Fwd: From Today's Denver Post

[Victor Steinbok <Victor.Steinbok@VERIZON.NET>]

Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 14:02:03 -0700 (MST)

http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1002,75%257E217865,00.html

perspective

Education reform causes major fallout

By Billie Stanton


Sunday, November 11, 2001 - The road to education reform in Colorado
has been paved with good intentions. But it has led us to hell
nonetheless.

While state standards and the Colorado Student Assessment Program
tests are widely accepted, even embraced, the dysfunctional
accountability system has created a horror show as many schools
sacrifice students to appease the state.

This wasn't the intention. When Gov. Bill Owens launched his education
reforms, his aim was to improve failing schools and make schools
accountable to the public.

Those are laudable goals. Alas, the unintended consequences are doing
more harm than good.

Most observers already know the blatant problems with this year's
first-ever school accountability reports:

Schools were rated in five categories, from excellent to
unsatisfactory, based on just one set of CSAP scores. Student
improvement was ignored, as were poverty, mobility and other factors
that inhibit achievement. The schools were rated on a bell curve,
which guaranteed that nearly one-third would be deemed below average.
And 29 bottom-rung schools were arbitrarily exempted, so all others
slid into lower ratings.

The reports are fraught with factual errors and, at this writing, had
yet to reach many Colorado households, despite a widespread ad
campaign urging citizens to study them closely.

In addition, their gross oversimplification of the complex working of
schools misleads the public.

But that's just the obvious stuff, much of which legislators promise
to "fix" next year. What is much more insidious - and what legislators
will be hard-put to fix - are the knee-jerk reactions by
"unsatisfactory" schools that are running scared.

If their ratings don't rise to "low" within three years, the state
will take them over or convert them into charter schools - a threat
seen by many as unconstitutional in a state where schools are to be
under local control.

Legal or not, the threat has gotten everyone's attention. But the
edict forces schools to find a quick fix rather than implement the
best teaching practices.

Indeed, the most perverse, cynical "fix" of all came to unsatisfactory
schools as a state recommendation. Just get three more kids to prove
proficient on third-grade reading, and five more on fifth-grade
reading, and voila - you can raise your rating to "low" and avoid the
charter threat.

But when schools focus on borderline kids - kids "on the bubble" -
they must largely ignore students at the top and bottom of the scale.
So a narrow population takes precedence.

Equally pernicious is the narrowing of curriculum, a trend that sucks
all enrichment and love of learning out of education while creating a
"drill and kill" focus on reading, writing and math to the exclusion
of everything else.

The problems that result are manifold.

When music, art, field trips, science and social studies are
eradicated from a student's experience, learning - even of the three
R's - lags. That's because children learn when they make connections.
And they learn best when they connect to subjects that incite their
passion.

The first-grade art teacher says, "Let's design a garden window box.
Use five geometric shapes - triangles, rectangles, whatever. And only
use 70 percent of the space, because the plants will need 30 percent
to grow." The fervent art student may not care much for math. But that
spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down. And when she encounters
a similar math problem, Zing! The connection will be made.

A middle-school boy didn't read, wouldn't read, had no interest in
reading. Then his teacher found out he loved snakes. A herpetologist
brought a snake to the classroom, and the teacher dug up every snake
book she could find. Before she realized what was happening, the boy
had read 30 books on snakes. Zing!

It takes all kinds, doesn't it? And that's the point. Children come in
all kinds - each unique, with unique interests. When we exploit those
interests, they learn. When we eliminate their range, they may learn
to decode words on the page, and they may even get a better CSAP
score. But their learning, in the long term, will be sadly stunted.

Yet the narrow curriculum and emphasis on test preparation are most
apt to be employed at poverty-ridden schools. While state leaders
insist - rightly - that all children can learn, no one can refute the
deep research that repeatedly cites poverty as the leading indicator
of low achievement.

That's partly because top teachers don't flock to the most challenged
schools. But it's also a result of poor children's lack of
connections.

When an affluent kid gets a lesson on polar bears, she reflects on the
ones she's seen at the zoo, her stuffed polar bear and books featuring
polar bears that have been read to her at home. A poor kid, who's
never been to the zoo and has no books, can't make these connections.
So his lesson is tougher, especially if the teacher hasn't time for a
zoo trip or to show parents how to find such books at the library.

When a school's fate hinges on CSAP scores, few educators take the
time for 30 snake books or a trip to the zoo.

Thus we create "a two-tiered system of education, for the haves and
the have-nots," notes Barbara Volpe, executive director of the Public
Education and Business Coalition.

Children who arrive reading-ready can be given social studies, music
and art and still do well on the CSAP. "Kids from less well-developed
backgrounds maybe need intensive focus on reading. But when is it
going to get richer? They won't get the richness more affluent kids
are getting. As we fine-tune accountability, these are things to look
at."

So the poor, in particular, receive the most hollow, superficial
education we can give them - even though they need deep connections
the most.

While we deprive children of the richest learning opportunities, we
also deny society any hope for citizens with higher-level, critical
thinking so crucial in today's world.

In the wake of the Columbine High massacre and the terrorist attacks
on America, teachers don't have time to teach good citizenship,
American history and solid character development. They're all-consumed
with a test score that may mean little in the grand scheme of things.

"As a nation's educational infrastructure goes, so goes its
democracy," writes John Goodlad, former education dean at the
University of California at Los Angeles and a renowned author in
education.

"Success in school test scores correlates with no human virtue you can
name," Goodlad warned last month at a Denver meeting of the National
Network for Educational Renewal.

Yet in the rush to obtain good scores, some metro-area schools are
even creating programs to lure top students away from other schools.
Rather than scrutinize their programs to improve teaching and learning
for all, they're importing better scores. It's an ironic twist on the
old Robin Hood credo, except these schools steal the rich students and
ignore the poor.

But it's an act of desperation. Teachers who have given their all to
"unsatisfactory" high schools suddenly are bolting, superintendents
report.

"Your friends look in the newspaper on a given day and see their
friend works at an unsatisfactory school," Volpe says. "Are they going
to think you're an unsatisfactory teacher? We've heard from teachers
how their kids say, "If my school's an F school, am I an F kid?' The
label ends up sticking to all parts of that school. We all know labels
can be very destructive."

Students, too, are abandoning high schools with lousy labels. With the
best and brightest bailing out, secondary schools - where change is
most difficult - will be hard-put to overcome the odds.

Granted, no one wants their child in a school with just 3 percent
proficiency in reading. "But you also don't want her in a school that
does only drill and kill around CSAP," says Van Schoales, who is
overseeing the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation's Small Schools
Initiative for the Colorado Children's Campaign.

Even parents in an affluent Boulder neighborhood - with a topnotch
school - are questioning whether private school may not be preferable,
since watching their fourth-graders return home dazed and drained from
being drilled again and again in how to write a "power paragraph."

Some observers question where the state system ultimately will lead.

"The more curriculum gets driven to teach kids the test, the more
privileged parents will draw them into private schools," predicts Rona
Wilensky, principal of New Vista High in Boulder. "CSAP may kill
public schools faster than the threat of vouchers ever would have. I
think private schools are going to be a boom industry as educators are
forced to focus on the bubble kids."

But most agree that schools long have needed a wake-up call. The
challenge is to create an effective approach.

"I think this huge hammer hanging over people's heads is a good idea,"
Schoales says. "The problem is, no one is stepping up to provide
leadership and some things that might work long-term rather than
short-term. Everyone is just whining about this system. The worry is
that people don't see this as an opportunity to change schools
dramatically."

The best components of education reform - standards and CSAPs - have
produced a wealth of data on student performance. Next year, when the
legislature allows student identifiers to be attached to test data,
teachers will be able to identify and address specific students'
strengths and weaknesses.

Meanwhile, the Fund for Colorado's Future - using money from the Gates
Foundation - is distributing laptops and guidance to hundreds of
principals statewide so they'll know how best to use the data.

Some legislators also want to revise the accountability reports to
focus on a school's improvement rather than just its test data. They
would be wise to also consider expanding the reports even further,
perhaps incorporating the extensive details on schools required for
state accreditation.

But whether such improvements alone can reverse the negative trends
cropping up in schools is dubious.

"The unknown is whether the governor's office can become a partner
rather than just a critic in the search for better leadership, the
responsibilities of school boards and central offices," says Cal
Frazier, former state education commissioner and a widely respected
moderate Republican.

"It's been too focused on teachers and schools with hopes that
leadership above would come through. This throwing bricks over the
wall gets to me. In the end, we need some kind of turnaround at the
governor's level without giving up the goal of literacy."

Education veterans acknowledge that much of Owens' agenda was intended
to spur failing schools to better serve poor children and children of
color. No one disputes the fact that many schools have done a
miserable job.

But even schools performing virtual miracles by making progress with
the most challenged children aren't getting recognition.

In addition, communities are being left in the dust as schools adhere
to state policies instead of community priorities. That trend is at
odds with the state Constitution's mandate for local control of public
schools. But it's happening nonetheless.

One notable exception is the Thompson School District, which surveyed
its community extensively and set four goals for education: basic
skills, creativity/critical thinking, school to life (such as
preparation for the workplace), and safety and belonging.

"They've responded to the narrowing of curriculum by saying, "No,
we're going to reiterate broader goals,' " Frazier says.

Thompson also is ensuring that its community values and priorities are
reflected in its schools, an important consideration in the wake of
Sept. 11.

"If public education is the cornerstone of democracy, what have we
crowded out of the classroom in the name of one test and one score?"
asks Jane Urschel, associate executive director of the Colorado
Association of School Boards. "This is where local control is
important. I'm not saying we don't have standards, too. But we have to
have the local aspect, reflecting the values of the community in what
an educated child looks like."

Likewise, literacy is the cornerstone of a good education. Without the
ability to read and write, children don't stand a chance.

But while the state is addressing the need for literacy, it cannot
ignore other components essential for a solid education:

Students need a rich curriculum. When a child loves science and gets
it at school, the child will love school. "You're going to lose kids
if you don't recognize their special skills and talents but place such
a strong emphasis on literacy that kids feel they don't belong,"
Frazier notes.

Society needs good citizens who can bring creativity and critical
thinking to our democracy. Without character education and a solid
understanding of democracy, the next generation isn't likely to be
America's finest.

Teachers and principals need professional development so they can
concoct creative approaches to improve achievement. At the Rocky
Mountain School of Expeditionary Learning and the Odyssey School,
climbing teaches students teamwork, self-reliance and trust. The
physical feat serves as an important metaphor when kids get stuck:
"Come on, if you climbed that mountain, you can write this paper."
Other schools may use art or other techniques to engage children in
basic skills.

Yet the accountability system now in place is inadvertently
eliminating such choices. And because each child responds differently,
a healthy variety of schools is critical. So is a variety of
curricula, so that schools - not districts and not the state -
determine how best to serve their students and communities.

Meanwhile, the "huge hammer" hovering over low-performing schools'
heads is an unrealistic threat. Any move to turn a neighborhood school
into a charter likely will provoke a lawsuit immediately by those
intent on protecting the constitutional right for local schools.

Charter schools generally are created and overseen by parents. But
unsatisfactory schools usually are bereft of parental involvement. So
how would such a school suddenly get that support?

In addition, some charter schools are rated unsatisfactory. What will
be done with them? Create a new charter?

While schools should be held accountable, the current system of
accountability is counterproductive. An effective system will arise
only if state officials, educators and other experts can engage in an
open, honest dialogue to eliminate the negative consequences and
expand the positive ones.

It has been said that teaching and learning are messy processes, but
the state accountability system is very tidy.

As schools tilt toward that tidiness, too, the losses for children
could be incalculable.

Billie Stanton is a member of The Denver Post editorial board. She can
be reached at bstanton@denverpost.com.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the ARN-L list, send command SIGNOFF ARN-L
to LISTSERV@LISTS.CUA.EDU.