Sunday, November 25, 2012

From PG letters:

The article "City Schools Rewarded for Student Academic Growth" (Nov. 20) was a nice, positive view on the state of public schools in Pennsylvania. However, the passing comment that Mathematica Policy Research "adjusted expected achievement for certain factors, such as poverty, which would lower the amount of expected growth" greatly disturbed me. As a teacher from a low-income elementary school, I feel strongly that a major reason many low-income students struggle to make significant gains is because nobody expects them to!
Could those researchers tell students face to face that they do not expect them to improve at the same rate as their high-income peers, just because their parents make less money? The whole article is about how overall proficiency levels tell more about students than it does the school. Just because those students are starting at a lower proficiency level does not mean they can't improve at the same rate. In my experience, with targeted high-quality instruction and positive reinforcement, students starting at low levels often improve rapidly.
Why should expectations for improvement be lower for schools and students that desperately need to improve? If we do not start holding all schools accountable to change students' trajectories, we will feel the long-term effects when another generation joins the work force.

Read more:


Questioner said...

This letter zeros in on a really surprising statement tucked into the article about schools receiving awards. Awards apparently are not based on final achievement levels or even on growth in achievement but on whether schools exceeded some unspecified the level of achievement that could be expected given factors such as poverty. Isn't the situation back to square one, before nclb, but justified now by a research firm?

Anonymous said...

Research, as we all know, serves a purpose that is rarely objective or not challenged with credible evidence to the contrary.

Trace the purpose to the source and follow the money.

Unfortunately, PPS has become an deep well of money for all types of consultants and external providers of resources for public education.

Millions upon millions have been wasted with counterproductive results for children who need to be educated to be successful.