Can Public Schools Fix the Achievement Gap? Yes, But They Won't
"Student achievement is on the rise," said Education Secretary Margaret Spellings said last week in response to new data showing better math and reading scores for American schoolchildren.
"No Child Left Behind is working," she went on. "It's doable, reasonable and necessary. Any efforts to weaken accountability would fly in the face of rising achievement." Indeed, test scores are inching up. But there's still the matter of The Gap, the difference in test results between advantaged and disadvantaged students. Closing the test-score gap was the ostensible reason for NCLB in the first place.
Yet the gap persists. That the achievement gap has remained so intractable for so long begs the question that few educators and policy makers seem willing to confront: Are public schools, as currently structured and conceived, capable of really making a dent in the achievement gaps between poor students and affluent ones?
According to our collective mythology about schools as the great equalizing force in American society, we want -- or say we want -- public schools to make a difference. But the reality on the ground often makes a mockery of that ideal. In recent years, public schools have been infected by a system of hidden privileges offered to affluent and politically powerful upper-middle class families and their children -- a system that flatly contradicts politicians' lofty goals of reducing the achievement gaps.
Schools reward privilege in many subtle ways that go mostly unnoticed because the mechanisms are the very fabric of the modern American education system.
Consider, for example, tracking -- the practice of placing students into remedial, regular or advanced classes based upon test scores and teacher recommendations. Not long ago, tracking became a dirty word in progressive education circles. But I found researching my book, Tearing Down the Gates: Confronting the Class Divide in American Education, that tracking has gone underground. Visiting schools across the country, I discovered that tracking remains a prevalent feature of most American middle schools and high schools, and takes a variety of forms, including selection for Advanced Placement classes, gifted and talented programs, and other special enrichment programs that systematically sort students by class and race.
Indeed, these programs are be populated with students who were born lucky: to affluent and well educated parents who able to provide their children with the cultural, educational and social advantages that American schools value and reward.
What's more, children whom schools track into these exclusive programs learn more than other students because they are taught more. And they are taught in far more interesting and engaging ways than what schools ordinarily provide students in regular classes.
Take the gifted and talented program at San Diego public schools, which offers its fortunate students highly engaging "seminar" classes as an alternative to the rote and dumbed-down schooling provided to ordinary students. The Seminar program has maintained a class size of no more than 20 -- considerably smaller than the average class size for the rest of the district. The argument for this special treatment? One Seminar program parent told the San Diego Union-Tribune that the elite students required "more social and emotional support than others."
Or consider the Treasure Valley Math and Science Center in Boise, Idaho, which I visited on several occasions for my research. Launched with a $1 million grant from Micron, a locally based Fortune 500 company, Boise public schools created a special school to serve the area's best and brightest math and science students -- at least according to its founders' definition of best and brightest.
That by itself isn't so unusual. More unusual was the admission of school and company officials that Micron had given the district $1 million to create an educationally attractive alternative to regular public schools for the children of Micron's executives, scientists and engineers. Although admissions policies at a public school couldn't be openly slanted to achieve this objective, the school did adopt certain IQ- type aptitude tests that the sons and daughters of scientists, engineers and other affluent professionals often perform very well on.
The use of such tests to sort the supposedly smart and talented from the not-smart and not-so-talented is so common in the United States that few parents and educators question the legitimacy of this practice. Rather than identifying the most promising young talent, the Treasure Valley Math and Science school was in essence picking and choosing children based on where they stood in the Boise class system. Far from being the Great Equalizer, Boise schools were instead a handmaiden to elite interests.
Boise is the capitol of Idaho, the most Republican of states. But the pressure on schools to create bastions of privilege and schools within schools in the interests of elite parents crosses the usual left-right political boundaries. I also visited Berkeley High (where the principal of the school kicked me off campus...but that's another story).
At Berkeley High, a select few of the school's highly regarded teachers quietly began to offer classes that attracted mostly white students from the more affluent neighborhoods of Berkeley and the Oakland hills. Until the legitimacy of the so-called Academic Choice program was challenged by the larger Berkeley High community, the exclusive program remained on the QT: Students with the "right" demographic characteristics learned about the program through informal channels. While the program was nominally open to any student, outsiders who weren't affluent and white felt decidedly unwelcome.
With appropriate re-engineering and refocusing, American schools do have the capacity to diminish the achievement gaps that politicians like to talk about. Schools need to pay a lot more attention to supplementing the cultural and social capital that disadvantaged students -- for a variety of reasons -- do not get from home because they, unluckily, were born to parents who lack education, information, and resources.
There's also the matter of basic fairness. It's hard to argue against the need to improve math and science education for American students, and schools like the Treasure Valley Math and Science Center are doing a decent job of that. Indeed, the school is doing a wonderful job. Any parent would kill to have a child attend such a school, so cool are the learning opportunities it provides its students.
But why should wonderful learning opportunities and small classes be the exclusive rights of only the "best and brightest?" Why do we dumb down schools for ordinary children, force-feeding them facts and formulas to pass the next standardized test, while we create special and enriched learning environments for the children of privilege?
The short answer is politics and brute power. Let's be honest with ourselves. As currently structured, the American education system is organized to serve elite interests at the expense of children and families at the bottom.
Schools could make significant headway at closing the achievement gaps. But they won't. The cases of San Diego, Boise and Berkeley illustrate that elites view educational opportunity as a zero-sum game, and they will protect their interests. As the old saw goes, watch what schools actually do, not what they say.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
I wonder where the idea came from that all is so wonderful for America's gifted, when they
are not served in over twenty states the last
time I looked into it. I suggest that ALL children deserve an equal opportunity to LEARN
as a result of going to a place called school.
Money for gifted programming has been reduced and in some places, programming eliminated.
The point of inclusion is exposure to higher levels of learning opportunities. Thus, including the gifted in a regular class would not serve that function. Yet we once again hear cries of elitism. Call me whatever..just let my children learn. I believe that the children of those who scream elitism deserve the opportunity to develop to potential just as I believe the gifted should be afforded that opportunity.
I hope to see the author read A Nation Deceived, Genius Denied, Derek Neal's study,
William's Sanders findings, and Margaret Delacy's data...he then might write a whole different angle about the gifted...one that helps rather than hurts.
Closing the achievement gap by holding down the top is unacceptable.
One last reference for Mr. Sacks,,In Praise of Elitism by James DeLisle. I look forward to a new outlook by the author about our nation's tragic waste of it's brightest young minds.
Fortunately I will be able to post rather than allow this article to stand without an opposing viewpoint!!! Call me elitist, whatever. I stand FIRM that all children deserve an equal opportunity to learn, even those who are gifted. If Mr. Sacks feels doifeerently, I need an explanation as to his comfort with providng gifted children with a meaningless compulsory education. Would he also propose weighting down the fastest runners in track events so their speed more closely approximates the pace of the mainstream? Should the Olympics no longer be available to the few and the best? Would Mr. sacks propose that any and all can now have first seat in the orchestra and the finest of pianists wear ski mittens so their playing is not far above the quality of others? WHY then would he suggest the provision of a meaningful education to the gifted is detrimental?? HOW
does that bode well for the future of the US in a global market let alone the moral choice of a society? Readers can be as annoyed at me as they are.. I still would fight for your child's right to learn as much as he/she can and I hope that happens for every child. IMHO,
Mr. Sacks is misguided and needs to read A nation deceived: How Schools Hold Back America's Brightest Students, Genius Denied, and familiarize himself with data UNLESS he is
comfortable with the loss of our best young minds while leaving No Child Behind. Willing to debate this topic as it is my passion!!!!
Education of children begins and ends with parental attitudes.
Perceived quality of teacher's, books, facilities is important but largely secondary.
The child whose mother/father confronts and belittles a teacher undermining her authority severely damages child' academic future.
In this country many teachers (especially some minorities) treat the teachers like waiters.
The results are self-evident.
Every teacher have had an encounter with an angry parent delivering some version of:" You failed my child,it's your fault... I demand extra credit work...My child told me you don't like ( fill in the blank race), I believe her...I will sue you and the district...please given my kid a passing grade because (fill in the blank reason)..." My child told me she haded you the final essay, you claim you don't have it, I believe my child."
If you doubt such parents exist, you haven't taught in this country and don't understand the dynamics of American educational paradigm.
Wrong. Bad teachers are dangerous. If you want these bozos to teach YOUR children, fine. These unqualified and unmotivated cretins should be PURGED from inner city schools.
Until I reached high school and could choose college-prep courses, I was rarely challenged by school. When I was young, the official justification for "mainstreaming" was that the presence of gifted students would inspire others to try harder. That wasn't my experience. All that I seemed to inspire was resentment in students who lacked an interest in school.
Today, I am married to a public-school elementary teacher who works in an underprivileged neighborhood. Our personal and professional experiences allow us to see the tracking issue from both sides.
You may not understand how hard it is to a teacher to individualize instruction for students of widely-ranging ability in a single classroom. Many teachers just give up, and just teach to the average level of their class. It's hard to blame them for it. But we believe that mainstreaming serves few students well.
My wife is happy to have a class of lower-performing students, as long as it is smaller. She has a talent for getting them to perform better. It shows in her students' test scores, and in the approving comments that she receives from the teachers who receive her kids the following year.
Now, the example you gave of a reduced class size for gifted kids in San Diego strikes me as absurd. Smart kids don't need coddling. This leads into the issue that I feel is far more important than tracking, and that's money. My wife and I don't spend any time debating the inequities created in the educational system by local property taxes, and affluent parents. We know that those inequities are real, and harmful.
Recently, I heard former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich advance a radical education proposal. Let's accept the Republican school voucher idea, on one condition: the richest kid would receive a voucher of $3,000/year, while the poorest would receive $15,000/year. This would stand the current funding situation on its head. Schools would rush to create programs for poor kids. I think the idea has merit.
Your comment is excellent. Gifted children are bored because instruction and the teacher's attention are often focused on the most needy student in class. This hurts all children.
If you want to level the playing field here's some steps to take.
Instead of funding schools on a local level that heavily draws on federal dollars, take all the money raised at the local and state level, send it to the federal government and let them redistribute it so each kid gets exactly the same amount of money spent on their education.
And since half the kids have IQs who fall below the bell curve it's time to face the reality that college isn't for everyone. Get these kids in good vocational education programs that put them on the track to a way to make a living. The grossest injustice is to have them take meaningless classes, get them to go to a local college, and watch them drop out because they can't cut it academically. They've now wasted valuable time with no marketable skill at the end.
As for AP and gifted programs, get them their own school, but spend the same amount of money on their education as you would the least intelligent.
If parents are serious about bringing up academic performance or leveling the playing field they can raise additional funds at the local level and target certain groups.
I'm convinced with poor black kids who have uneducated and in many cases uninterested parents we need to totally revamp their education. From day one, small classes with highly qualified teachers (not uneducated mothers working at the local head start). Long term it will pay off.
In my area schools in poor districts are pockets of patronage. Since job opportunities are few they create hundreds of assistant positions (teacher aides, security, bus aides, etc) and employ their supporters. This money's well spent on their political future, but doesn't help kids a flip.
True.
This is the most honest article on what is actually happening in all schools throughout the nation. As an educator let me tell that trying to re-structure a school to actually serve all children is a task that requires a level of courage many of my colleagues could not maintain. As you can tell from the comments by parents no one want the system to change until their children get all the benefits of privilege.
You're right. It's sad, but you're right.
What's worse is that some parents aren't just trying to make sure their kids get all the benefits of privilege, there're some who actively attempt to keep others from sharing.
The "No Child Left Behind" (NCLB) Act is an absolute scam.
The NCLB is founded on flawed premises: 1) That teachers completely control student learning; 2) children are a fungible commodity; and 3) uniform (read cheap and administratively convenient) standardized tests fully measure student learning.
The educational process is very much a horse to water enterprise. Schools should provide the best possible "water" to all students, but they cannot be made to drink.
This is the real problem in American education: Americans really do not value education.
In fact, quite the opposite, we glorify the "cool" but ignorant bad boys, and ridicule as "geeks" those that take learning seriously.
All children are not the same when they enter schools, differing in abilities, motivations, effort, and aspirations. Because they are not the same, it is bizarre that anyone should expect the same outcomes.
Using a standardized test to measure the complexities of learning and useful life experience is like using a tape measure to determine which computer is the best computer. Real and authentic learning involves enlightenment and progress toward personal life goals. No standardized test can fully measure these. But it can produce results that can be manipulated for political purposes (i.e., test scores are going up because the difficulty of the test is going down).
The NCLB is in fact a fundamentalist approach to education. To every complex problem there is a simple solution: And it's wrong. That sums up the NCLB.
There are no simple, uniform, fixes in educating the next generation. But if we realy wanted to help, Americans would look in the mirror and ask themselves what sorts of role models we are for our children. If we don't care about education, they won't either. If we spend our time watching t.v. rather than reading, they will too.
The NCLB is destroying our schools by pounding the love of learning and teaching out of students and teachers, and will in time destroy our schools and result in a more ignorant population. George W. may still get to use the "Mission Accomplished" banner yet.
I have to agree with you.
Each child is different, has different abilities and defecits. Cookie cutter approaches work generally for a while but what
happens when kids can't measure up to say a school or state or federal standard because they have a defecit???
Having moved around quite a lot, I have horror stories about how some of my teachers dealt with me...I'm sure these kinds of stories though are a dime a dozen.
And later on....what happens when kids graduate, go to college, graduate and find it's hard to get a good job?
Seems to me we just flat don't care, if we ever did.
Finding a job and career should be maybe a bit easier...if we really cared.
Problem is ..
We don't.
And then we choose to overseas outsource.
Wonder why there are other problems?
It's rather unfortunate that many children can't get a decent education, but denying the above-average students access to AP and advanced classes isn't the answer either.
Putting below-average to average students into the advanced classes isn't going to help anyone- they likely won't be able to cope with the faster pace, and the class will be dumbed-down to suit them, punishing the smart kids.
Kids are going to be sorted out by IQ, they get sorted out everywhere around the world. All we can reasonably ask is that all the qualified kids get a good education.
The next concern should be that lower IQ kids are treated decently. We can't make them smarter but we can provide a decent living for all. The right wing doesn't want to do that and that is sad.
I attended and graduated from public schools. Some were better than others, though none were exceptional. Mediocre at best. The major thing I got though was more than just a basic education what school was really about is teaching you to follow rules like showing up in the morning at 8 am then going from one class to another as the bells rang like a rat in a maze.
Rule-following & TESTING. Little wonder the interest of many is stanched; however, there is still the matter of disinterested/unruly students: Much of education is like any occupation, not continuously exciting. That expectation, that times tables are as fascinating as RAP MUSIC, must be replaced by the self-discipline to build on what was studied at home.
One way to encourage interaction between more intellectually-able students and others would be to offer incentives for the former to tutor the latter. Of course, the school year should be extended provided more was expected in terms of achievement.....
Get serious! My daughter is a graduate of a public high school in a medium sized midwestern city who was able to take AP classes all through high school. Yes, she got lots of math and science, and yes the classes were small and yes the investment society made in her was worth it. She's a surgeon at a state university hospital, her high school AP classmates/friends are a cardiologist, a history teacher, a geneticist, a newspaper reporter among others! Do you really think we can do without AP classes for middle class kids?
MamaRage
At risk of turning your ire against me, I think the point of the blog as that AP classes should be available to ALL kids, middle class kids, included.
I can say from my own experience, that of the four high schools in my county, the one with the most AP classes is also the one most affluent parents send their kids. They send their kids to what amounts to our version of an innercity school in middle and high school, this after transferring them out of the innercity system for elementary school.
Luckily for me, my mom had been a teacher in the "innercity" school and had friends at other schools who told her that if she wanted me to get the best education and have the least racist experience, she had to transfer me to the innercity school.
I almost forget to mention that at our version of an "innercity" school, only 2-3 blacks were tracked into AP/honors classes.
Okay, I was in the GATE (Gifted and Talented) program at a poor public school for the entire extent of my grade school education. Kids gained entrance to GATE by scoring well on an IQ test or showing an unusual talent in a particular subject. The students, in my GATE program at least, were from every socio economic level, from pretty poor to middle class (rich didn't exist in our demographic). I concede that it may have been possible that students with more resources could have recieved additional extra curricular attention that helped them develop an "advanced ability" in a subject they were interested. But statistically, I would say that a third of the GATE students at my school were from families living below the poverty line. Maybe my school was not representative of the system in general. I don't know (I never attended another school for comparison) but I didn't see an income bias, inherent or not, in GATE admission. FYI, my parents were poverty level when I started in GATE, though I was lucky to come from a stable home that gradually became middle class by my high school graduation.
What I can attest to, is that GATE gave all of us an additional opportunity to explore our talents and trully dive into subjects that interested us. I can say that GATE was a great motivating experience for all student that attended it, and I hope the program continues.
After 25 years in public schools, I can say unequivocally, the goal of the schools is to maintain the status quo. There is a narrow ladder for a few really high achieving kids to move up. However, in public schools there are always a few subversive teachers looking out for the kids, opening their minds , teaching them to think for themselves. Private schools, on the other hand, are completely committed to preserving class status; they make sure Johnny learns to be upper middle class, just like his parents.
If Americans wanted what is good for kids, they would fund schools in such away to assure schools with high enrollments of low socioeconomic families were better funded. They would encourage the best and the brightest to teach (the culture at many of our great universities does not support students to enter public school teaching).
In the current system there are many many good teachers, but only a few great ones. Those resources are subject to triage, currently the best students , usually get the best teachers. Given the limitations this may be the best choice. However, you can not continue to demean the profession, provide unconstructive criticism, and underfund schools and expect more great teachers to show up begging to be underpaid, over-criticized and undervalued. For depth of being, good intentions, and hard work one teacher is worth three lawyers, five accountants and likely ten engineers.
I absolutely agree with you!
Sometimes I wonder what would happen if a Black-owned Fortune 500 company opened a school for those who had been tracked at the lower end of expectations.
One day, I plan to find out.
Truth be told-- bright kids who can't afford college don't need a "diploma" from a public school. In the real world no one cares or checks on High School documents. They learn early that, like their competition, they have to lie to get ahead anyway. Exit exams? Why bother?
Truth is spoken. How long before high schools start teaching Gaslighting 101?
'Let's be honest with ourselves. As currently structured, the American education system is organized to serve elite interests at the expense of children and families at the bottom.'
When 'good' jobs are unavailable, what's the point
of a good education?
Without a good education, how are you going to
get a 'good' job?
No such thing as a 'good' job anymore...
I've been a professional musician my entire adult life. After I escaped from high school, I hit the road. All my musician friends from high school went to college to learn something to "fall back on". They fell back instantly upon graduating, and have all been bouncing from one 'good' job to another ever since.
I tell my 4 daughters... If you want to go to college, by all means go but don't believe the hype. Depending on the field you wish to go into, it's far from necessary.
In the future people will need to be more creative, independent, and resourceful. 3 things most public schools discourage.
"Schools need to pay a lot more attention to supplementing the cultural and social capital that disadvantaged students . . . do not get from home. . ."
This is exactly the problem that schools cannot address. Bright children with disadvantaged backgrounds would have to be removed from those backgrounds and sent to live with doctors, lawyers scientists and CEO's to provide them with the cultural and social capital they lack.
If a student's parents don't read or engage in discussions on a range of issues the student will have very little experience of how those things are done regardless of income. How do schools prepare a student to escape from the culture that produced him into a culture that, according to the author's research, doesn't particularly want him?
The trend since WWII has been for the intelligent and fortunate members of almost every ethnic community to move out of the old enclaves into suburbs defined by income and education levels. This leaves pockets of the disadvantaged with no direct access to the type of discourse required for academic success in a cultural context that they understand. This is not a problem that the schools, as presently conceived, can adequately address except to help a few of the best and brightest escape to a different world.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
