Sharkblog posted an article about a "rare school official" in Seattle who is honest about the problems facing public education. Hint: He doesn't want more funding.
If the Education Trust Fund initiative makes the November ballot and passes, the state sales tax would grow to almost 10 percent. In return, there'd be new money for preschool, full-day kindergarten, at-risk students, smaller class sizes, greater college enrollment and more. But before public-school parents and K-12 school districts jump on board, they'll need to ask, "What could we already be doing better?"
Charlie Hoff, the vice president of the Federal Way School Board, is glad to tell them, and his message is bracing...
Over coffee at a 24-hour restaurant near Boeing Field, Hoff lets it fly. He says that nationally, it's going to be "hell" meeting tough new federal and state achievement-testing standards because junior-high schools and high schools have become "juvenile social halls," and most educators — while well-intentioned — have given up.
Too much of the school day is wasted, says Hoff. He's right.
Beyond the frequent interruptions of bells, loudspeakers and messengers, there's the sacred cow of high-school athletics, which steals additional time and warps priorities. Worse, many schools downplay the basics to teach about diversity, character, drugs, sex, fitness and diet. All are important. Yet why can't parents provide these lessons at home?
"We have shrunk the learning time, but we're asking for more knowledge. This equation doesn't balance. Parents will be shocked" when they see the dismaying outcomes, says Hoff.
This is a refreshing change from the constant refrain of "We have no time to do anything but prepare for tests!" that one often hears from educators. If the focus is on character, diet, and athletics, well, no, there's not going to be a lot of time for solid academics.
Tougher grading is also necessary, according to Hoff. One mother of a seventh-grade honor-roll student e-mailed Hoff, distraught because her child couldn't pass the crucial Washington Assessment of Student Learning. Grades are often awarded with "no connection" to ability, says Hoff...
That's why standardized tests are useful. The disconnect between testing and grades is often startling, but the point of hammering home this disconnect is not to punish kids. It's to force teachers to examine their grading schemes. Awarding "A"s for effort isn't a good idea if a student really hasn't learned much.
The charter-like Federal Way Public Academy [that Hoff oversees] is part of the blueprint for success, Hoff says. This junior high follows a rigorous college-prep model. Forty percent of the 280 students are non-white; entrance is by lottery. Core subjects are limited to English, math, science and social studies. Then come computers and foreign language. Athletics are non-existent.
There's no drama, either, in more ways than one. "The peer pressure is about academic achievement, not whose party everyone is going to, who made cheerleader and who's going out with whom," says Principal Judy Kraft.
It's gratifying to see the reporter describe this situation as a positive "laser-like focus on core subjects," instead of bemoaning (as this Time reporter did) all the extracurriculars that schools must "give up" in order to teach students essential academic skills.
Hoff wants to see additional schools like the Federal Way Public Academy, but that's not all: social promotion ends; social engineering and athletics are curtailed; savings are funneled to existing and new programs that help low-achievers; 10th-graders get a coveted driver's license only if they pass the WASL, and then just for one year. Passage of additional WASLs for juniors and seniors would be required for annual driver's license renewals and high-school graduation.
Woohah. Tying the WASL to a driver's license? I can't support that, because the test isn't a valid measure of one's driving capabilities - but man would it be fun to see the fur fly if that were implemented.
Anyway, on a related note, I'd like to address a comment that Devoted Reader Lawrence K. left on an earlier post of mine:
You've made the point now, dozens of times, that tests don't need to be used to restrict activities in the schools. But how many educators are listening to you? You have to admit there is an irony in the fact that you are often critical of "educrats" but then you expect them to be reasonable in their use of tests? Which raises the issue, do you trust them or don't you? If you don't trust "educrats" then surely you admit they may misuse tests?
Good point. I support testing because I believe tests are useful when properly used. But even though I know that many educators dislike or misuse tests, I don't think that's a good reason not to support testing. It would be nice, though, if there were more administrators like Mr. Hoff, who understand that making room for tests doesn't mean a decline in education.
I don't know the school system as well as you do. I don't work on education issues. I don't keep in touch with developments in education policy. But I do know what my friends are doing, those with kids. Those friends of mine who are parents are desperate to get their kids out of the public schools at least in part because of the way the testing has narrowed what gets taught in the schools.
See above comments by Mr. Hoff. What, exactly, is missing from the school days of the children of your friends? Extra recesses? Athletics? Arts & music? Were your friends satisfied with their childrens' academic performances before? If their children are gifted, and now they've been put in classes with subpar performers, then yes, perhaps private/charter/home schools are better for them. But I also agree with Hoff's criticism that much of the "curriculum" being cut from schools now is chaff, and that all students would benefit more if schools focused on core skills and held all students to high standards.
One often reads of gifted children being denied special services because of funding issues. There are the usual cries that cutting funds to gifted-student programs "threatens the nation's future by stunting the intellectual growth of the next generation of innovators." But when so many students in US public schools perform so far below the level of "mediocrity" that critics despise, is it really that bad to shoot for bringing everyone up to par for now?
Surely you can admit that teachers are now teaching to the tests? I'm in Virginia, where education has been pretty thoroughly wrapped around the SOLs (standards of learning). Those friends of mine who are teachers say they must teach to the test now. Those friends of mine who are parents say they hate what they percieve as the limits put on the children's education by the tests.
What were those teachers teaching before, if not basic reading, math, and science? I'm not saying the SOLs are perfect - no test is. But there's not a state standardized test being used anywhere in the country that is not a test of basic skills. What gave these teachers the idea that teaching basic skills was not the foundation of their job? Why is teaching a child to read quickly and correctly considered "teaching to the test"? Is it because teachers really weren't assessing those skills before?
More so, my friends with kids hate the way the SOLs limit the reach of education, its potential excitement, and what that means for the reach and even the identity of their children.
Again, I've yet to understand how a basic-skills test can "limit the reach of education." For kids who haven't mastered those skills, any remediation that follows the test is absolutely essential. Is it really the tests themselves that are having this impact? Or is it the attitude of the teachers, overtly or covertly transmitted to kids, that tests are awful, tests are meaningless, or tests prevent students from learning "higher-order" skills because teachers don't want to cut out lessons on "character education" to make room for more advanced academics?
I don't mean to sounds unsympathetic, and I'm glad Lawrence raised these points. But if a child's reach and identity are impacted by anything in a school, it's by the quality of teaching, not by the method of assessment.
Update: Captain Yips has his say in the matter.
Posted by kswygert at March 3, 2004 10:13 AM