest numbers. It’s the “b” students. The very students the “selectivity” category pushes them to decline.
More proof that “college ready” is not such a clear cut concept. The idea that only straight A , AP, calculus taking students can succeed in college is off base. Kids mature. They grow up.
They get serious.
LikeLike
Excuse my potty mouth, but if they actually care about education and not just the bottom line, colleges universally need to tell U.S. News and World Report to f— off. That single report quite possibly does more damage to education – at all levels – than anything the rephormers have ever thought of. This article raises the idea that the key to undoing rephorm is, in fact, for colleges to reject the whole notion of admissions tests, or at least to give them far less weight: http://nancyebailey.com/2016/01/20/could-changing-college-admissions-be-the-end-of-high-stakes-testing/
“The idea that only straight A , AP, calculus taking students can succeed in college is off base. Kids mature. They grow up.”
Yes, that and the straight A kids often discover that what they were good at was school, not learning. Colleges are more likely to require the latter.
LikeLike
There is hope for us parents without the academically perfect children lacking a long resume of AP classes and 4.0 GPAs. Harvard Graduate School of Education released a report suggesting there is something to be said for lacking standardized testing aptitude while possessing social and well-balanced abilities.
LikeLike
Fm,
That university evidently has more students with higher GPAs applying, or their entering freshman classes would be smaller. If it’s a state school, the applicatnt pool probably reflects that some students are choosing state schools rather than private because of tuition, Also, students now apply to numerous colleges to “shop” for the best financial aid package.
The US News ratings have many factors–including % of alumni donating to the college. So make sure when your son graduates university, he donates to protect the value of his alma mater on his resume …
LikeLike
This notion also leaves out some people that take classes just for their own edification. Perhaps I want to take a class just to learn something, I do not need any more degrees. My son left school to serve in the Coast Guard. He has now returned to finish a degree several years later. He has a better understanding of engineering. Is he somehow a failure? I doubt it. He has something his engineering classmates do not, real world rescue experience. Reform can not measure his time in the water rescuing people and stressing the equipment.
LikeLike
Rob
I’ll give an even phonier statistic: Scoring a 3 or 4 on the Pearson (or PARCC or SBAC) math and ELA exams in third grade means you are on the path to college or career readiness.
Phonier yet: If you score a 2 or 1 on said tests you are a “failure”
Rob states,
“But without [*proficiency measures] validating the diplomas we’re handing out like participation trophies after a youth soccer match, we’re flying blind.”
Mr. Pondiscio – here in NYS you know dam well that every HS student must pass five Regents tests, two of which are now Common Core aligned in order to graduate HS. You could have at least held up NY as a model for “validating diplomas”.
LikeLike
There is something fundamentally flawed about requiring a “rigorous” standardized test to be the deciding factor in whether a student graduates or not.
LikeLike
I think the point that Pondiscio (and Achieve) would make is, first, that a diploma representing no standards is recognized as such. It isn’t that that employers are fooled into considering an undemanding diploma a qualification for a job. However, states and schools are able to offer multiple diplomas with different meanings so that students and parents are not misled about what a diploma from that state or that school actually means.
And states should hold themselves accountable for helping students reach the highest possible level.
LikeLike
Minor request Diane. Would you be able to add a “print” button to the options at the end of blogposts ?
LikeLike
Daun, I will ask my tech gurus.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi “NYS Parent”
A point of clarification, please. When you refer my “support for punitive education reform under NCLB and the USDOE/ADWP” were you referring to this piece of mine?
http://edexcellence.net/articles/lets-tell-the-truth-high-stakes-tests-damage-reading-instruction
Or maybe it was this one, where I noted it “seems fanciful to think we can expect teachers to commit themselves wholeheartedly to reaching higher standards while holding the threat of test-based performance reviews over their heads.”
http://edexcellence.net/articles/holding-a-wolf-by-the-ears
More recently I derided the President’s testing reduction talk as meaningless nonsense and wrote, “if you use standardized tests to make high-stakes judgments about schools and teachers, they are no longer a mere diagnostic. The testing tail wags the schooling dog.”
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/knowledge-bank/2015/10/26/obamas-school-testing-talk-is-meaningless
Or maybe it was when I noted that tying tests scores to individual teachers functionally demands bad practice? Like here:
http://edexcellence.net/articles/esea-and-the-return-of-a-well-rounded-curriculum
If these were not the cites you had in mind where I described my support for punitive education reform, could you kindly let me know which ones you had in mind? I’m a little fuzzy.
Your neighbor,
“Rob”
LikeLike
Are you forgetting who signs your checks?
Thomas B. Fordham Institute
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Thomas B. Fordham Institute is an ideologically conservative American nonprofit education policy think tank with offices in Washington, D.C., Columbus, Ohio, and Dayton, Ohio.
Positions[edit]
Standards and accountability[5]
The Thomas B. Fordham Institute presses for the full suite of standards-based reforms across the academic curriculum and throughout the K–12 system, including (but not limited to) careful implementation of the Common Core standards (CCSS) for English language arts (ELA) and mathematics as well as rigorous, aligned state assessments and forceful accountability mechanisms at every level.
A Reform Driven System[6]
The Thomas B. Fordham Institute seeks to deepen and strengthen the K–12 system’s capacity to deliver quality education to every child, based on rigorous standards and ample choices, by ensuring that it possesses the requisite talent, technology, policies, practices, structures, and nimble governance arrangements to promote efficiency as well as effectiveness
LikeLike
Quick questions sir:
What is the fundamental purpose of public education and where is that information to be found? Would you please give an example?
Have you read Noel Wilson’s “Educational Standards and the Problem of Error”? If so, your thoughts on what Wilson has proven about educational standards and standardized testing.
TIA,
Duane
LikeLike
Mr. Pondiscio, I find it ironic that you would question graduation rates as being “phony”.
What would constitute “real” graduation rates? Just 2 months ago you had no problem with manipulated graduation rates, it seemed:
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/knowledge-bank/2015/11/06/uncomfortable-questions-about-school-discipline-suspension-and-expulsion
“If all this creaming, counseling out and ensuring just the right school and just the right environment is a standard part of American education for so many, why does it become a problem – why does it make national news – only when someone gets caught doing it for poor black and brown kids?”
Let’s turn around that question, Mr. Pondiscio? How can you defend a practice where charter schools simply get rid of their “non-graduates” and then profess “shock, shock”, that public schools are allowing some of them to move on and graduate without being “college ready”?
Remember when charter schools were going to be the saviors of all those kids who weren’t on track to graduate? I think you’ll agree that they have found it to be an impossible (not to mention an expensive) mission and have abandoned it as fast as they could.
Since you don’t seem to be bothered by charter schools abandoning those kids, I can’t figure out your point here. Are public schools supposed to just weed them all out before graduation and then you will approve? Should the US DOE stop caring about drop out rates and then will you find that the resulting higher graduation rates are more legitimate?
LikeLike
I wish Arne was correct in his statement/belief that …“As a result, many more students will have a better chance of going to college, getting a good job, owning their own home, and supporting a family,” [crowed then-Secretary of Education Arne Duncan.]
The recent college graduates I know (and I know lots) can’t afford to leave home, can’t afford to buy a home, can hardly afford RENT with roommates and are drowning in college tuition debt. Arne is living in a bubble of eliteness.
LikeLike
mark 50% of black boys do not graduate from high school in USA. Paul J. Smith, Ed.D. pjsmith44@yahoo.com
LikeLike
Will the real Robert Pondiscio please stand up.
Are you simply the “good cop” for the Fordham Institute?
An enigma wrapped in a paradox?
A caring and concerned former teacher who lost his way?
Or just full of it?
Unfailing cheerleader for the Common Core standards, a pro Pearson/PARCC/SBAC testing guy; a staunch charter/choice advocate (an Eva wannabe?), supporter of artificially produced super-failure rates, public school basher, you seem to truly believe in the magical powers of test scores (but seem unconvinced of the permanent damage being inflicted on the majority of students), and graduation rates are the phoniest data ever yet they are attributed to the success of your reform efforts.
Yet you support enriched curricula, you completely get the importance of content knowledge (despite its complete absence from the CC) as a pre-requisite for reading comprehension, and, with some reluctance (see the trade-off) you see the importance of de-coupling teacher evaluations and test as a way of soothing the opt-out beast? Or truly restoring sanity to the 3 to 8 classrooms?
Rob on “REFORM SUCCESS” and HS graduation
And while there’s no room for complacency, REFORM IS WORKING: Test scores are trending up, particularly in math.
Graduation rates are too, especially for low-income kids of color.
Rob on Cuomo’s Common Core Task Force:
The report is silent, alas, on how the state is to assess for “joy” [of learning] in its annual tests. Nor are we told whether teachers are to be held accountable for love and joy. Perhaps only after we fix poverty. One truly ill-considered “recommendation” in the task force’s grab bag is to “modify early grade standards so they are age-appropriate.” This a transparent sop to fans of “play-based” early learning—the “joyful illiterate kindergarteners of Finland”—and all others unfamiliar with the term “false dichotomy.” Common Core is already age-appropriate and wisely raises rigor and expectations for reading in the make-or-break early years of schooling.
Rob on Success Academy: “Eva-Knows-Best”
Much has been written by me and others at Fordham about the stellar results achieved by Moskowitz’s Success Academy charter schools and the controversial tactics used to achieve them. This isn’t an attempt to re-litigate any of those arguments. How Moskowitz runs her schools is of enormous importance to education policy advocates and activists, but most parents simply don’t care. Indeed, I’m tempted to suggest the secret of Moskowitz’s success is that she may have a better grasp of what parents want than just about anyone in education today.
Rob on Common Core’s “Break-out (Scripted-Lessons) Hit”
There are good reasons to think that Common Core may at last be spurring the development of innovative curriculum. Last month, my Fordham Institute colleagues released a report that gives a warm review to EngageNY, a comprehensive, Common Core-aligned curriculum developed by New York State for its seven hundred-odd school districts. “While imperfect, the materials offer educators…an important alternative to traditional textbooks of questionable quality and alignment,” the report notes. EngageNY may be quietly emerging as Common Core’s first “breakout hit.”
Rob on NYS Pearson math and ELA tests
The tests are tough. Too tough? Recall that New York State was the poster child for the “proficiency illusion,” an alarming and dishonest dumbing down of state tests and lower cut scores After a quick analysis of the released items, on the charge of “confusing,” I find the tests (at least somewhat) guilty. Not well aligned with the Common Core standards? Not guilty. Developmentally inappropriate? That charge should never have been brought in the first place.
Calling Common Core “developmentally inappropriate” has become something of a blanket criticism, but it’s largely irrelevant. University of Virginia cognitive scientist Dan Willingham hasrepeatedly cautioned against invoking the idea of developmental stages to draw strong conclusions about what children are ready for. “Hard” and “developmentally inappropriate” are not synonyms.
Rob on unions role in opt-out
Unions are driving discontent. I agree with my Fordham colleague, Mike Petrilli, who attributes larger numbers of test refusals in New York and New Jersey to unions in those states rallying allies, “especially left-leaning parents, to make a statement.”
Rob on the test score trade-off
If reformers want the data that testing provides, they may simply have to abandon attempts to tie test scores to individual teachers. Personally, I think that’s a fair exchange. Test scores in a single classroom can have at least as much to do with class composition, curriculum, and district-mandated pedagogies as teacher effectiveness. Uncoupling tests from high-stakes teacher accountability to preserve the case for higher standards, charters, and choice might be the reasonable way forward
Rob on the power of test scores
In many states, the new Common Core-aligned tests of reading and math that have recently reported student and school results from 2014-15 have set a higher bar than ever before, and—if accurately and honestly reported to parents—should go a long way to deflating the “proficiency illusion” under which many schools have sheltered.
Common Core testing, if nothing else, is supposed to make it harder to tell self-serving lies about where kids actually stand.
This is a painful shift from the Lake Wobegon days, when all children were above average. States that used to claim that 80 or 90 percent of their students were “proficient” will now start to admit that one-third or less are on track for college and career. No doubt, the truth will hurt.
If it weren’t for tests, too many of our kids would still be stuck in lousy schools – yes there are too many lousy schools – and we’d be hearing the same old tired excuses about poverty, about parents, and about how “those kids” are just hard to teach.
Rob’s Magical Proclamations (made while riding on a paisley unicorn?)
The Common Core (or associated) tests . . . may not be perfect, but these tools are finally giving parents, educators, and taxpayers an honest assessment of how our students are doing—a standard that promises to end the lies and statistical games. Virtually all kids aspire to go to college and prepare for a satisfying career. Now, at last, we’ll know if they’re on track to do so.
Rob completely misunderstands David “Tests-Must-Drive-Instruction” Coleman
(Rob also correctly hits this one out of the park!)
One of the arguments I’ve long made in support of Common Core is that properly understood and implemented, it’s a delivery mechanism for the ideas and work of E. D. Hirsch, Jr., and the Core Knowledge curriculum he created.
Hirsch’s work and output span decades, but a principal thrust of his ideas can be summarized thusly: reading comprehension is not a “skill” we can teach directly, practice, or master. It is not like riding a bike, where if you learn on one you can ride another with ease. Once you learn to “decode” the words on a page, your ability to read with understanding is largely a reflection of how much knowledge and vocabulary you have and share with the writer.
LikeLike
It’s not too late to join the Resistance. Now that the ESSA has put the ball in NY’s court maybe you could make your voice heard when its time to fully revamp Cuomo’s Regents Reform Agenda. Just leave your evil twin in the car, and the FI in your rearview mirror.
LikeLike
Damn. I’m even more open-minded than I generally give myself credit for! Nice summary. Thanks for taking the time.
Here’s what interests me: encouraging more examination and introspection about instructional practice–what teachers teach and what children learn–which I think both reformers and non-reformers alike have been far too incurious about for far too long, and which I think is incredibly important. Indeed, that’s what has historically united Diane and I, even if we disagree about other things: our shared interest in curriculum. I make no apologies for my support for choice, charters, etc., simply because the children I work with (and I’m still an active teacher, not former) in my judgement are more likely to get what they need today via those means than not. Standards interest me mainly because it puts curriculum and instruction “in play” in a way that other reforms (testing, teacher quality, charters, etc) do not. Reform, broadly speaking, tends to lose interest at the classroom door. That’s where mine tends to begin.
And please accept my apologies for failing in my designated role as evil reform apologist. I’ll try to be an easier piñata to swing at in the future.
Best,
Robert Pondiscio
LikeLike
b) An enigma wrapped in a paradox!
Maybe a riddle hidden inside a mystery?
And damn, partially open-minded – and fast!
LikeLike
Robert P,
Feel free to answer my queries from above as a response here. TIA, Duane
LikeLike