Education Gadfly Weekly

Volume 3, Number 7

February 20, 2003

New York's Finest (?) and the Perils of Determinism

Chester E. Finn, Jr. / February 20, 2003

Last week, New York City chancellor Joel I. Klein released the list of 208 schools that will be exempt from the new citywide math and reading curricula that go into effect next year in the rest of the country's largest school system.

Ignore for now the issue of whether a uniform citywide curriculum is a good idea. [On that point, see "Letter from New York City: Bloomberg's Reforms," by Diane Ravitch. Disregard as well the awkward question of whether Klein has chosen sound reading and math programs. [See "Chancellor's New Reading Program Is Unproven," by Diane Ravitch, Newsday, February 10, 2003 for more on this.] Focus instead on two other aspects of this policy.

The first is Klein's (and Mayor Bloomberg's) decision not to impose their new curricular regime on the Big Apple's best schools. This is presumably meant to reward them for their success with a measure of autonomy and self-determination that will be denied to less successful schools - and to follow the ancient maxim that "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." Note, though, that these schools aren't getting any new freedoms or building-level prerogatives (more control over personnel or budget, say); they're simply not losing any of the curricular independence - some would say fragmentation-that previously characterized all of Gotham's schools.

That exemption provoked grumbling before the list came out, for the mere idea of making such a list means distinguishing between higher- and lower-performing schools, i.e.

» Continued


New York's Finest (?) and the Perils of Determinism

Battle over Race-Based Admissions Intensifies

Eric Osberg / February 20, 2003

With the Supreme Court scheduled to hear oral arguments on the University of Michigan's affirmative action admissions policies in April, the debate over such policies grows ever hotter. As this week's deadline for filing briefs approached, more than 300 organizations representing universities, corporations, labor unions, and the military announced that they would support the University's affirmative action policies.

Last month, the Bush administration gingerly threw its weight behind the anti-affirmative action crowd, filing a cautious amicus brief that opposed quotas. The administration has also pointed toward an alternative admissions method used in the President's home state of Texas as a possible substitute for affirmative action. Known as a "percent plan," it guarantees college admission to those who graduate near the top of their high school class. California and Florida also have percent plans, though these differ in many specifics (the percentage of the class guaranteed admission; whether the student earns admission simply to the state system or to the campus of his/her choice; and whether the plan applies to public high schools only or includes private schools). The common denominator, however, is that supporters believe such plans will generate diverse college populations without explicitly using race as a factor.

Two new reports by the Harvard Civil Rights Project question this assumption and in doing so shed light on the complexity of this issue. (See Percent Plans in College Admissions: A Comparative Analysis of Three States and Appearance and

» Continued


Battle over Race-Based Admissions Intensifies

New SAT measures creative and practical skills, boosts minority scores

February 20, 2003

A revised SAT being developed by the College Board and psychologist Robert Sternberg produces smaller test score gaps across racial groups and can help colleges achieve diversity without using affirmative action, its developers claim. The test, which aims to measure creative and practical skills as well as memory and analytical ability, was recently field-tested and the results were better at predicting college success than the current SAT, Sternberg says. The new test is meant to augment the SAT, however, not replace it. College admissions offices have always defended their use of the SAT by explaining that the scores of high school seniors are correlated with the grades they will receive in their freshman year of college. If the new test does a better job of predicting freshman GPA while also boosting racial diversity, it's likely that admissions offices will welcome its use. A more critical reaction is expected from those who believe that what the current SAT measures - vocabulary, analytical ability, etc., - is more important than creative and practical skills, and from those who prefer tests focused on curricular mastery to those that appraise aptitude per se.

"SAT revision passes first test," UPI, February 11, 2003

» Continued


New SAT measures creative and practical skills, boosts minority scores

Snowmen, huts, yachts banned from textbooks by language police

February 20, 2003

You won't see any references to bookworms, busybodies, craftsmanship, cults, dialects, dogma, extremists, fairies, heroines, huts, jungles, lumberjacks, limping, Navajos, one-man bands, slaves, snowmen, straw men, or yachts in today's textbooks. That's because these terms are among the hundreds that turn up in lists of banned words and phrases, lists now widely used by writers, editors, and illustrators when preparing textbooks or tests. They've all been banished as sexist, ethnocentric, offensive to the handicapped, inauthentic, elitist or otherwise troublesome. The Atlantic Monthly has published a short glossary of banned words compiled by Diane Ravitch; the list is an abridgement of a longer list that will appear in her new book, The Language Police, to be published in April by Knopf.

"The Language Police," by Diane Ravitch, The Atlantic Monthly, March 2003 (not available online)

» Continued


Snowmen, huts, yachts banned from textbooks by language police

The education establishment's assault on school reform

February 20, 2003

Breaking up a popular, high-achieving neighborhood elementary school because it doesn't have enough white students, even though the suburban black parents who send their children there are pleased with the school. Trying to shut down charter schools, though they cost less to run than traditional public schools, their students' performance may be superior, and they have long waiting lists. Giving parents the runaround when they try to transfer their children out of schools classified as failing. What do these real-life scenarios have in common? They're all examples of the uncanny instinct of the Massachusetts education establishment to resist anything that threatens its hegemony. Jeff Jacoby skewers the hydra that controls public education in a hard-hitting column that appeared last week in the Boston Globe.

"Assault on school reform," by Jeff Jacoby, Boston Globe, February 13, 2003

» Continued


The education establishment's assault on school reform

Unions behind the push to hire more teachers without reducing class size

February 20, 2003

Over the past thirty years, per-pupil spending on education has doubled. Almost half of this increase was caused by the hiring of many more teachers. As a result, the number of students per U.S. teacher has shrunk from 22 to 15 since the early 1970s. Oddly, this hasn't led to a reduction in class size; instead, the average teacher simply faces fewer classes per day. Why has the additional money been channeled into more teachers teaching fewer classes? According to the Manhattan Institute's Jay Greene and Greg Forster, the ones who benefit the most from this arrangement are the teachers' unions; by jacking up the total number of teachers, they collect more dues and enlarge the ranks of shock troops they can call on to volunteer at election time.

"Widespread exploitation," by Jay Greene and Greg Forster, National Review Online, February 10, 2003

» Continued


Unions behind the push to hire more teachers without reducing class size

ESEA: Myths versus Realities

Chester E. Finn, Jr. / February 20, 2003

The Education Trust
2003

This 8-pager, subtitled "answers to common questions about the new No Child Left Behind Act," attempts to build enthusiasm for NCLB and to encourage strenuous efforts to comply with it by dispelling eleven "myths" about it. Because these myths (e.g. "student achievement goals...are impossible," "ESEA requires teachers to 'teach to the test'," states could lose their federal funding) are the sort that might be used to excuse failure or cynicism vis-??-vis NCLB, it's good to lay them to rest. In one or two cases, however, the authors split hairs in order to remain reassuring. For instance, one "myth" is that "Many schools will be declared 'failing schools' under ESEA." The EdTrust response is that "There is no such thing as a 'failing school' under ESEA," though the law does "recognize that some schools are in need of improvement, some schools need corrective action, and that persistently under-performing schools need to be restructured." It's not absolutely clear that a meaningful distinction can be drawn between a "failing" school and a "persistently under-performing" one. But it's better to err in this direction than the other, and this pamphlet is worth sharing with any state or local education officials whom you catch muttering words of despair, exasperation or dismay about the changes sought by NCLB. You can download a copy at http://www.edtrust.org/main/documents/ESEAmyth&real.pdf.

» Continued


ESEA: Myths versus Realities

National Teacher Certification: Advancing Quality or Perpetuating Mediocrity?

Chester E. Finn, Jr. / February 20, 2003

Robert Holland, The Lexington Institute
December 2002

This thirteen-pager by the Lexington Institute's Robert Holland contends that certification from the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS) doesn't mean much in terms of student learning, but that the Board's existence has helped to tighten the education profession's grip on classroom entry and rewards. The author is pleased that an alternative approach - the American Board for Certification of Teacher Excellence - is now emerging. You can read it at http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/education/pdf/HollandNatlTeachCert.pdf.

» Continued


National Teacher Certification: Advancing Quality or Perpetuating Mediocrity?

The Invisible Dyslexics: How Public School Systems in Baltimore and Elsewhere Discriminate Against Poor Children in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Early Reading Difficulties

Terry Ryan / February 20, 2003

Kalman R. Hettleman, Abell Foundation
February 2003

Since the early 1990s, researchers have made solid gains in understanding how children's brains develop, grow and produce uniquely human capacities. The insights now emerging from brain science are beginning to impact on education, but far too slowly, and nowhere is this truer than in the study of reading disabilities. The author of this report, Kalman Hettleman, notes that reading scientists have reached agreement that:

  • Most reading difficulties, including dyslexia, are caused by core deficits in phonological awareness. In other words, children cannot make enough connections between spoken and written letters and words, blocking their ability to master the foundational reading skills of decoding and word recognition.
  • Such deficits in phonological awareness are found among children with low as well as high IQs.
  • These deficits can usually be identified as early as pre-kindergarten or kindergarten and effectively treated.

What these insights mean in practice is that the vast majority of reading disabilities are "curable" if identified and treated early. This matters greatly. Hettleman observes that "at least 20 percent of the children in Baltimore City public schools and other large urban districts can be called 'invisible dyslexics,'" which means they have treatable reading disabilities. But, despite our new knowledge, most of these children are not identified or taught using research-proven reading programs. To keep these children from being condemned to a life of bare literacy-and the poverty and crime associated with this-Hettleman

» Continued


The Invisible Dyslexics: How Public School Systems in Baltimore and Elsewhere Discriminate Against Poor Children in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Early Reading Difficulties

What Works in Schools: Translating Research into Action

Chester E. Finn, Jr. / February 20, 2003

Robert J. Marzano, The Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development
2003

Robert J. Marzano authored this pricey ($25.95) volume for the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD). He contends that U.S. public education is "at the dawn of the best of times" because research has provided a solid foundation for schools to "have a tremendous impact on student achievement." Indeed, he says, "The schools that are highly effective produce results that almost entirely overcome the effects of student background." If that's so, then nobody has an excuse for leaving any children behind - or for blaming kids, parents or nasty environments for weak academic performance. All that's needed is to assure that every school is "highly effective." And what would that take? Marzano starts by insisting that it "requires a powerful commitment to change the status quo," which is surely true. Then he outlines five school-level factors, three teacher-level factors and three student-level factors that, in combination, would assure highly effective schools with high achieving students. He develops each of these elements into a short chapter, most of which are careful rehashes of effective-schools and effective-teachers research. What's perplexing is his contention, that 80 percent of the variance in student achievement is accounted for by student factors and that what is arguably the most potent of these - home environment - is not very susceptible to intervention by the school. That's probably true but seems to undermine his claim that every

» Continued


What Works in Schools: Translating Research into Action

Announcements

March 25: AEI Common Core Event

March 21, 2013

While most discussion about the Common Core State Standards Initiative has focused on its technical merits, its ability to facilitate innovation, or the challenges facing its practical implementation, there has been little talk of how the standards fit in the larger reform ecosystem. At this AEI conference, a set of distinguished panelists will present the results of their research and thoughts on this topic and provide actionable responses to the questions that will mark the next phase of Common Core implementation efforts. The event will take place at the American Enterprise Institute in D.C. on March 25, 2013, from 9:00AM to 5:00PM. It will also be live-streamed online. For more information and to register, click here.

Read more announcements

Archives



  

Please leave this field empty

Gadfly Podcast

National