Fwd: [arn2-strategy] Rewriting NCLB to Emphasize Success Not Sanctions

[Susan Harman <susanharman@igc.org>]

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Bob Schaeffer <bobschaeffer@earthlink.net>
> Date: Thu Jul 12, 2007  5:15:15 AM US/Pacific
> To: ARN Main List <arn-l@interversity.org>,  arn2-strategy  
> <arn2-strategy@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [arn2-strategy] Rewriting NCLB to Emphasize Success Not  
> Sanctions
> Reply-To: arn2-strategy@yahoogroups.com
>
> REWRITING NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND
> Providence Journal Opinion Column -- July 11, 2007
> by Julia Steiny
>
> Congress is wrestling with the reauthorization of their its education
> law No Child Left Behind (NCLB). To my mind fixing the law is
> philosophically simple: shift its emphasis from the persistent pursuit
> of the negative to seeking out the positive.
>
> Instead of putting the focus on identifying and punishing failure,
> elevate and broadcast success.
>
> By now we know all about ineffective urban schools, and anyone
> interested can find examples close at hand. But NCLB has done nothing  
> to
> inspire us with images of what urban schools - or any schools - would
> look like when we're really doing things right.
>
> The law assumes that it can force schools to improve students' test
> scores by getting tough with "sanctions." I'm all for accountability,
> but punishment needs to be the last, not the first, resort. By all  
> means
> continue publicly reporting tests scores, good and bad - and impose
> consequences, if necessary - but focus attention on understanding the
> promising results. Study success.
>
> Success is so incidental to the NCLB strategy; the law speaks to it
> virtually not at all. In psychology circles, obsessing about what you
> don't want is considered an anxiety disorder.
>
> Consider briefly, how the 1,200-page law works. NCLB required states to
> create massive state testing programs that assess all kids in grades 3
> to 8, and once more in high school. To keep track of students who had
> been ignored historically - racial minorities, low-income and
> special-needs students - states set 37 "performance targets" for each
> school, and report were required to report how well students are  
> meeting
> these targets.
>
> Each of the 37 targets is an opportunity to fail. Missing one  
> classifies
> the school as "in need of improvement," which is NCLB's euphemism for
> "failed." The law mandates that every year states must publicly  
> identify
> schools and districts "in need of improvement," teachers who are not
> "highly qualified," and subgroups of students who are not proficient.
> States must raise their performance expectations incrementally until  
> all
> children, in all subgroups, are deemed "proficient" by their state  
> tests
> by 2014.
>
> If NCLB continues on its current path, in 2014 virtually all U.S.  
> public
> schools will be failures.
>
> The good news is that the law has forced the states to build  
> educational
> data systems with 21st-century technologies and standards. These  
> systems
> aren't completeas yet, but they are impressively sophisticated. They  
> can
> tell us which colleges best prepare teachers in math, which financial
> investments have paid off in better academic results, and which  
> children
> need what kind of reading help. This is huge.
>
> Indeed, I predict that these state data systems will be the only truly
> useful legacy of the flawed law.
>
> However, by using these powerful systems to shine light on the worst
> schools, not the best, the law is doing little or nothing to improve  
> the
> educational experience or future prospects of the students themselves.
> Drop-out rates are going up, and students show up at college needing  
> the
> same amount of remedial work as they did before the law's passage.
>
> If we studied the most successful schools, what lessons might we learn?
>
> The first thing such a study would tell us is that the punitive nature
> of the law has turned many states into liars. For example, according to
> the state tests, students in Mississippi are far more proficient than
> students in Massachusetts. The National Assessment of Education  
> Progress
> - the gold-standard, national test - begs to differ, indeed reverses
> that assessment, putting Massachusetts students at the top of the
> nation. This tells us only that some states protect their struggling
> schools and students from being labeled failures by setting sadly low
> standards. It does not help draft success.
>
> The next thing we'd find is that most of the schools approaching the
> 100-percent proficiency mark have easy kids, plentiful resources and
> flexible working conditions. No big lesson there either. Yes, we could
> better understand the variations in quality among the well-to-do
> suburban schools, but the law's focus is trained on poor kids' schools
> with many disadvantaged children because they receive federal Title I
> money.
>
> After eliminating lying or unchallenged schools, we'llwe would at last
> get to those that manage somehow to cope successfully with the
> tremendous difficulties most schools face and to change the  
> trajectories
> of students' lives. They're out there, schools that nourish learning  
> and
> a love of learning in youths, no matter their backgrounds. States have
> more than enough data to identify these successes and pool
> information.about them.
>
> What would we find then? I'll I'd bet most, if not all of them, would
> have staff members who know the students really well and have found  
> ways
> to work effectively with the families and communities. Surely many have
> would have partnerships with external institutions, universities or
> businesses that expand their resources. Maybe they focus on helping the
> students think positively about their futures and about the impact they
> can have on their own communities.
>
> In any case, imagine research backed by hard data from, say, the New
> England states, California and Ohio. That would be compelling.  
> Educators
> and the public could finally see what they were reaching for, instead  
> of
> what they're struggling to escape.
>
> Laws are blunt instruments at best. And lawmakers tend to think in  
> terms
> of creating rules that can be enforced with consequences. Even so,  
> armed
> with reality-backed information about the states' school successes,
> Congress actually could actually use its powers to rework NCLB so that
> it encouragesd and enablesd best practices. They The nation's leaders
> badly need to get over thinking they can punish schools into  
> excellence.
> It can't be done.
>
> Julia Steiny is a former member of the Providence School Board; she now
> consults and writes for a number of education, government and private
> enterprises. She welcomes your questions and comments on education. She
> can be reached by e-mail at juliasteiny@cox.net or c/o EdWatch,
> Education and Employment, Providence Journal, 75 Fountain St.,
> Providence, R.I. 02902.
>
>
> http://www.projo.com/education/juliasteiny/content/ 
> projo_07112007_steiny.6407fc87.html#
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
>     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/arn2-strategy/
>
> <*> Your email settings:
>     Individual Email | Traditional
>
> <*> To change settings online go to:
>     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/arn2-strategy/join
>     (Yahoo! ID required)
>
> <*> To change settings via email:
>     mailto:arn2-strategy-digest@yahoogroups.com
>     mailto:arn2-strategy-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
>
> <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>     arn2-strategy-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
>     http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Vote in the National Cheney Impeachment Poll
http://www.usalone.com/blogvoices.php?Cheney%20Impeachment%3F
Add this text to your own email and blog signatures!