Yong Zhao is one of the scholars I admire most. He turns out book after book, each saturated with remarkable scholarship and learning. He is also a superb speaker, who fills his lectures with learning and humor.
He recently posted the introduction to a book he published last year called Reach for Greatness.
In it, he wrote about America’s obsession with “the achievement gap,” which is based on the belief that someday the bell curve, on which all standardized tests are normed, will close. The test score gaps can be reduced, as history shows. The biggest narrowing of the gap occurred at the high point of racial integration (late 1970s, early 1980s). For the past decade, the black-white gaps on NAEP have been unchanged.
The gap may narrow but it is designed never to close because bell curves are intended to rank people from best to worst, highest to lowest, most to least.
Here is part of Yong Zhao wrote:
The Achievement Gap Mania in America
For nearly two decades, since the enactment of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) (“No Child Left Behind Act of 2001,” 2002) in 2002, America has been suffering from “achievement gap mania” (Hess, 2011). Closing the achievement gap has been the commanding, almost exclusive, goal of education in America. All educational efforts, be they in policy, research, or practice, must be justified on the grounds that they can help close the achievement gap. As a result, the nation has devoted all its educational resources to the campaign to narrow the chasm in test scores and graduation rates between students of different backgrounds, particularly in income and race.
The campaign has been a futile one. The gap between the poor and the rich has not narrowed significantly, nor has the chasm between children of color and their White counterparts (The Annie E. Casey Foundation, 2013; Curran & Kellogg, 2016; Plucker, Hardesty, & Burroughs, 2013)—in fact, it has widened (Ostashevsky, 2016; Reardon, 2011). The drastic policies put forth by NCLB, the billions of dollars, the numerous instructional innovations, and the tireless efforts of educators did not seem to have turned schools into an effective mechanism to alter the trajectory preset by children’s family background before they arrive at school. Today, factors associated with a child’s home remain much more powerful predictors of their future than do schools (The Annie E. Casey Foundation, 2010; Bailey & Dynaski, 2011; Curran & Kellogg, 2016; Duncan & Murnane, 2011; Fryer & Levitt, 2004; Reardon, 2011).
Worse, the campaign has been counterproductive (Hess, 2011). Beyond the squandered resources and opportunities, “achievement gap mania” has significantly changed American education for the worse. It
has led to education policy that has shortchanged many children. It has narrowed the scope of schooling. It has hollowed out public support for school reform. It has stifled educational innovation. It has distorted the way we approach educational choice, accountability, and reform (Hess, 2011).
It has also turned American education into test preparation, resulting in massive “collateral damages” (Nichols & Berliner, 2007). It has demoralized educators and students (Nichols & Berliner, 2008; Smith & Kovacs, 2011; Wong, Wing, & Martin, 2016), and it has deprived many children, particularly those whom the campaign was supposed to help, of the opportunities for a real education (Carter & Welner, 2013; Tienken & Zhao, 2013). Furthermore, it has reinforced the deficit mindset for minority students and concealed the real cause for educational inequality (Cross, 2007; Jones, 2013; Ladson-Billings, 2007).
Nevertheless, the campaign continues. The well-evidenced failure and damaging consequences of efforts summoned by NCLB to narrow the achievement gaps have apparently not caused American policymakers to change course. Although NCLB was replaced by the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) in 2015 (“Every Student Succeeds Act,” 2015), closing the achievement gaps remains the commanding goal of education. Despite the mechanical changes, the purpose of the new education law “is to provide all children significant opportunity to receive a fair, equitable, and high-quality education, and to close educational achievement gaps” (“Every Student Succeeds Act,” 2015, Section 1001). Barring any significant changes, achievement gap mania will continue to reign over American education for the foreseeable future.
Rudolph and Me
Rudolph had a red nose. It is a deficit because the standard nose color is supposed to be black in reindeer country. So all efforts were applied to fix his nose color. And of course, the poor red-nosed reindeer was not normal and did not meet the standard. The other reindeers with black noses were the good ones and did not want to mix with the bad kid. But all the children around the world should be grateful that no one fixed Rudolph’s red nose because his red nose was the very thing Santa Claus needed for his sleigh on a foggy Christmas Eve.
I am grateful that no one tried to fix my deficits either. I am able to write this book not because I had planned to be a professor in the United States, but because I was not forced to fix my lack of ability and interest in becoming a farmer in China. I was born in a Chinese village and thus destined to become a farmer like everyone else in the village. But from a very early age, I discovered that I was not cut out to be a successful farmer. I was physically smaller and weaker than other boys. I could not drive water buffalos or climb trees or manipulate the hoe nearly as well as other boys. I tried to learn, and my father was a good teacher, but I was unable to master the farming skills. By any standard, I was way below the average of all the boys in terms of farming knowledge and abilities. There was a clear achievement gap in farming capabilities between me and the other boys in the village.
Luckily, my father did not try too hard to close my achievement gap. He gave up on me early. Instead of pushing me to become a better farmer, he sent me to school. In school, I discovered what I could be good at. My ability to handle reading was much better than my ability to deal with a water buffalo. After all, I could be good at something. And I liked that feeling. However, no one, including my father and myself, knew how I could make a living without farming at the time, when China was in the midst of a disastrous political campaign called the Great Cultural Revolution. The campaign dismantled the formal education system and sent the educated elite to remote rural areas to be “reeducated” by farmers. Education was thus not a way to get out of the village for a better life, like it is today. In other words, it was not the remote chance that education would bring a better life that motivated me to go to school. Instead, it was the feeling that I could be good at something, and the desire to avoid doing something I was not good at, that sustained my motivation to walk barefoot to school every day, in burning summers and freezing winters.
I am a big fan of the “growth mindset” (Dweck, 2008). I strongly believe that anyone can learn anything. But I have tried not to apply the idea to everything in life. I have avoided applying a growth mindset in football, for example, although I know if I indeed put 10,000 hours into it, as Malcolm Gladwell (2008) suggests in his book Outliers: The Story of Success, I could become better. But I also know very well that even if I put 100,000 hours into it, I will not be playing for the NFL because my 5’6” height and 150 lb. weight are way below the average height and weight of NFL players. No matter how hard I try, I probably won’t get there.
I have also avoided applying it in other undertakings. I gave up on putting 10,000 hours into painting quickly after I discovered that I could barely draw a straight line and the Chinese characters I produced always looked like the footprints of a chicken. I gave up studying math in high school because I did not enjoy math and I was not good at it. I received 3 points out of 120 in the College Entrance Exam in 1982.
I was able to go to college without studying math because of a policy that forgave my poor math performance. In the late 1970s and early 1980s, when Chinese education was recovering from the damages of the Cultural Revolution, it allowed students to major in foreign languages without being good at math. Math was not counted toward the total score of the College Entrance Exam for those applying to study foreign languages. To run away from my poor math, I chose to major in English in college. I was lucky because the policy ended in 1982. Math has since become a required core subject in the College Entrance Exam, which means Chinese students can no longer run away from math if they want to go to college.
I have been fortunate to be able to avoid virtually everything that I have no potential for being good at or I am not interested in. More important, I have been fortunate to have had the space to explore my passions and experiment with different undertakings to discover my weaknesses and strengths. Most people are not born knowing what they are interested in and can be good at. They can only find out through experiences.
But experiences have costs and risks. Every experience requires time, and some require money and extra effort. Thus, adults want every activity their children experience to be positive, to lead to some desirable outcome. They don’t want their children to waste their time, energy, or money, or worse, to have experiences that may have a negative impact. Responsible adults naturally have a tendency to prescribe experiences for children. The result is that many children are allowed to have only experiences deemed to be beneficial and safe by adults.
I was fortunate to have broader and more diverse experiences than most children. Although my experiences were severely constrained by the lack of resources and remoteness of my village, I enjoyed more freedom. As soon as I started school, my illiterate parents did not feel they could guide me anymore and thus allowed me to pursue whatever I thought appropriate throughout my life. My teachers in the village school were not well trained to make me follow a prescribed reading curriculum, so I was able to read anything I could find instead of a series of carefully selected graded reading materials. The assortment of used books, magazines, and newspapers my father collected for wrapping noodles in the village noodle factory not only taught me to read but also, more importantly, exposed me to a broad range of topics, way beyond what a very carefully designed curriculum can offer.
Neither my parents nor my teachers attempted to force me to do things they wanted or forbid me from doing things they did not like. I was free of external judgment and never feared it. So I got to have many different experiences, some more beneficial than others, but all were necessary for me to find my passion and strengths. In college, instead of devoting my energy to studying the English textbooks in the classroom, I spent more time reading English books and magazines on psychology, linguistics, and education. Rather than spending time memorizing English literature as required, I took on computer programming. Instead of worrying about my grades, I spent a tremendous amount of time programming a piece of statistics software for a research project. In the end, I developed great proficiency in English by not following the prescribed program.
I have learned to be very open to new experiences. I have always been willing to explore new opportunities. When opportunities present themselves, I jump right in as long as they look interesting, but I am not one who would keep at it at any cost when I realize that it is not something I can be great at or enjoy doing. For example, I tried making fish tanks after college but gave it up when I discovered I have no talent in engineering. I quit being a college teacher to join a translation business, but gave it up despite its success because I did not find it interesting. I returned to be a college teacher afterwards because I found that that was ultimately what interested me.
I was lucky on two fronts. First, I was lucky that my parents and schools did not force me to fix my weaknesses according to whatever their definitions of strengths or weaknesses were. They were very forgiving of my weaknesses and appreciative of my various adventures. Second, I was lucky that the massive societal transformations in China and the world over the past few decades made it possible for me to use my strengths and interests, just as the fog on Christmas Eve made it possible for Rudolph to change his fate. If China had not restored its education system after the Cultural Revolution, it would not have been possible for me to go to college. If China had not opened to the outside world, it would not have been possible for me to migrate to the United States. If I had not come to the United States, my passions and strengths would not have found as much value.
Fortunately, the changes I experienced in China are now widespread for everyone. In other words, the foggy Christmas has arrived for all due to technological changes. But unfortunately, the accidental great educational experiences I had are not widespread. To enable every child to be able to explore, experiment with, and enhance his or her strengths, education must change.
What a beautiful, inspiring, instructive post!!! Thank you, Professor Zhao! Perhaps one day we shall move beyond the Common [sic] Core [sic], which is common in the sense of “base, mediocre” and not at all core, and beyond the mania for attempting to standardize children and recognize that school needs to be a place where differing students can discover their proclivities and interests and pursue those.
Agree. And the water buffalo story was a very humorous illustration.
This professor is always such a pleasure!
I hope he can entertain and further enlighten the NYS Board of Regents soon.
What beautiful words!! He has traveled far and done what he was interested in doing.
“To enable every child to be able to explore, experiment with, and enhance his or her strengths, education must change.”
Dr. Zhao is definitely a GEM and his “own” person. His books are great and I totally enjoy his speeches.
He is a wonderful speaker. Funny, insightful, intelligent. I recommend him highly to anyone looking for a great speaker for their next conference.
Yong Zhao is very insightful. Not only does he reject the futile standardized tests, he rejects standardized education. The past twenty years of so-called reform has harmed many students. All students have their strengths and weaknesses, and it is absurd that we continue to hammer a square peg into a round hole in pursuit of standardized “excellence.” The Common Core with all associated tests supposedly prepares students to be “college and career ready.” This goal is presented as a fact because the whole concept comes from Gates and company. It is pure nonsense that continues to deny students access to a rich, meaningful curriculum.
Professor Zhao presents the term ‘personalizable’ education. In other words all schools should provide students the opportunity to pursue their interests and passions. Students should not be locked into following some perceived workplace goal. By exposing students to a rich and varied curriculum, students get the opportunity to learn and explore new possibilities. This is particularly beneficial for poor students that come from families that have a limited means to provide students with a variety of experiences. This must continue to be one of the main goals of free, public education.
Professor Zhao claims that he did poorly in math and did not wish to continue with a math related education. He spent time “programming” a specific piece of statistical software for a research project. Bill Gates pushed his Common Bore curriculum because everyone would need to have incredible math skills for programming, coding and engineering. Funny that a very intelligent Professor Zhou with little math background was able to accomplish this goal? And then, the very intelligent Professor Zhou found that he developed better English proficiency by NOT using the computer program that he developed. This just goes to show that Gates created a myth about the computer industry so that he could push he agenda and make lots of money.
Silicon Valley keeps pushing coding to create a glut in the market that will drive down the salaries of programmers. In the future AI may have the capacity to program, and programmers will no longer be in demand. So what does college and career really mean?
and unlike Zhao, Gates and the many like him have little ability to see outside their own myth
Correction:
“The drastic policies put forth by NCLB, the billions of dollars, the numerous instructional MALPRACTICES, and the tireless efforts of educators did not seem to have turned schools into an effective mechanism to alter the trajectory preset by children’s family background before they arrive at school.”
How does a teacher address the gap in his or her classroom?
________________________________
https://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/our-achievement-gap-mania Essay on gap-closing by Rick Hess in 2011. Apparently, our national and state policy makers haven’t cared to learn that gap-closing is not an effective approach to education reform. The Moynihan Report (1965) and Coleman Report (1966) pointed out the more influential role of “family background” on school achievement (compared to schools and teachers) over 50 years ago. But almost all efforts to help low achievers or children in low-income families have centered on education. Why? Sandra Stotsky
________________________________
Why? Because it’s a cheap political trick by the Waltons, DeVos, and other billionaires to blame schools instead of our inequitable economic policies.
Sandra,
What do you think of E.D. Hirsch’s analysis of French education in his latest book Why Knowledge Matters? He cites evidence that French schools used to significantly narrow the class and race achievement gap when it had a content-focused national curriculum, but that after the Jospin reforms of the 90’s which “Americanized” the curriculum by making it skills-focused, the schools commenced to widen the achievement gap? Poverty is a huge factor, but that doesn’t mean curriculum is a non-factor.
Thanks for this interesting question, ponderosa. I am educating myself on its context through a couple of National Review articles:
https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/02/educational-reformer-hirsch-promotes-knowledge/
https://www.nationalreview.com/2014/02/saint-socrates-pray-us-m-d-aeschliman/
Loved the first article. Thanks!
The Water Buffalo gap
The “water Buffalo gap”
Is what the Chinese have
Instead of gap in scores
They have a gap in chores
Cuz some folks are just better
At churning up the field
While others turn to letter
To earn their daily meal
So gap is no big deal
It doesn’t mean a thing
It never will reveal
If folks can play or sing
Hee hee!
The U.S. is suffering from the ear gap: the gap between David Coleman’s ears.
Also the Gates gap.
Bill left it open and all the wolves got into the schools.
This was exactly what I needed to read just before school starts. We need to foster the whole child, not the narrowly-defined test-taking machine. Schools should be measured on progress toward achievement. First, this means acknowledging that some students arrive in my high school ESOL classroom with two or more years of interrupted formal education. They can barely read and write in their own language. But we have them doing pre-Algebra and writing paragraphs in English by the end of the school year. That progress should be rewarded. Second, we need to do away with the myth that all students can graduate in four years – and we have to either “dumb down” their program of study or cut access to fun electives. Some students, especially English Language Learners, need just a little more time to master the skills they need to make a high school diploma meaningful. Stop labeling them as failures if they don’t fit the bell in the curve.
Does anyone think that denouncing the achievement gap feels tense? I agree with Yong Zhao, yet I sense this has become a sensitive topic regarding race in America. How can we respectfully handle this, and how can we hold schools accountable while we do?