Advertisement
Schools are not “failing.” Schools are doing a better job than ever before, helping more kids with more problems. Over the years schools have gotten better and better. That is not to say that schools are perfect, that they provide everything certain interest groups demand, that they provide enough of what actually is needed, or that they shouldn’t be asked to do even more. Still, schools are not failing.
What has happened is that as schools improved at one rate; business, technological, and economic demands increased at a faster rate. It may be true that schools, although improving, have not been able to keep up with every need, demand, and wish that they encounter in a rapidly changing world, but state government (which controls nearly every important aspect of education) adapts to new needs even more slowly - at a snail’s pace. If schools haven’t kept up, the failure is the state government’s, and particularly that part of government partial to business.
We have proficiency tests because business, in need of a larger number of intelligent, well-trained workers, is looking for a cheap solution. Rather than accept good old supply and demand (i.e. offer higher pay to attract more highly qualified workers), they demand that the schools increase the number of such workers. If it can be done, that’s not a bad idea, but they also demand that it be done without “throwing money at it” (i.e. without any increased investment of tax dollars), a big savings for business (a shifting of “training expenses” from business to the schools [ again, assuming the scheme can actually succeed] ) -- and a “no new taxes” platform for politicians. How to pull it off ? Proficiency tests.
Proficiency tests promise to meet the goals of business and politicians; that’s why we have them -- not to help children. Most of the expense and pain produced by the tests fall upon local districts and the people associated with them -- not politicians and businesses. Everyone locally is expected to work harder and smarter and do more with less; all local priorities must be adjusted to the state’s prescription; communities, families, children as young as nine years old, school boards, administrators, and teachers must all be ready to admit their “failure” (by the state’s standards) and live with it indefinitely; local taxpayers are forced to either let valuable non-test related programs die or ante up new taxes ( locally -- where powerful businesses can extort abatements).
If it works, it’s a perfect scheme for business. They can lower training costs, avoid taxes, and - via an expanded labor pool - keep wages low (in this case business likes supply and demand). If it works, it’s perfect for state politicians (we’re “doing something,” it “doesn’t cost anything,” and “business will remember us” come the next election). Even if it doesn’t work, it’s still advantageous: many years must pass before educational “reform” can be evaluated, and then denial can drag it on for many more years. Eventually some new scheme will be hatched to “help” us forget the old, failed one.
On top of that, since (by design) the majority of children will pass the test, and only a minority of students will fail, shameless political frauds like State Senator Gene Watts can argue that “only a minority are complaining “ (at any given time only a minority are dying too). Is there any wonder we have proficiency tests?
But weren’t the tests designed by teachers? No. Start asking teachers you know whether they designed the proficiency tests (good luck finding one). If you think you’ve found one, ask that person what question she or he wrote (they won’t be able to answer).
Yeah but, what’s so bad about asking high school seniors to pass an eighth grade test (they must pass the “9th grade” test [which is said to be on the 8th grade level] in order to graduate)? Well, there is no such thing as “an eighth grade level,” never has been, at least not an objectively determined one; it is an impossible, imaginary concept.
Sure, “8th grade level” conjures up some notion for each of us, based on our own or our children’s experience, but we all conjure up our own personal, subjective notion. There is no precision whatsoever. I’ve known eighth graders from 12 to 16 years old with IQ’s ranging from 75 to 148 -- and that’s in “regular” education. In “special” education classes, some 8th graders have IQ’s under 75 (100 is average). Differences also exist between the experience and opportunities of 8th graders in wealthy suburban districts and 8th graders in poor city or rural districts. Which 8th grade kid represents the “8th grade level”? Are children with IQ’s of 75 or 148 “on” the “8th grade level”? If both are, should we have the same standard for both? Should the test be easy enough for both to pass or hard enough to fail one of them (which one would that be?)? If one fails, does that help him. If the other passes, does that help him?
If a low IQ student with attentive wealthy parents, through extraordinary parental effort and expenditure, passes the test, but a slightly above average IQ student with abusive, negligent parents fails the test, which one is on the “8th grade level”? Neither is. All that can be said is that one child passed a test he was given and one did not. Thomas Edison was kicked out of school. I wonder what “level” he was on. All children can learn, but all children can’t learn all things, and all children can’t learn at the same speed and to the same degree. Schools cannot mass produce uniform children as if schools were widget factories or tract home builders. There is no set of instructions or blueprints by which, if only schools would follow them, identical widget children could be spewed out endlessly into the marketplace. No, proficiency tests are a flawed “answer” to the “failure” of the schools.
While some marginal improvements will be seen in test scores. No real, substantial “improvement” will ever be realized by this scheme. The Drs. Frankenstein who sewed this monster together have unwittingly admitted as much by their recent, desperate actions. When they began to realize that their punitive 9th grade scheme was not performing up to expectations, they began to worry. As their apprehension built they panicked and started abusing 4th graders in hopes of impressing the other children (that set off a reaction by parents who, unlike state legislators such as Gene Watts, don’t believe in child abuse).
The whole notion is insanely ludicrous. It is supposed by those who imposed the testing that the Columbus Public Schools, which in 1999-2000 met only 4 of 27 test goals, will gradually pass more and more until after thirteen years of teaching to the test and using the right teaching methods (but not throwing money at it), Columbus kids will meet all 27 goals just as New Albany kids already have. Nobody is saying, however, that after thirteen years Columbus kids will be living the same life style as New Albany kids. Why should they; nobody is saying that class, economics, prejudice, or flaws in our country’s social/political make-up have anything to do with it. Supposedly, the system isn’t failing; the schools are.
Every day someone somewhere is bashing the schools. Well, schools can certainly be made better, but if significant improvement is ever to occur, the real, systemic social/political problems involved in this issue must be acknowledged, and real solutions must be attempted. Reality rather than selfish desires must inform reform. Everyone who truly loves this country and community wants the best for our children and knows that we don’t help children by beating on them. We don’t help children by “holding them accountable” for things that are largely not under their control.
Being a craven politician or a selfish businessperson doesn’t require beating on children for selfish personal gain, but it’s so much easier than being socially responsible. It’s cheaper too.
Tom Harker is a fifty-six year old former teacher with ten years’ teaching experience in Columbus (Linmore Junior High School and North High School) and twenty-one years experience in Circleville (eighth grade). He now heads an active local band, “Ukulele Man & His Prodigal Sons.” Their CD is “SumoNinjaLele.” Tom is available at: ukulele_man@yahoo.com