25 Years Later—A Nation at Risk is even worse off

Education Week published an article on 25 years since the famous A Nation at Risk report by Ronald Wolk, founder and former editor of Education Week, titled Why We’re Still ‘At Risk’, The Legacy of Five Faulty Assumptions.

He starts by asserting, “After nearly 25 years of intensive [very expensive and wasteful] effort, we have failed to fix our ailing public schools and stem the “rising tide of mediocrity” chronicled in 1983 . . . This is mainly because the report misdiagnosed the problem, and because the major assumptions on which current education policy—and most reform efforts—have been based are either wrong or unrealistic.”

He goes on to join the misdiagnosis with one of his own, “Most of the people running our public education systems and leading the reform movement are knowledgeable, dedicated, and experienced. But they are so committed to a strategy of standards-based accountability that different ideas are marginalized or stifled completely.” He is definitely falling into the education insider party line trap. To call the people tasked to lead in education leadership knowledgeable or committed to anything but maintaining the status quo is ludicrous. These people have been trained to not lead, not rock the boat, and pray morning and night to the false gods of education myths that don’t stand up to scientific scrutiny. They have been tasked by the education insider power groups to maintain the status quo and prevent any real change from taking place. And in that they have been spectacularly successful. Of course, many billions of taxpayer dollars have been wasted in the process and kids are continuing to be harmed by the school system.

Wolk’s list of five “wrong assumptions” and some comments follows.

1. The best way to improve student performance and close the achievement gaps is to establish rigorous content standards and a core curriculum for all schools—preferably on a national basis. His argument on this one makes decent sense for the most part. “Standardization and uniformity may work with cars and computers, but it doesn’t work with humans. Today’s student body is the most diverse in history. An education system that treats all student alike denies that reality. . . Standards don’t prepare students for anything; they are a framework of expectations and education objectives. Without the organization and process to achieve them, they are worthless. States have devoted nearly 20 years to formulating standards to be accomplished by a conventional school model that is incapable of meeting them.

2. Standardized-test scores are an accurate measure of student learning and should be used to determine promotion and graduation. He argues, “if test scores are the accepted indicator, schools have not been meeting the needs of students for the past couple of decades. So why spend more money and time on constant testing to tell us what we already know . . . “ That is like saying if you are sick in the hospital stop taking vital signs information because it might cost too much. He also falls back on the demographic argument saying, “Standardized-test scores tend . . . to say more about a student’s socioeconomic status than about his or her abilities.” The demographic excuse leads to a self-fulfilling prophecy that has led to a “kill them with kindness” mentality. That is, the underlying assumption that educators are trained to make starting in the education schools is that “those kids can’t learn to a high standard.” This has been proven to be wrong in hundreds of research studies but it makes a convenient argument for not addressing the real problems. Mortimore and Sammons as far back as 1987 showed that the teacher effect is up to 6 times more powerful than demographics in reading and that the difference is up to 10 times for math. The mistake being made is that while the performance of “gap kids” on the standardized testing correlates well with, say, eligibility for free or reduced lunch that demographics is the cause. It is not. The way educators treat the gap kids is the cause. The problem is imbedded deeply in the educators’ attitudes. Correlation does not prove cause. It is a good predictive tool however.

3. We need to put highly qualified teachers in every classroom to assure educational excellence. He says, “A great idea! If we could do that, we’d be a long way to solving our education problem. But it won’t happen for decades, if ever.” Wow! So let’s just give up and forget the kids’ futures being limited due to poor educational performance because the adults can’t get their act together. I know the problem can be solved but it will take new and creative thinking. We will have to break away from many of the “iron-clad” norms of teacher preparation and certification and replace them with a system that truly values “educated people as teachers.” There are tons of educated people out there who would be more than willing to enter teaching if it were made less difficult. The well educated people who are underemployed in our economy would view the pay and benefits of the teachers as a huge plus compared to where they have been working. Wolk bemoans the fact that teachers aren’t treated as professionals. That is a two way street. If you act professionally you are more likely to be treated as a professional. Of course, as I have pointed out multiple times the poorly skilled leadership in education would have to be retrained to enable the massive change required in teaching effectively.

4. The United States should require all students to take algebra in the 8th grade and higher-order math in high school in order to increase the number of scientists and engineers in the country and thus make us more competitive in the global economy. Wolk states, “This assumption has become almost an obsession in policymaking arenas today. Requiring every student to study higher-order math is a waste of resources and cruel and unusual punishment for legions of students. It diverts attention away from the real problem: our failure to help kids become proficient readers and master basic arithmetic.” I need to quote some history so that you can see how attitudes haven’t changed in a century about math education. This is from David Klein’s “A Brief History of American K-12 Math Education in the 20th Century.” “The prescriptions for the future of mathematics education were articulated early in the 20th century by one of the nation's most influential education leaders, William Heard Kilpatrick. According to E. D. Hirsch, Kilpatrick was "the most influential introducer of progressive ideas into American schools of education." Kilpatrick was an education professor at Teachers College at Columbia University, and a protégé of John Dewey. Kilpatrick proposed that the study of algebra and geometry in high school be discontinued ‘except as an intellectual luxury. According to Kilpatrick, mathematics is ‘harmful rather than helpful to the kind of thinking necessary for ordinary living.’ In an address before the student body at the University of Florida, Kilpatrick lectured, ‘We have in the past taught algebra and geometry to too many, not too few.’ So you see that Wolk says the same thing in a little different way. First, algebra is not advanced mathematics. Second, mastery of arithmetic is very important but not being done at all because of the increasing application of discovery math curricula like Everyday Math which use calculators instead of providing a foundation in math facts and skills that are necessary to the study of algebra. I agree that every student will not study calculus or want to become an engineer or scientist. But even those who take vocational tracks can use algebra in their future jobs or at least the mental discipline learned in algebra. An auto mechanic, for example, needs to have good diagnostic skills to succeed with today’s ever more complex cars. Sadly, the current state of math education fails to prepare many of those who do want to a pursue those fields of study, thus reducing our total number of domestically trained engineers and scientists. Unless we discard the wrong-headed assertions of the education school training regarding what education should entail we will be saying the same thing a century from now, although we may be speaking Chinese when we do it.

5. The student-dropout rate can be reduced by ending social promotion, funding dropout-prevention programs, and raising the mandatory attendance age. Wolk does a pretty good job on this one saying the drop-out rate is the most telling evidence of public school failure. He points out that the initiatives such as legally requiring students to stay in school longer or “just stay in” programs are not addressing the problem. The problem is that kids are allowed get further and further behind grade level performance yet are expected to stay in the system which becomes more demotivating and frustrating for them as the years pass. This gets back to the “self fulfilling prophecy” and the kill them with kindness approach. Wolk points out that the NAEP tests show that only about a quarter of 4th grade kids can read proficiently. Of course the levels decline in the 8th and 12th grades. Also, we need to realize that the NAEP is not as rigorous as the requirements in our strongest global competitor countries. Studies show that in surveys of students the one word they use most to describe their schooling is “boring.” Until we can engage and motivate them with high quality experiences [not field trips and other tangential activities but real subject based rigor] the problem will not change.

The article was disheartening to say the least. It is not disheartening from a “what is required” point of view. It is disheartening because fixing it will take a much different approach to the one we have been using. And that will only happen if the electorate demands it. The quote from Kilpatrick juxtaposed with that of Wolk shows that we are mired in a rut that can’t be broken out of without the public demanding that the problem be fixed. Sadly, most of the public believe that “their schools” are doing well and only those “other schools” are doing poorly and who cares about them?

PWR