Criticism is again being levied against our state’s high schools, this time from a report written by Judge Howard Manning, who is presiding over the eleven-year-old Leandro court case.
Judge Manning’s report responds to recent testimony from Charlotte Mecklenburg School (CMS) officials, among others, regarding the difficulties facing high schools, as well as current efforts to reverse high percentages of student failure. In his 45-page report, Judge Manning provided this stinging indictment of several CMS high schools: “The most appropriate way for the Court to describe what is going on academically at CMS’s bottom “8” high schools is academic genocide for the at-risk, low income children.”
Judge Manning’s findings only reiterate what other national reports have indicated for quite some time: specifically, America has an abysmal graduation rate, coupled with poor overall student achievement (especially when it comes to our most economically disadvantaged students).
As reports proclaiming the failure of American high schools abound, so do the many “remedies” destined to cure what ails us. Along with these new ideas come more programs, as well as greater government-driven control over schools. Even President Bush focused his State of the Union address on reforming our high schools.
So, how do we sift through all of the proposals in search of sensible, sound reform policies? First, don’t blame it all on the high schools − elementary and middle schools have a role to play as well, claims Diane Ravitch, a research professor of education at New York University. In her recent article entitled High Schools Wrongly Blamed for K-8 Deficiencies, Ravitch declines to jump on the bandwagon singling out criticism for high schools. While Ravitch acknowledges that high school students are not performing well, she warns educators and others to carefully evaluate solutions proposed from the panoply of high school reforms.
For starters, Ravitch indicates that poor high school performance often occurs because incoming students have been ill-prepared by elementary and middle schools for the rigors of high school academia. Ravitch reminds us of the “long history of reforms by pedagogues to deemphasize academic achievement and to make school more ‘relevant,’ ‘fun,’ and like ‘real life.'” Many of these “progressive reforms” start in the primary grades, and certainly ought to make us examine K-8 curriculum and teaching. Her timely article caught my attention; in fact, I think it should be required reading for Judge Manning, our General Assembly, and the entire education establishment.
In her commentary on high schools, Ravitch refers to a report released last February by the National Association of Scholars, an independent group of educators. While this report failed to garner a lot of media attention, it nevertheless outlines many common-sense proposals. One policy suggestion is the implementation of merit pay for teachers, the same proposal I highlighted in last week’s journal.
To end with a quote from Judge Manning: “The bottom line is that the lowest performing high schools must be ‘fixed’ and not in the distant future.” Sounds good. But considering that the Leandro case has already lasted eleven years, how much longer are we willing to wait?