A Lesson Plan for the Schools With Little Learning Behind It

by
Gerald Bracey, Ph.D.

Center for Education Research, Analysis, and Innovation
School of Education
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
PO Box 413
Milwaukee WI 53201
414-229-2716

January 28, 2001

CERAI-01-03

A Lesson Plan for the Schools With LittleLearning Behind It

By Gerald Bracey, Ph.D.

On January 23, PresidentBush proposed a sweeping education reform program that deals with literacy,math, science, testing, technology, teacher training, charters, vouchers,"failing schools," school violence,  character education, and rebuildingschools for Native Americans--and more.  The plan is often vague and nodoubt many devils will be found in the details as specifics of a congressionalbill replace the indeterminate prose and inchoate program of the document.

Before looking at someproblems in the plan, let us give the president credit for emphasizingliteracy.  For all of the talk of performance on math and science tests,it is reading that really counts.   Unfortunately, the specifics ofthe program appear to depend on the conclusions of the National Reading Panelwhose work is suspect. 

In spite of the text'sambiguities, many problems emerge from the document, only a few of which can betreated in this space.

THE PROBLEMS WITHTESTING

The plan requires states toannually test reading and mathematics in grades 3 through 8.  It alsodemands that states set "high content standards" for science andhistory, but prescribes no tests.  This uneven treatment of curriculumtopics would guarantee the neglect of science and history.  Peoplenaturally concentrate on doing well that which they are evaluated on. Both carrots and sticks apply to test scores in reading and mathematics, butnot science and history.  Schools will, therefore, emphasize reading andmath.  Education moves by the law of WYTIWYG (pronounced, WITTY-WIG): WhatYou Test Is What You Get.

Moreover, importanteducational decisions should not be made on the basis of standardizedtests.  Such tests do not measure creativity, judgment, persistence,higher-order thinking, stamina, motivation, imagination, determination, senseof craft or civic mindedness.  No wonder, then, that studies find thattest scores do not correlate with later success in life.  Aside from theselittle problems, they're fine.

Even if the testing wereappropriate, the plan starts it too late.  Too late, at least, foreliminating the rich-poor achievement gap.  Currently, it is too late oncethe child is born.  Poor mothers often do not receive the pre-natal carethey need, especially in the first trimester, and as a direct consequence, somechildren are born with conditions that later impair their intellects.  Nowonder that a U. S. Department of Education study found that children fromlow-income families were mentally well behind their middle class peers--inkindergarten.  A program that doesn't get any formal information aboutchildren's functioning until the end of third grade is doomed (there is no hintin the plan that any proposal to deal with the prenatal care or cognitivestimulation in the earliest years will be forthcoming).

THE PROBLEMS WITHVOUCHERS

Bush's voucher proposal isa gift to the Catholic Church from American taxpayers of alldenominations.  He sets their value at $1,500.  Catholic Schools,with their low salaries, heavy subsidies, and emptying classrooms can welcomethese vouchers.  They are the only reputable educational system that canafford to do so.

In Cleveland, wherevouchers are worth $2,500, 96% of the 3,000 voucher students attended CatholicSchools.  For this reason, a Federal Appeals Court declared the programunconstitutional. 

The recently defeatedCalifornia voucher proposal would have given any California child $4,000. But syndicated Los Angeles columnist, Matthew Miller, who has himself broughtforth voucher proposals, estimated that a voucher would have to be worth atleast $6,000 to arouse the interest of Los Angeles' private schools. After all, the educational institutions of the National Association ofIndependent Schools charge on average from $8,000 for kindergarten to $13,000for secondary school.

The plan also assumes thatthe private schools await voucher-bearing students with open arms anddoors.  They do not.  Most are not looking to expand.  Duringthe California referendum campaign, one story stated that 85% of California'sprivate schools would not accept vouchers from students performing below gradelevel.  And even if all private schools were open to voucherchildren, they could accommodate only four percent of existing public schoolstudents. 

Free market theorists willargue that new schools will pop up to accommodate the voucher kids.  Thispresumes that building a school is no more complicated than building a fastfood joint.  But the "intelligence" in a fast food restaurant isbuilt into the hardware and the system.  All the employees have to do isfollow the book -- rigidly.  A school's intelligence, though, is builtinto its "software" -- the teachers and administrators who mustdisplay all of the personal characteristics listed above that tests cannot test. It is not as if we had a deep bench of well-educated, well-trained would-beteachers just waiting to get into the game.

The plan does permitchildren in "failing schools" (undefined) to attend "higherperforming public schools" (also undefined).  But most of these schoolsare already bursting at the gills.  And if the voucher students arepermitted to attend schools in other districts and displace children who livein those districts, there will be a tax revolt of a magnitude unseen since theAmerican Revolution.

Most people in the UnitedStates aren't even interested in vouchers, which might be why secretary ofeducation Rod Paige said "We never use that word."  Whitesconstituted more than 80% of the voters in the election that brought Bush topower. Their children, over 70% all students, do just fine on internationalcomparisons of mathematics and science.  Thirty-eight countriesparticipated in the most recent comparison.  White students ranked 13^thin the world in math and 6^th in the world in science.  And mostof the higher scoring countries were only a few points higher.  In themost recent reading comparison, American students of all colors were secondamong 27 countries and our best readers scored higher than any other nation'sbest readers.  The people who vote are satisfied with their publicschools, and rightly so.

It is more than slightlyironic that a plan that claims in increase accountability dumps students intoschools that have no accountability at all.  Private schools are free fromall accountability sanctions.  At least, so far.  Home schoolers andmany Protestant schools oppose vouchers because they fear that increased use ofpublic funds for private schools will inevitably bring increased governmentregulation.  They are right.  This is precisely what has happened inEurope where private schools receive government funds.  Governmentregulations bind the private schools so tightly that they differ from thepublic schools only in that they explicitly teach religion.  Any large useof public funds for private schools will produce demands that private schoolsbe accountable in the same ways that public schools are.  Virtually allprivate schools will then refuse to participate.

THE PROBLEMS WITH THEACHIEVEMENT GAP

Poor and minority studentsdo not do well in international comparisons.  In one study involving 41countries, the District of Columbia finished ahead of only South Africa andtied with Colombia and Kuwait.  The other 38 nations all scoredhigher.  Urban education experts think that the District is about averageamong major urban areas.

So let's really go aftereducational improvements in the cities (and in poor rural areas as well). But let's not do it with a narrow, shallow testing plan.  Let's do it witha Marshall Plan.  After all, from birth to age 18, even students withperfect attendance only spend 9% of their lives in school.  How on earthcan we single out this one institution and hold it"accountable?"  How can we refer to "failing schools"in areas where employment is irregular and low-paying, families are unstable orsingle-parent, student mobility is high, and drugs and crime areprevalent? 

In sum, Bush's plan isfragmented, incoherent and poorly thought out.  It has been flung togetherwith cliches, buzz phrases, and piecemeal ideas.  It bears all thehallmarks of haste, of ideological rather than logical and systemicthinking.  It reveals an extremely limited understanding of how schoolswork, what education means or how children learn.  No workable bill canemerge from it.