This is a must read for anyone who feels their child is not being recognized for their talents and abilities as a human being/ student in traditional school. IEM supports individualized learning plans that focus on the students strengths and learning style while also incorporating the over all assessment of students needs to function in society. Its long but worth it! HERE GOES: School Accountability: Now and What Could Be In general, it is reasonable to expect that all people of good will want to see our public education system succeed in educating the youth of America. Preparing students for a rapidly changing world that demands more from everyone is truly a major challenge, which will require reexamination of current efforts to quantify success. The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) legislation of 2002 was intended to create nationwide conditions that would support all students’ success. As well intentioned as this legislation was, it has failed to create the result that was intended and has been labeled flawed legislation that cannot work as designed (Blackford and Mueller, 2004). The history is that the program has not produced increased performance on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) or other measurements intended to produce higher levels of performance (Elenore Chutes, Pittsburg Post-Gazette). What has increased is the number of students, teachers and administrators who will cheat in order not to be penalized. (Carl Campanile, New York Post, Jan. 26, 2004). In addition, the drop out rate has increased; leaving even more children behind. Current Practices (No Child Left Behind) is failing: 1. Student achievement, as measured against other Countries, has not shown improvement. 2. Focus on language arts and math has reduced time spent on other curricular areas. 3. Struggling students are required to spend additional effort in remedial programs, denying them other curricular opportunities. 4. Normative testing is not designed to demonstrate individual progress against adopted curricular standards. 5. Test structure limits higher level thinking applications and fails to measure actual student achievement. (Washington Post, Sept. 2012) 6. The annual cost of high stakes testing is estimated to be between 5.5 and 14% of our education budget. 20-50 Billion dollars per year. (The Educational Forum, Volume 69) 7. High stakes testing has resulted in fewer students completing their education with a high school diploma. Recent estimates (U.S Department of Labor 2010) show that approximately 20% of jobs require a bachelors level college education or higher, 65% of jobs require some level of advanced training and knowledge (Community College AA degree, apprenticeships or other specialized certifications) and only 15% of jobs can be learned on the job, with out prior specialized training or knowledge. There is no question that education and information is critical to a student’s future success, but so are such things as attitude, discipline, creativity, motivation, encouragement and character. Despite knowing that college degrees for everyone is unrealistic: we have neither the capacity to offer every student a bachelors degree level education, nor is every student inclined or able to successfully participate in such programs; we continue to act as if expecting anything less is somehow seen as un-American. We must look carefully and critically at what we are doing to our students with a message that says, “college is the only acceptable choice.” The nature of high stakes testing is that it encourages the narrowing of curriculum to those areas that will be measured on the annual test (math, reading, writing). Tests are structured by professional testing companies in a normative manner, which is designed to create a bell shaped curve of results from high to low; as opposed to a summative approach, which would show student growth over a period of time as it relates to instructional standards in all curriculum areas. Tests are not structured to assess for creativity, original thinking, and higher order synthesis of information and abstract applications. Most tests are created in a true false or multiple-choice format, which always means students can guess a right answer, rather than know the right answer. Although the legislation of 2002 was titled No Child Left Behind, the truth is that most current estimates of dropouts indicate an increase of 2-6% more students are dropping out (left behind) than prior to NCLB. Certainly that was not the intent, but it is a critical area of concern that demands more attention and action than has been provided under the current legislation. Estimates are that we are currently spending over 53 Billion dollars on high stakes testing, which hasn’t made a difference in overall betterment of our educational system. It is this authors opinion and that of others at institutions like Harvard and Stanford, that we need to look at summative assessments that identify longitudinal growth, areas a student is challenged by, how well curriculum is effecting learning, teachers are teaching and schools are performing. The hope that somehow standardized assessments would provide us with critical data that would provide the basis for evaluating student growth, teacher effectiveness and administrative practices; does none of the above. How long will we continue this unsuccessful practice? Many ideas exist on how to reform education. Most solutions are grounded in some form of testing. The greatest promise appears to lie in systems that document student growth and achievement over a longitudinal period. Perhaps one of the most telling measurements is our drop out rate. Our Country can’t afford the cost of an uneducated population. In the current information age, those without skills are faced with extreme economic challenges. One’s ability to learn is essential to their economic well being. (Ginther, BIP Consulting 2012) Some educators believe that the old style of mass education that originated in the early 1900’s, has out lived its’ usefulness. A more inclusive and effective approach would incorporate the skills, interests and passions of students in a context of application to their desired future goals. Certainly basic academic skills are critical to success, but the same road will not recover the third of students who fail to complete high school. Connecting with students is a missing component in NCLB. Stakeholders should be included in determining local solutions to the challenges to student success. (Parents, students, teachers, administrators, community members, government officials and all interested in reclaiming an educational system that is truly second to none. Paul Tough, in his new book, How Children Succeed: Grit, Curiosity and the Hidden Power of Character, explores the importance of traits that empower children to succeed in a wide variety of life’s offerings. High Stakes testing isn’t what prepares students for success. The importance of nurturing relationships is of primary focus in developing children’s ability to deal with the many challenges they will face. Tough argues the importance of targeting emotional, psychological and neurological pathways is that they can be much more effective than cognitive interventions in later life. I respectfully submit that our current focus on High Stakes Testing is failing our expectations, students, parents, school boards, teachers, administrators, public and nation. Assessment is critical to helping students maximize their abilities and gifts. Not every child is going to be a language and math wizard, but every child can be successful in areas that they show ability and interest. We are very good at telling students where they are deficient, but relatively weak at identifying their strengths and supporting their development toward being a self supporting citizen who is capable to taking care of themselves and their family. With the help and input of all stake holders we can develop and adopt systems that measure student growth, identify gifts and challenges, develop appropriate instruction and celebrate student success, whether it be simply a job that supports them or a PhD in the field of their choice. Children are not disposable, we are losing too many to a system that they cant connect to and find value in joining in to the finish line. Dr. William Glasser once said, “If education is not part of a students Quality World, they will not participate at the level of their potential or they will leave at the first opportunity. It is time to put our efforts to work in connecting with students, personalizing their educational plans, involving their parents and looking to their future success, as they define that success. Author: Bob Ginther, MA BIP Consulting
Posted on: Mon, 06 Oct 2014 20:26:05 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015