John Thompson, historian and retired teacher in Oklahoma, wonders if the days of authentic teaching and learning will ever return. After a quarter-century of NCLB mandates, are there still teachers who remember what it was like in the pre-NCLB days. John does.
He writes:
Our public schools are facing unbelievable threats. We need to unite and fight for culturally meaningful, holistic, teaching and learning. To do so, I believe educators must remember the divisions that took off after the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB), which mandated test-driven, competition-driven instruction. So, I believe we need cross-generational discussions about both – the weaknesses and strengths of urban districts before the NCLB.
Corporate school reformers used top-down, accountability mandates to rapidly transform schools serving our poorest children of color, but in my experience, those were the students who were most damaged by their output-driven reforms that forced teachers to be “on the same page” when teaching the same lessons.
However, thirty-plus years ago when I started teaching in the Oklahoma City Public Schools, teachers’ autonomy was respected. Teachers in our 80% Black John Marshall High School were urged to build on students’ strengths, not just remediation. Many teachers failed to use that freedom, but we were encouraged to frontload the semester with lessons the students would love in order to turn them onto “learning how to learn.”
On the first day of school in the mid-1990s, I held up a copy of the old Oklahoma history textbook, Panorama of Oklahoma.. The book wasn’t as bad as the curriculum and the video that State Superintendent Ryan Walters is now mandating. But it pushed “inspiring” passages about our state. According to the curriculum guide, the book could be used to explore themes such as “The Spirit of Oklahoma” and “Oklahoma as the Heartland.” One suggested lesson was watching the video Oklahoma by the Department of Tourism.
When the laughter subsided, I showed my students the newly approved book we would use, The Story of Oklahoma, by the late Danney Goble and James Scales. My job was to help the students “read the authors’ minds” and understand the most important information and concepts that they sought to communicate. I explained Goble’s sales pitch to the OKCPS where he admitted that his book was written on a higher level than other texts, but he demonstrated how students would be able to follow a lesson if it were told as a compelling story.
Goble chose the Tulsa Race Riot of 1921 (as it was called back then) as one of the pivotal moments in the book. This massacre happened during the post-World War I panic known as “the Red Scare,” when immigrants and people of color were often seen as threats to America’s way of life, and when up to 300 died as a white mob burned the section of town known as “Black Wall Street.” The text included a photograph of the burning of Mount Zion Baptist.
The lesson concluded with Goble’s closing words on Mount Zion:
All that was left was a shattered hull, an ugly hole – and an $84,000 mortgage that would have to be repaid … In a remarkable display of courage, tenacity, and will, Mount Zion’s congregation proceeded to rebuild the church. Not only did they rebuild the church structure but they also paid off the original mortgage. …”
Goble concluded:
“Let that serve as our point. Those anonymous black Oklahomans endured and triumphed over momentous times. Like others – nameless roustabouts, oil millionaires, tired housewives, …, even Tulsa’s white rioters – their lives were the stuff of which history was made.”
The end-of-class bell rang. Nobody moved or made a sound. Will, a baritone in his church choir, stood solemnly and said, “Please tell your friend, Dr. Goble, that we appreciate what he is doing.” The rest of the class remained seated, watching Will clasp my hand as if I were a preacher after a Sunday sermon and, then, the entire class lined up and shook my hand as each filed out of our room.
Similarly, our curriculum director encouraged me to start classes with the 20th century to get the kids hooked on history, and then double back to the first years covered in the classes. In World History, that meant we started with a scene from Cry Freedom with Denzel Washington, playing the role of the South African hero Stephen Biko, explaining imperialism.
As required, I would put each day’s learning standards on the blackboard, in addition to the day’s “History in the News.” That meant that students would come in early to see what contemporary topic would be discussed, and make suggestions for other topics, as well as report on conversations they had had at lunch about yesterday’s lessons. This was doubly meaningful when seniors visited when younger students were coming to class and got sucked into these higher level conversations.
One day, the older students previewed scenes in Marc Levin’s award-winning movie, Slam. It portrayed a Black rapper who used poetry to defuse conflict in the inner city. Before the start of the first-hour class, a crowd gathered to watch a gripping scene where the rapper used free verse to extract himself from a jailhouse situation. As older students crowded around the television, the freshmen had to squeeze in closer to see.
Mike, a tall, impressive senior, was a perfect role model. His first-hour teacher knew he would quickly catch up on whatever he might miss in class, and freed him to guest-teach a lesson on Slam. He gave a motivational lecture on the power of satire and metaphors. He closed, as usual, by citing a line from Dalton Trumbo’s Spartacus, “I’d rather be here, a free man among brothers, facing a long march and a hard fight, than to be the richest citizen of Rome.”
We should remember the lessons learned by listening to students, and together building a culture where they share insights about topics ranging from Keynesian economics to Ralph Ellison’s childhood in Oklahoma City’s “Deep Deuce,” to Clara Luper leading the 1969 Oklahoma City Sanitation Strike march. They saw those lessons as a sign of respect. For example, a militant Black Nationalist and I got caught up in an after-school discussion of a New York Review of Books article on the history of Black families. When we realized that more than two hours had passed, he said, “You are the coolest white man I’ve ever known. You respect my brain.”
Again, I want us to move beyond the last two decades of teach-to-the-test, which almost all of my students saw as a sign of disrespect, treating them like a test score. We all need to participate in cross-generational conversations on how we can do both – defeat the attempts by Ryan Walters to impose rightwing ideologies on our students, and build on their strengths and moral compass in order to prepare our kids for the 21stcentury.

Thanks, John Thompson, You are why most people like their schools. Someday we will teach again. Maybe not soon, but it will happen. When it does, it will be like a republic, if we can keep it.
LikeLike
I have not posted in a while, but I thought that this was important to post here…Mr. Thompson raises many good points here, and it sounds as if in his class having the flexibility in how things were taught was a good thing for his students. And yes, there were and are many other teachers in the same boat.
That said, when the idea of teacher autonomy is raised, isn’t it important to consider why No Child Left Behind was even put into place initially. I know that Dr. Ravitch, as an education historian and someone who was at the forefront of this while in Washington, can speak to this. And, yes, I will concur that perhaps NCLB has gone a bit too far in the direction of a lack of autonomy.
That said, here is my question – can policies (federal, state, district) level be written with enough flexibility that can both allow some to have the autonomy and others to not have it. NCLB was initiated because what was happening in the past wasn’t working – that there were many students that were passed on (Please do not come on here and say “that doesn’t happen” – there are statistics that have shown that to happen).
I do not believe that the only options are complete control or complete autonomy. There must be some ways to write policies that fall somewhere in the middle. So, how do we make that happen?
LikeLike
NCLB and test and punish policies have been harmful to students, teachers and schools that have been shuttered over test scores. Teaching to a test impedes the thoughtful and comprehensive education that all students deserve. It has narrowed curriculum to reading and math in many places in the country. By the way many states continue to pass along students as bureaucrats adjust cut scores on standardized tests to make their state appear more “successful.” Failing half the students would cause a political outrage. Just as insidious as NCLB has been the transition to canned instruction delivered online with testing that is often embedded in the daily grind of privacy violating, isolationist cyber instruction that is now the norm in many school districts. Teachers have become data collectors instead of educators. Students are human, and the best way to reach them is through human interaction, group discussion and thought provoking assignments. We need to bring our young people back to the more humane way students were taught before NCLB and so-called reform, but that requires investment.
LikeLike
So we do agree that the testing has placed an overfocus on literacy and math (and I say that as a mathematics teacher). That is a negative of the bill. You have pointed out many things that are bad, but are they a byproduct of the bill perse. As for moving the goalposts to pass more students – of course that is not a solution either.
All that said, I wonder why there is never any blame placed on poor teaching or teachers making poor decisions. You have rightfully noted when policy makers make poor decisions (such as lowering the cut scores).
About the idea of teachers being data collectors – yes, perhaps there is too much data being collected, but at the same time, in the past, it appears that decisions were made at a whim without any data to back things up. Students of color were placed in regular courses instead of honors classes they could thrive in because of their color, not because of data.
It seems the reaction in most of these conversations is to get defensive and point fingers at all the things that are wrong with the other side, as opposed to being reflective of what could be wrong on your side. OR then there will be teachers that say “Well, I don’t do that…” so that means that all teachers don’t do that.
Yes, NCLB is a very flawed piece of legislature. But it seems that you and John Thompson are advocating for going back to the “good old days” – and I ask, “Where they really that good?” How often would teachers be allowed to do whatever they wanted, give kids whatever grades they wanted, and students would graduate without truly knowing anything?
LikeLike
I said nothing about “going back to the good old days.” I said that NCLB was terrible piece of legislation that did no good. It did not help teachers or students. The biggest beneficiary was the testing industry.
Why don’t you tell me how NCLB improved teaching?
LikeLike
In my experience teachers were never allowed to simply do what they wanted. Teachers were always accountable to district and state curriculum objectives, state tests and even some standardized testing given at various intervals. Teachers have always been accountable to building, district administrators and ultimately parents. However, the tests were like a litmus test with results only going to teachers and parents. There was no public flogging in the newspapers for teachers or schools closing over test scores. Teachers were still accountable; yet they had more autonomy over daily instruction and interaction with students.
LikeLike
Pre-NCLB, the exit rates for teachers was high. Typically those who left couldn’t take the pressure. The demands of the job were too much.
LikeLike
Jls: the problem of “passing on” was exacerbated by the top down reform.
LikeLike
jls– Congratulations for starting a discussion on a touchy subject. Picking it up again…
“when the idea of teacher autonomy is raised, isn’t it important to consider why NCLB was even put into place initially…” And later that it was put into place because what was happening in the past wasn’t working; too many students were “passed on” [moved to the next grade or graduated when they couldn’t do the work].
I’m no educational historian like Diane, but this struck me as incorrect, so I did a little googling to refresh my memory. Certainly the effects of NCLB as implemented– especially when Common Core was tied in nearly a decade later– served to cut teacher autonomy to near-zero. Perhaps that was the intention in 2001, perhaps not. The states creating ‘more vigorous standards’/ aligned assessments were in fact all over the place, rigor-wise. Criticism of that phenomenon was leveraged to justify promoting CCSS later on. (But of course groundwork for it was already being laid in the 1990’s.) Regardless: there is nothing in the history of the devpt of NCLB that I could find that targets ‘social promotion’ per se, nor some connection with sanctioning teachers who did so by restricting their autonomy in the classroom. [Diane feel free to correct me here!]
I reject the idea that there could be legal policy that somehow tied degree of teacher autonomy in the classroom to whether they were passing kids to next grade that should have repeated a grade, or any other supposed measure of teacher quality. All of these concepts– “teacher autonomy,” “social promotion,” and “teacher quality” are mushy and don’t lend themselves to the specificity of laws. When they are (as in NCLB implementation of teacher evaluations based on student test scores), there are unintended, harmful results. The policy on your wish list would be even worse, as none of its elements can be empirically measured.
As retired teacher notes at 2:03pm 12/6, teachers have always been held to various levels of accountability. It is up to bldg supervisors– dept heads, principals, AP’s– to implement local and state policies. IMHO, fed level should never have stuck its head as far into the classroom as they did in NCLB (let alone Race to the Top).
LikeLike
bethree – Thanks for your response. What I find interesting here is that the buck seems to be passed on – “It’s not the teachers fault that they passed the students on – it’s the administrators fault” Here’s what I will say to that – what is an administrator to do if a teacher gives a student a B when they should have actually earned a D or possibly an F. Are they to monitor every single grade of every single student?
I will agree that NCLB (or perhaps any federal policy) cannot fix the issues that exist in education. But can you, and retired teacher or others here, actually admit that there are some cases where teachers may be the issue, instead of passing the blame onto administrators not doing their job? What about teachers not doing their job.
As for some of your other points, they are valid. I am confident that any teacher that has passed a student on did so with good intentions – to give a student hope in pursuing a job, or a future, which would have been very challenging without that diploma. And end of course, end of year exams – I agree that having a pass or not pass that connects to a diploma can be extremely challenging for some special education or students that are new to the United States. That is why I wrote in my original post that IF a law were to exist it should have numerous, numerous “exceptions” to the rule.
As an classroom teacher for many years, and as one now, I consistently make exceptions. I understand that if a student earned a 69% for a quarter or a semester (which is technically a D), that perhaps finding a way to add a couple of points here or there to make that 69% to a 70% can provide an added spark to that student and give them a boost they need. To me, such moves are rationale. What isn’t rationale is when a student may struggle so much with reading or math or another subject and are giving a C or a D just to have them move on, aka “social promotion”
IF all teachers were reasonable and rationale, then sure, the education system would be a much better place. Perhaps top down federal or state policy isn’t the solution. That said, I also don’t think that the solution is complete autonomy for teachers – as too often I have seen that complete autonomy lead to disarray.
From my own personal experience – I taught pre-calculus at schools, as did another teacher. At the time, there were students who avoided my class because I actually held the students accountable – I gave HW regularly, I had high expectations. The other teacher tended to led students slide and the material in the course didn’t math the pre-calculus curriculum. Years later, I have had students who avoided me in HS say to me they wish they had taken me. They heard how successful their peers were after taking my class in college, while some of them had to take remedial math. That’s a result of complete teacher autonomy. One could say, “Why didn’t the principal or assistant principal do more observations” Well, kids weren’t complaining and that teacher was the union rep…you can come to your own conclusions…
So to Roy, to John Thompson, to Diane and everyone else who has chastised me here I say – what’s your actual solution to the problem? And no, just saying let teachers do whatever they want isn’t a practical solution.
LikeLike
JLSteach: Passing a national law fixes no problem that you describe. A national law is a blunt instrument. It’s like using a cannon to swat a mosquito.
LikeLike
So this I agree with…Which is why I ask you and others, what are the solutions (if not a National law)? The constitution set up education to be decided at the state level, but unfortunately that exasperates inequalities among different states. Many other countries that are more successful (see Finland) have national curriculum and national expectations about education. I think it would take a miracle for that to happen here. So, if not that, then what? I have yet to hear from you or anyone else here concrete solutions, outside of “give teachers autonomy” which I don’t think it is the solution.
LikeLike
NCLB did not weed out “bad” teachers. It punished teachers for teaching in high-poverty schools, for teaching kids with disabilities, and for teaching kids who were ELL.
Race to the top punished the same teachers, as well as teachers of the gifted because they didn’t get higher scores, their students were already in the highest rank.
Be careful what you wish for. The negative consequences of NCLB and RTTT were immense.
You don’t seem to trust human judgement. Principals and peer reviewers are the best judges of teachers.
LikeLike
jls– p.s., I recognize that one element of what you propose can be measured to some degree by a high-school exit exam. However you’ll notice that was only part of the overtesting fad: at its height in mid-2000’s, 29 states had them. In recent yrs it’s down to 9 states. Problem being, a number of studies showed that results of adding hs exit exam was a noticeable rise in dropout rate, as well as costs to SpEd and ESL students. Meanwhile, consider the duplication: for many decades, all high school diplomas could only be obtained by getting passing grades in a set # of courses per subject as established by the state.
So why the push for diplomas to students who haven’t “really” met reqd stds? This has been going on since well before NCLB, and still does. Consider the context: students without hischool diploma are unlikely to obtain even an entry-level job. This was not true in the 1950s, but has become increasingly the case for the last 60 yrs.
LikeLike
jlsteach– pls see below under general comments, where I try (with add’l margin space) to address all your comments
LikeLike
Um…no.
LikeLike
Great post. Thank you, John and Diane.
My daughter, as a teacher in the NYCDOE, is fortunate to be able to use these methods when teaching American Government and Economics to her seniors. I’ve seen her lesson plans and links. No way she’d be doing this in Florida.
I’m active on some music forums. someone was saying that he seems to be meeting more and more people (both on line and in person) who are lacking in the area of critical thinking.
I mentioned the CCSS, close reading, etc. Then I included the infamous YouTube clip of David Coleman’s “…nobody gives a s*#t what you think or feel” speech.
I haven’t seen that clip in a while. What an incredibly terrible thing to say, backed by confidence, power, and money.
LikeLike
That clip didn’t get in the way when Gates funded him to create CCSS or when he was hired to be CEO of the College Board. He is paid nearly $3 million a year. https://search.app/jNMFNpYKqcHaQj6t5
LikeLike
Unfortunately, I think it helped further his cause. His philosophy matched that of his target financial audience.
LikeLike
I remember when this nonsense started. I was appalled. All we were hearing from both sides of the aisle was that teachers were incompetent boobs and that all public schools were failing.
The university education departments were calling for more and more “reforms” and this would tell us who wasn’t qualified to be in the nation’s classrooms.
I just love it when people who have spent their lives in university classrooms, in court rooms (so many politicians are lawyers) or in elective offices think that they know the perfect “educational reform” that will assure that every student who enters public school kindergarten will come out a Nobel or Kennecott scholar.
Of course, no one ever bother to ask an actual classroom teacher what we know, what reforms will actually work. You know things like lowering the class size, lowering the number of sessions and time that an individual teacher is in the classroom [maybe one hour of preparation for each hour in the classroom], treating teachers as the educational professionals that we are, and finally paying teachers like the professionals we are.
But all that would cost money and would require that we actually make the wealthy pay the same percentage of their total income (salaries, stock options, capital gains, dividends, etc.) that the teachers have to pay out of our meager salaries.
So needless to say, we will continue to have our salaries determined by a useless state test that the students know will not affect their grades or futures and that they will have left our classrooms for 8 months before we get the results back and by then we will be teaching another 180 to 200 new students and be getting 30 minutes of preparation time a day!
It’s no wonder that we retire as soon as we can get a pension (oh, the Michigan Legislature has taken that away from new teachers years ago and replaced it with a 203b “investment”)
LikeLike
Actually, over the years the Department of Education has gone from administering funding programs to encourage the various states to assure that needy children receive all the services they need. (Head Start, Chapter 1, etc.) and has been co-opted by “Educational Reformers” who, as I just stated, haven’t in a public [or private] school classroom since they graduated from high school, are certain that their bright idea will assure every student will have success. Requirements like those in NCLB and the destruction of America’s system of public education is the best argument for ending the Department of Education. Which I think would be the worst thing we could do.
LikeLike
NCLB didn’t come from the Department of Education. It came from politicians, GW Bush, and allies in Congress.
LikeLike
Didn’t the NCLB requirements get administrated through the D o E? I thought all the money appropriated to get the states to comply with a law like the NCLB that deal with education passed through that department. I understood that the yearly testing regimen was the result of the federal government “incentive grants.”
If the states didn’t want the federal money, they could have just ignored the NCLB because education is not specifically mentioned in the US Constitution and as such is reserved for the states. So, the way that the “reformers” get states to comply with their ideas is to pass the funding to pay for the program and then get the states to go along to get the funding.
I was my district’s Chapter 1 director. My main responsibilities were making sure our chapter 1 teachers and aides were delivering the services, documenting the student’s progress. and certifying that the district’s number of free and reduced lunch students, how the Fed determined needy students, were sufficient for us to receive the federal money. My reports went to the Michigan Department of Ed and they were then compiled into the state’s report to the D o E in DC.
LikeLike
Prof you are confusing NCLB with Race to the Top, the Obama effort that did tie state funding to the implementation of the CCSS (which, in some ways, was an attempt to have a national curriculum without calling it a national curriculum)
And I partially agree with you about the “education reformers” – yes there are many politicians and others that have not been in a classroom. Yet, I have been in the classroom and currently am in the classroom and I am one of the voices here that is a naysayer that teachers should have complete autonomy.
As for your comment about ending the Dept of Education, that sounds like it comes straight from the Republican playbook, more recently the playbook of Donald Trump. It was Jimmy Carter that first initiated the Dept of Education – my guess it that the hope was to provide support for states to improve education. How would eliminating ED help with the implementation of Title I or other programs?
NCLB attempted (admittingly in a flawed way) to bring some type of accountability for schools…
So I ask again, which it seems no one has stepped up to my challenge – how would you recommend implementing accountability for teachers? And no saying that there is accountability doesn’t cut it, because well, if that were the case, would NCLB even have come about? Clearly things weren’t necessarily great prior to NCLB. And before you say it, yes, in many cases they aren’t great now. So good people, what’s your concrete solution? And not just one that can be done in your school, or your district, but one that can be implemented broadly. And why does that matter – well, why shouldn’t it matter? All students should get a good education, no matter where they live, right?
LikeLike
I don’t confuse NCLB with Race to the Top. NCLB harshly punished schools (eg, closing them) if scores didn’t go up, RTTT punished teachers and schools.
I assume you have not read any of my books, where I explain the differences and the very large commonalities between them. Obama and Duncan agreed with Bush that testing and punishment would raise scores.
NCLB came about after Bush claimed that Texas produced a “miracle” by annual testing. It wasn’t true. Read “The death and life of the great American school system.” 2010. ALL students were supposed to score proficient by 2024 or else. A ridiculous goal, not matched by any country in the world.
I repeat, the best accountability is human judgement. People who observe and evaluate teachers as they teach. You seem to think that is not an answer. If NCLB was effective, why do we have many of the same issues today that we had 23 years ago?
LikeLike
Dr. Ravitch – I apologize – I wasn’t referring to you confusing RTTT and NCLB. I was referring to the post prior to that from the Professor who had said that states could opt out of NCLB and not take the federal funds. I believe that what he was referring to was RTTT. I am well aware of the differences between the two.
As for human judgement being the best accountability – sure, if all humans are approaching things from the same perspective. But humans are certainly flawed. It’s a fair point to say that NCLB wasn’t the answer (and we agree that stating that all students would reach proficiency in 14 years was a ridiculous goal). But to go back to what we had before – how is that really the answer?
Sure, in a perfect world administrators would have more time to observe and work with teachers rather than deal with discipline. In a perfect world class sizes are smaller and all teachers make decisions that are the best for students. Yet, you and I both know we don’t live in a perfect world…My own experiences, as I have shared here, make me very leery of just relying on human judgement. Not to be too cheeky, but it seems that doing so left plenty of students behind.
LikeLike
JLSteach,
We agree. There is no perfect world, nor is there a perfect answer to the best way to evaluate teachers. I maintain that there is no mechanical way to do that. None. When teachers were evaluated by how much their students increased their test scores, the judgments were bizarre. In NYC, teachers of the gifted were punished. The “worst” teacher in the entire city taught a class where ELLs rotated in and out all year. Read the American Statistical Association statement of 2014 on the limits of VAM. Most of student score gains or losses was attributed to the home, not the teacher.
What is your proposal?
My view: Teachers can be evaluated ONLY by those who have seen them teach.
LikeLike
The U.S. Department of Ed administered the funds for NCLB. They did not write the legislation.
LikeLike
jlsteach– again, see below under general comments
LikeLike
its impossible and disingenuous to assume that any one group of strategies will assure success for the majority of any group of students.
The game is rigged and backed by powerful interests. But we already know that. And for those who don’t: we’ve been there. We know.
LikeLike
I agree, others who are not in the classroom telling us what works best has not worked. Teachers go to school to be educated on how to properly teach students. I took that class called Teaching Teachers to Teach Students. This class touch strategies on how to meet students at every level assisting them with their challenges. Of course, teachers mess create a bond with the family. And their needs. But these professional test makers need to understand is that inclusion and teaching the whole child is a great importance. Student shouldn’t be defined by test scores that really nobody understands. At some point educators need to be trusted to do the jobs especially, since they are n the classroom facing the behaviors, the needs, and the challenges of their students.
LikeLike
The worst thing I agree, others who are not in the classroom telling us what works best has not worked. Teachers go to school to be educated on how to properly teach students. I took a class called Teaching Teachers to Teach Students. This class touch strategies on how to meet students at every level. Of course, teachers to create a bond with the family to understand the needs and the challenges of the student. This allows a strategy of how to teach the whole child. Student should not be defined by test scores that really nobody understands the meaning of.. Educator’s need to be trusted to do the jobs. They are in the classroom facing the behaviors, the needs, and the challenges The worst thing to do is to interfere with strategies built by experts. Look around the state of Ohio at all the damage state takeovers have caused us in education. By now it should be clear that teaching to the test and interfering with classroom strategies has not been the answer!
LikeLike
Here I try to address all of jlsteach’s key comments.
jlsteach– I feel like you are not really listening to what others are saying.
1.You claim there is no teacher accountability other than unsuccessful NCLB/RTTT measures. Teachers are accountable to dept supervisors and higher admin. Regular IRL observations/ feedback are required. Some enlightened schools even find time for teacher collaboration/ observing each other/ sharing techniques. It’s not OK to excuse the lack of it on ‘admins don’t have time,’ it’s part of the job. If admins don’t have time, that is an issue of priorities and funding. There is no substitute.
2.Would NCLB even have come about if there were in fact teacher accountability? Of course. Study its history. Rep admin POV: public schools are “failing,” so we’re not getting our $’s worth, so we need punitive sanctions for traditional pubschs, and encouragement to drop out of them in favor of privatized options. [Read up on the utterly flawed/ debunked “A Nation at Risk” report where the public-schools-are-failing narrative got its start.] Libertarians, privatizers, testing co’s, sw/hw co’s and private religious schools jumped on this bandwagon for obvious reasons. Civil rights groups too, altho they backed out of privatized alternatives about a decade ago.
3.Have US pubschs performed poorly? I suggest a look at NAEP scores over the decades which show steady, incremental progress for all subgroups from 1971 to early-to-mid 1990’s. From there forward you can see some flattening of scores, but no decline. And it’s important to note it’s not just the same test – NAEP updates assessments to reflect changing standards. Another source: large metastudy of millions of test scores done by [very conservative] Hoover Institution’s publishing arm Education Next, released summer 2022, called “A Half Century of Student Progress Nationwide.” And let’s not forget PISA: as of 2022, US is #6 among OECD in Reading and #12 in Science. Sadly still a dismally mediocre [slightly below OECD ave] #28.
4.Which brings me to the question for you, a math teacher: why? Is it not finally time to overhaul the way math is taught in this country? The first several international competitions in ‘60s and ‘70s were in math: US came in dead last or near to it. In the ‘80s there was a China-US exchange of math teachers. Chinese teachers observed: they taught children from young age to derive basic algorithms [through use of teams/ manipulables]. US taught kids to memorize algorithms without explanation, and spend all their time practicing them on different sets of data… Obviously we have improved our game somewhat. Although I cannot help but think that the ‘90s win of math wars [“conceptual” over “rote” – cast in concrete by Common Core Math] did not help. It was as tho they were trying to respond, but missed the memo.
LikeLike
Thanks for trying to respond to all of my comments bethree5. I will take the time to respond (correcting some of the assumptions you have implied that are not quite true)…
First, you state “You claim there is no teacher accountability other than unsuccessful NCLB/RTTT measures. Teachers are accountable to dept supervisors and higher admin. Regular IRL observations/ feedback are required. Some enlightened schools even find time for teacher collaboration/ observing each other/ sharing techniques. It’s not OK to excuse the lack of it on ‘admins don’t have time,’ it’s part of the job. If admins don’t have time, that is an issue of priorities and funding. There is no substitute.”
Nope, I didn’t claim that at all. You say that “teachers are accountable to dept supervisors and higher admin” – really? Is that always the case? If that were the case why then were so many students passed on (NOTE – that type of data isn’t captured necessarily in the assessments – more on that later). What type of “regular feedback” is required – at least in the districts I work it, that means two observations a year, IF you are on an evaluation year, which doesn’t happen every year. So, No, they aren’t always required. Not in every state. Not in every district. As for you to say that for admin, it’s not okay to say “they don’t have the time…” sure I’d agree with you, BUT when you have four admin (including the principal, for a school of 1200 students) they may NOT have as much time to observe. Oh, and in my district staff development teachers went from full time release to only 0.6. To simply say, “It’s their job” and perhaps not realize all that they do, well, that’s just not genuine. Yes, the solution could be more money, more staff, etc. But, my point still stands. Let’s also add that there are plenty of politics involved at the local level. You can live in your ideal, but I am sharing the reality.
Since you mentioned history and A Nation at Risk (which I know plenty about – why is your post so demeaning as if I don’t know these things), I have to disagree with you somewhat. Yes, A Nation at Risk sounded an alarm about education, and allowed many other things to happen. And Goals 2000 (in the GW Bush days, something then Gov and later President Clinton was a part of) attempted to look at education from a national perspective. It took nearly 25 years between A Nation at Risk and NCLB. I wonder, if there had been regular teacher accountability as you seem to believe happens, would NCLB have been necessary? Would top down accountability truly be necessary if it were happening at the local level? I would argue perhaps not.
Now, let’s look at progress – yes the NAEP scores or the PISA scores that you mention are one source – although as you note, since the NAEP test actually changes and is not the same test, can one statistically compare certain years to one another? NAEP, PISA all take a snapshot of education. On one hand, this can be seen as valuable. But on the other, it doesn’t get to the personal side – the students stories that state how they were passed along, and weren’t prepared for higher education, or the ones that were passed along and then ended up struggling in jobs, etc. How should those stories be accounted for?
Since you asked about Math – why is it that you think that the US success should be measured in international math competitions? That is similar to saying that women’s soccer in the US is amazing because of one talented group of American women. If that a reflection of the entire state of soccer in the US? Not sure I would say that. Funny that you seemed to criticize the memorization part and mentioned the need for conceptual, but then seemed to criticize CCSS which aimed to do just that – so, which side are you on of that conversation?
Actually, let me take a little of that back – saying “which side” represents the polarization that has happened in education, and even in this post and in many cases this blog. I believe that NCLB was very flawed legislation – starting with the insane goal of all will be proficient by 2024. It’s focus on literacy and math took away from science and social studies. I also think that testing every year in Grades 3-8 can be overkill. So no I don’t think that NCLB or even federal top down is the ideal way to make change.
Now, that being said, I have seen too many things happen at the local level to know that our education system is very flawed. I think that a big flaw is that many, many educations and those in education are unwilling to look in the mirror and accept that there are things they should or could be doing better and instead like to point fingers at others. OR, they will show data about how things are improving, data that may be meaningless or the data isn’t fully scrutinized. Educators always say there isn’t a quick fix, and yet year after year there is a search for one.
If you notice in many cases, I have asked who has the answers. Dr. Ravitch thinks that the answer is local observation for teacher accountability – to which I say, “How? What are the details? and…How is is scalable?
Many may consider me an idealogue on one side or another because I ask questions – and that is the farthest from the truth – I ask and raise questions because I think that too often educators don’t consider another perspective or side.
LikeLike
JLSteach,
I asked you to describe, in your view, how NCLB and Race to the Top improved teacher accountability.
Since you are quite certain that there is little to no teacher accountability today, what does that say about the value of NCLB, Race to the Top, and the Every Student Succeeds Act?
I think that NCLB was a huge mistake, though at the time I had high hopes for it.
A good part of judgement is admitting when you were wrong. My hopes for NCLB were dashed. It turned out to be, in my view, a waste of billions of dollars and gazillions of hours of student & teacher time.
Please tell me what were, in your view, the benefits of NCLB? The law was a 27-page proposal by President George W. Bush that turned into a 1,000-page law. The law was written by politicians, not educators. It was based on “the Texas miracle,” which was a hoax.
Please: how do you think teachers should be held accountable?
LikeLike
Dr. Ravitch….I appreciate that you have been open on changing your mind on education policies or practices that you may have once thought were good but then were not as good as they were advertised (including No Child Left Behind).
I’ll respond to your thoughts. I think that one of the possible positives of NCLB is that it provided a more “objective” measure to demonstrate teacher progress. Yes, that measure has been outside testing. And yes, there is way too much testing (among the flaws of NCLB is only focusing on math and literacy and testing each grade in 3-8).
I also understand that the Texas Miracle that didn’t really happen was a basis for NCLB – increased accountability from the top down through testing.
To be honest, this entire conversation has demonstrated again a flaw in education – we are viewing things through extremes. I don’t believe that a law like NCLB IS a way to make change in education. Yet at the same time, I don’t believe that local autonomy is completely the answer (as seen from my own experiences in the classroom as well as my experiences as a parent).
I’m not sure if there is a great solution to this very complicated problem. But if the Secretary of Education, the Superintendent of Schools in my state or the Superintendent were to ask me what’s the best way, I would start with these pillars:
Dr. Ravitch – I don’t have all of the answers. But what I fear is that the call for “letting teachers teach” is another swing in the pendulum back to where we were, where poor teaching was excused, where teachers let kids slide by, and where teachers could teach whatever they wanted (which in some cases was good, but in other cases not so good).
My final thought – Why is it that in education we are unwilling to be honest with ourselves – we point to any bright spot and say, “See it’s working” without looking at all of the variables or details of why something may work. We instead focus on what is not working. You have been a very strong anti-charter school person, as noted here in this blog. You rightfully point out the areas where charter schools are failing students. Yet does that mean that ALL charter schools are bad? As I have raised in this blog, I find it fascinating that in many cases the children of the students that I taught in DC Public Schools chose for their children to attend charter schools – why do you think that is? Shouldn’t that be explored as well – why is it that parents in DC are choosing charters? Perhaps it is because of their own experiences in public schools or their neighborhood schools.
I am someone that will ask questions = as I think that too often we don’t ask questions in education…Without asking those questions, we cannot get to the root causes of problems.
LikeLike