A Flawed Campaign to Reinvent High School

[Peter Farruggio <pfarr@cal.berkeley.edu>]

> ****NEWS RELEASE--FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE****
>
> A FLAWED CAMPAIGN TO REINVENT HIGH SCHOOL
> New analysis argues that recent attacks on American high schools and proposals
> for stiffer graduation requirements are 
> simplistic and almost certain to fail
>
> Contact: W. Norton Grubb -- (510) 642-3488; wngrubb@berkeley.edu
> Jeannie Oakes ­- (310) 825-2494; oakes@ucla.edu
> Kevin Welner -- (303) 492-8370; kevin.welner@gmail.com
>
> TEMPE, Ariz. and BOULDER, Colo., Oct. 1, 2007 ­ 
> Several recent high-profile reports calling for 
> the ?reinvention? of the American high school 
> are simplistic and seriously flawed, according 
> to a new analysis by two distinguished scholars.
>
> W. Norton Grubb, an economist who holds the 
> David Gardner Chair in Higher Education at UC 
> Berkeley, and Jeannie Oakes, who holds the 
> Presidential Chair in Education Equity at UCLA, 
> analyzed a wave of commission reports since 2004 
> that attack the American high school and call, 
> in particular, for higher state graduation requirements and for exit exams.
>
> Grubb and Oakes conclude that this current push 
> for ?rigor? fails on several levels. The reports 
> don?t adequately consider the likely 
> consequences of the policies intended to enforce 
> higher standards. They also ?have little to say 
> about how [the] imposition [of these standards] 
> will enhance student performance.? And most 
> discussions in these reports focus on narrow 
> definitions of rigor?higher test scores, more 
> demanding courses, or both?while ignoring other 
> conceptions of rigor that may be as valid, if 
> not more so, to discussions of how high schools 
> should better fill society?s needs.
>
> Rigor, the authors explain, can also be advanced 
> as depth rather than breadth, as more 
> sophisticated levels of understanding including 
> ?higher-order skills,? and as the ability to 
> apply learning in unfamiliar settings. These 
> goals are largely neglected in the new ?high standards? commission reports.
>
> Grubb and Oakes advance their argument in a 
> policy brief titled, ??Restoring Value? to the 
> High School Diploma: The Rhetoric and Practice 
> of Higher Standards.? It is one of a series on 
> education policy questions published jointly by 
> the Education Policy Research Unit at Arizona 
> State University and the Education and the 
> Public Interest Center at the University of Colorado at Boulder.
>
> The commission reports analyzed by Grubb and 
> Oakes have had a very real policy impact. As 
> they note, ?Recent legislation has forced the 
> translation of rhetoric into practice. Most 
> states have increased their graduation 
> requirements, and half the states have adopted exit exams.?
>
> Yet the current push to increase rigor and 
> heighten standards is ?seriously flawed,? they 
> write, and ?any gains come at the expense of 
> other goals for high school reform, including 
> equity, curricular relevance, and student interest.?
>
> In place of the current approaches, Grubb and 
> Oakes describe a clear and distinctly different 
> alternative to the nineteenth century model of 
> the traditional high school. They suggest that 
> high schools offer ?multiple pathways? 
> structured around themes, some drawn from 
> occupational areas, others drawn from broad, multidisciplinary concepts.
>
> Such an approach would ?provide room for 
> examining the important occupational, political, 
> and social issues of adult life in the process 
> of teaching disciplinary subjects.? They also 
> explain that focusing ?on a single theme 
> nurtures multiple concepts of rigor,? and ?the 
> approach distributes responsibility for 
> standards throughout the educational community, 
> and it provides students with the benefits of 
> curricular choice and several routes to graduation.?
>
> Find ??Restoring Value? to the High School 
> Diploma: The Rhetoric and Practice of Higher 
> Standards,? by W. Norton Grubb and Jeannie 
> Oakes, on the web at http://epsl.asu.edu/epru/documents/EPSL-0710-242-EPRU.pdf
>
> CONTACT:
>
> W. Norton Grubb, David Gardner Chair in Higher 
> Education and Faculty Coordinator, Principal Leadership Institute
> Policy, Organization, Measurement, and Evaluation (POME)
> School of Education, University of California, Berkeley
> (510) 642-3488
> wngrubb@berkeley.edu
>
> Jeannie Oakes, Presidential Professor and Director
> Institute for Democracy Education and Access
> University of California, Los Angeles
> (310) 825-2494
> oakes@ucla.edu
>
> Kevin Welner, Professor and Director
> Education and the Public Interest Center
> University of Colorado at Boulder
> (303) 492-8370
> kevin.welner@gmail.com
>
>
> **********