Facebook
Edutopia on Facebook
Twitter
Edutopia on Twitter
Google+
Edutopia on Google+
Pinterest
Edutopia on Pinterest Follow Me on Pinterest
WHAT WORKS IN EDUCATION The George Lucas Educational Foundation
Subscribe to RSS

We Must Change the Narrative About Public Education: Guest Blog by Diane Ravitch

Betty Ray

Director of Programming and Innovation @Edutopia

Editor's Note: Today's guest blogger is Diane Ravitch, an historian of education, an educational policy analyst, and former United States Assistant Secretary of Education. She is now a research professor at New York University's Steinhardt School of Culture, Education, and Human Development.

Diane Ravitch

As the protests in Wisconsin dominate national news, and the White House and Congress gear up for reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA, currently called "No Child Left Behind"), we have a unique opportunity to put to rest some of the inaccurate narratives that have come to dominate debates around education policy, and to lay the foundations for a set of policies that can achieve our broader societal goals for children.

Myth #1: The Achievement Gap is Widening

Central to the current focus on using standardized tests to hold teachers and schools accountable is the belief that low-income children, especially minority children, are losing academic ground, and that weak schools and teachers with low expectations are to blame. In reality, African-American fourth graders have gained so much ground over the past two decades - when their schools were ostensibly failing them miserably - that they now score higher, on average, on reliable (NAEP) math tests than their white peers did as recently as 1992. And the very lowest-scoring students have seen the largest gains. White students have also gained a lot of ground, so the achievement gap hasn't closed, though it has narrowed a bit. (Over the same time, reading scores, which are likely much more tied to factors outside of schools, have not increased nearly as much, especially in the later grades.) These gains actually slowed after the adoption of No Child Left Behind, possibly because the intense demand for testing caused diminished time for studies that engage children most in school, like the arts, history, science, even physical education.

Critics of so-called "bad" schools point to gaps of a year or more between poor and middle-class fifth graders as evidence of that the school is a failure. Yet there is a gap of as much as two years when at-risk students enter kindergarten - bad schools clearly didn't create it, and seldom have the resources to overcome it.

Myth #2: Achievement Will Soar With Younger, More Enthusiastic Teachers

A second, related narrative asserts that teachers who work in the poorest schools are lazy and burned out; achievement will soar if only we can fire more of the older teachers and replace them with young, enthusiastic ones, especially those from Teach for America, who have only five weeks of training. But this demand runs counter to what we know to be true in every other profession: experience is a plus. Indeed, while the evidence is mixed on some aspects of education policy, it is unmistakably clear on this point: experience is one of the best predictors of teacher quality. Moreover, teachers familiar with community circumstances are especially needed in schools in which students have experienced poverty, inadequate housing, lack of sufficient food, and health problems. All these limit students' focus in class and prompt behavior problems.

The incontrovertible evidence about the effects of poverty on family life and student motivation flies in the face of the pervasive narrative that policymakers and the public have been hearing. It makes clear the need to reverse the increasingly narrow focus on testing, accountability, and the use of both to get rid of tenured teachers and to close "failing" schools. And it points to several suggestions for policymakers as they look to ESEA reauthorization:

1) Given the remarkable progress in math that schools serving poor and disadvantaged children have made, we should use data collection as a tool to figure out what has worked well - such as improved curricula and class size - and to help schools and teachers improve, rather than as a weapon to punish schools and fire teachers, which further destabilizes already fragile communities.

2) The current system forbids us to say openly what we all know: Students who live in poverty and isolation face tremendous hurdles to learning, and they bring those problems with them to school every day. If schools are to succeed, and students to reach their full potential, teachers, principals, and parents need to have the necessary resources to help them do so. This means helping all students arrive at the kindergarten door ready to learn through quality early childhood education, parent education, targeting scarce resources of money, small classes, and the best teachers to at-risk students to maintain those early gains, and linking schools to the range of community supports, such as after-school and summer programs and mentoring opportunities that middle-class children already enjoy.

3) The federal mandates in No Child Left Behind that require schools to demonstrate Adequate Yearly Progress in reading and math embody a utopian goal that no state or nation has ever met: 100% proficiency on state tests. This has resulted in accountability measures that narrow the curriculum, especially for poor children, and game the system rather than helping students learn more. Measures that help schools and teachers determine how well they are serving their at-risk students require: enhancements to NAEP that will allow it to provide disaggregated data in more nuanced ways and to assess a much broader range of subjects; additional tools to assess children's health, values, civic engagement, and other curricular and societal goals; and state flexibility in designing accountability systems so that a range of models can be tested to meet district needs.

If we are serious about school reform, we would change our efforts from the current punitive approach to a strategy of building a strong education profession and attending to the conditions of children's lives. Instead of closing schools that are often the most stable institution in the neighborhood, we would be improving them. Instead of firing experienced teachers, we would be making sure that they have the tools to do their job. Instead of ignoring poverty and its negative consequences, we would be designing programs to help families and children. Instead of creating programs to insert inexperienced teachers, principals, and superintendents into our schools, we would take steps to recruit, support, and respect those who work in our nation's schools.

Diane Ravitch is Research Professor of Education at New York University and a historian of education. In addition, she is a nonresident senior fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C. She has written numerous articles and books -- her most recent, The Death and Life of the Great American School System: How Testing and Choice Are Undermining Education (New York: Basic Books, 2010).

Betty Ray

Director of Programming and Innovation @Edutopia
Related Tags:

Comments (36)Sign in or register to postSubscribe to comments via RSS

  •  
David Wees's picture
David Wees
Formative Assessment Specialist for New Visions for Public Schools
Blogger

The real objective of the current reforms is to make educating students in the US cheaper, rather than actually improve the system. If the politicians kept ranting that we need to put less money into schools, and cut budgets, I think they would find a lot less political support for their changes. Hence, they blame teachers and try to point out the flaws they perceive in the system so that parents will give cart-blanche to whatever politicians want to do to "fix" schools.

C. Brown's picture
C. Brown
Fifth grade teacher from Hayward, CA

I agree with this article. In addition enough isn't said about the money being poured into these testing companies and textbook companies that are achieving a monopoly on curriculum. They sign contracts with states requiring schools to only buy their materials, in addition they make billions on "test prep" for the tests they control.

David Coffey's picture
David Coffey
Joint Appointment at GVSU between Math Dept and College of Ed

I work with student teachers and it has become clear that we need to help them to survive in the current system while preparing them to subvert it. We are reading Stigler and Hiebert's "The Teaching Gap" and using it to chart a course of action that implements subtle shifts toward teaching and learning sustainability. Given the direction education is headed, however, I wonder if we can wait.

In any case, we must, as Diane says, reclaim the narrative. Unless we do, someone else will tell our story - ignoring our strengths and embellishing our struggles. Hopefully, this is the beginning of a movement toward finding our voice.

John Bennett's picture
John Bennett
Emeritus Faculty in the School of Engineering / University of Connecticut

I would be totally alarmed and outraged if the goal was simply older teachers - regardless of the reasoning (e.g. high salaries or won't seek constant improvement). What is important is to help teachers in areas of need - and then dismiss them if they won't or can't work to improve. And, by the way, there are money issues everywhere; so, yes, it's important that everyone seek to save funds where possible. As critically important as effective learning is for our students, there can be NO blank checks.

There is another issue for teachers however that I believe even worse: teachers are burdened by far too many responsibilities that are not really associated with effective learning - such as students having no motivation to learn (the responsibility of parents mostly I'd suggest). There needs to be a greater education community effort to deal with these issues so teachers can facilitate effective learning rather than progressively burning out because of these issues.

James Mils's picture

It is so refreshing to hear someone speak truthfully about what is going on in public education. Teachers and their unions are scapegoats for deeprooted problems in our society. Charter schools are now emerging as a parallel school system that takes the remaining informed and involved parents out of the traditional publics. This is not a fair fight and anyone in it knows the truth. But the reports and rhetoric, as Ms. Ravitch indicates, are based on a utopian world view espoused by people who have never run a classroom at any level.

Sign in and Join the Discussion! Not a member? Register to join the discussion.