Except For Them!
NYT education reporter Michael Winerip’s method of holding up schools that are not meeting various accountability requirements and giving an incomplete picture of these schools and what’s going on is well-established. The archetype of the genre is Lake Alfred in Florida. And of course, Wheeler Elementary deserves a place in the pantheon, too.
Today we get Oyster River Middle School. Scary! And just in time for Halloween. The school isn’t making “adequate yearly progress or AYP.” Winerip says that’s just because,”about a dozen of its 110 special education children did not score high enough.” Sure, what’s 10 percent of the special ed kids here among friends? Actually, it also looks like some low-income students may be lagging, too, (only about 3 in 4 low-income fifth-graders are proficient in math) and schools are unfortunately quick to blame special education students for AYP problems when other groups aren’t doing well either. (You can find data here via Great Schools). Winerip basically says it’s a great school and this is just more evidence of the folly of accountability. It does look like a good school – and to their credit they apparently want to do better – but just for the sake of argument: What about the poor students or special education students there? Don’t they matter? Nevermind, I think I know the answer. Apparently they don’t. Winerip touts SAT scores instead…which, of course, not all students take…
In his own subtle way Winerip’s work is actually a spectacular argument for No Child Left Behind-style policies requiring disaggregation, transparency, and accountability. It’s pretty clear that absent those policy elements students who lag behind are swept under the rug. This is one reason special education advocates, for instance, are in favor of No Child Left Behind’s approach. The performance targets required by No Child do need to be changed, yes, because the law is several years overdue for reauthorization. But it’s exactly this ethos that makes many people leery of various alternatives to today’s policy and is consequently slowing progress on Capitol Hill. Or, put another way, ‘except for them’ sounds reasonable, unless it’s your kid.
October 31st, 2011 at 4:43 pm
Actually the article talks about the role of test prep. The teacher elects not to go in that direction. Test prep has no long term value and taints the data.
October 31st, 2011 at 4:53 pm
If poor students and special ed. students are better off now than they were in 2000, then your argument makes sense. But there is no evidence that they are. About five years into NCLB I began to wonder what reformers would do if, after a long period of time, there was no evidence that test-based reform was successful. The answer appears to be that they will advocate for more of the same.
October 31st, 2011 at 5:33 pm
Doing cool projects, teaching without textbooks, and “making learning fun” all make schools sound great, but if the students don’t know how to use a textbook, or if they don’t have basic literacy skills like reading a title and making predictions about a text, what’s the use? I’ve seen far too many instances of “inquiry-based learning” being used to fool people into thinking that real learning was happening in the classroom. If teachers’ best advice on how to pass a writing exam is to tell students to “fill the box,” I have to wonder about the quality of their “superior” teaching methods.
October 31st, 2011 at 6:59 pm
I think you missed the point regarding schools which miss AYP because of special education students. As a special education teacher, I value each and every student, but I recognize they learn at their own pace. Some students have cognitive disabilities which impede their ability to read or to understand basic math concepts. Some students have mental health issues where they have been hospitalized for large periods of the school year, some children have learning disabilities which significantly slow their learning, despite all the research-based interventions.
It is a “one-size-fits-all” accountability plan that is failing these students. The schools are right to question and call it out. They are showing the care about and value these students as individuals, not some just some silly test score.
October 31st, 2011 at 8:47 pm
It is enjoyable to see Michael Winerip get under Andy’s skin (or noted liar Steven Brill’s).
Truth hurts, Andy.
November 1st, 2011 at 5:10 am
KatieO, dittoes!
November 1st, 2011 at 11:55 am
Diane Ravitch does a decent job of pointing out the flaws in his argument, noting that identifying bad teachers is not as easy as it sounds. Based on my experiences, I would argue that being a good or bad teacher is largely a function of the environment where you work. A teacher who is not up to par (by any evaluation method) at one school may be an excellent teacher in another school. For example, I received satisfactory ratings as a high school teacher in Chicago but got an unsatisfactory during my year teaching elementary school. The age and race of the children you teach, along with your camaraderie with other teachers, support from your administration, class size, sufficient resources, adequate facilities, and motivation of children and parents all play a big role in teacher quality. Teacher quality is not constant by any means. . I do agree that bad teachers should eventually be removed, but only after sufficient intervention and determining whether they are in the best possible environment for their talents. Hanushek also vastly overstates the importance of the teacher. Teachers matter, but it isn’t like the movie Freedom Writers where the nice new teacher comes along and instantly turns everything around despite poverty and neglect. We need to have realistic expectations.
November 1st, 2011 at 4:50 pm
As much as I’d like to see my special needs child catch up to her chronological peers, I think it’s absurd to fault her school for not yet achieving that goal. They have helped her make tremendous progress but because she started out so far behind, she remains behind. The progress of special needs kids needs to be measured against their own individual goals, not a well-intentioned but unrealistic target of 100% grade-level proficiency.
November 12th, 2011 at 3:35 am
I do agree that bad teachers should eventually be removed, but only after sufficient intervention and determining whether they are in the best possible environment for their talents
http://besthealthnews.info