Parents vs Genuine Educational Achievement

I was challenged today by a parent of several children when I questioned where the money was going in the form of school taxes that is paid on almost every single item you can buy, outside of groceries, in the state. She was quite indignant, in her denial of truth, by my assertion that my money was being wasted. She evidently viewed my comments as though I was attacking her children personally, which was not the case. The fact is, by comparison to other states, this one ranks in the lower half, usually around the mid-30s, in almost every category, especially beginning in middle school and above. So, yes, I certainly do feel justified in my complaint.

But, the real problem in today's public schools, in my opinion, is we compare ourselves to the dysfunctional education systems of every other state, or district, and not, as we should be doing, comparing ourselves to standards we set in the '60s and '70s when there were few education systems in the world that could compare to the quality we delivered to our students.

In those years, if a student had not mastered the subjects they were taught, they stayed back and repeated that grade until they had proven they had mastered the information necessary to make them ready to advance to the next level in education. What we have today, in "No Child Left Behind", is a system that refuses to allow for differences in children's learning abilities or their motivation level and dedication to learning. Consequently, the entire school (and I daresay, national educational system) is dragged down to a level of incompetence that is wholly unacceptable by comparison with standards of 40 and 50 years prior.We pay more attention now to the kids' self-esteem than their education. Self-esteem is great, but it won't earn a paycheck in a competitive global economy. Self-esteem plus a couple of bucks will get you a loaf of bread at the store if you shop carefully. And, it's a straw man argument that attaining education and self-esteem must be mutually exclusive. Achieving an advanced degree does quite a bit for one's self-esteem, and rightfully so.

The federal government's insistence that a certain percentage of students must attain a level of acceptability on "standardized" tests leaves the teachers in the position of having to "teach to the test" instead of teaching the wider curriculum that would allow in-depth exploration of higher concepts within the discipline, whether that be reading, math, or science. Should we be amazed, under such circumstances, that our education system is failing to keep up with the progress of the rest of the world when our teaching staff is forced to "dumb down" their teaching because of federal mandates that are inextricably tied to funding?

Who is really being served by such a system? It certainly isn't the brightest of our student population, nor is it the student who, if he or she was truly being challenged to rise to the occasion, would respond with renewed interest and perform above expectations. Then again, considering the mediocre expectations of today, perhaps that isn't such a good thing, after all.

There are obviously many who do not subscribe the notion that kids who are genuinely challenged will respond by exceeding what they have previously achieved. As an example, however, I offer myself. From observation, I can say with confidence I am not an isolated case.

When I was a kid, living in Oklahoma, I was not a particularly good student. The grading system was 90-100 was an "A", 80-89 was a "B", 70-79 was a "C", 60-69 was a "D" and below 60 was considered an "F". The courses I had to take were of average difficulty, but I had no real interest in the drudgery of homework. Consequently, I would score well enough on tests, but combined with homework grades, I just got by.

Then came the move to South Carolina. The schools there graded differently: for an "A" you had to score 95-100, a "B" was 88-94, a "C" was 78-87, a "D" was from 70-77, an "F" was from 60-69 and additionally, a "BF" (bad fail) was below 60. Suddenly, there was a new challenge and, in response, my interest level rose. I had to shoot higher to achieve even mediocre letter grades. And, the other kids in my class seemed enthusiastic about getting better grades, which pushed me even harder. As a result, my scores, in terms of percentage rose considerably. Getting better grades had now become a competition.

When we left South Carolina in the middle of my sophomore year of high school and moved to Texas, I found I was quite a bit ahead of the kids there in terms of progress in the same subjects. This was a good Texas school district in a middle-class to upper middle-class neighborhood. That felt pretty good, but... it was short-lived. I was no longer being challenged. I was ahead of the other kids in my class and the grading system reverted to the same as Oklahoma's had been. The materials presented no challenge and I felt I could coast the rest of the way. My grades began to slip back to the middle of the pack because the expectation and challenge had been lost. I did well on tests, still, but lost interest once more in homework. As evidence that I did learn what I needed to know, my composite score on the ACT was 32 (of a possible 36). I do not know if there can be any comparison made between the ACT test of today, or even the SAT test, since so many changes have occurred in the interim to accommodate "learning differences".

We do our children a great injustice, leaving them ill-prepared for the real world, with programs like "No Child Left Behind" and societal notions like political correctness. When we consistently force life's standards downward, the possibilities for a brighter future dwindle year by year. By doing so, the message we send the children is "You don't really have to try harder to succeed. Mommy and daddy will just raise a stink with the school board to make sure you are a success without further effort on your part, regardless of how far below prior expectations you fall."

Granted, there are teachers who are not the greatest at what they do. But, in all honesty, the institutions' policies are even greater in their impact, both on the teachers and the students. How many of those teachers would be more inclined to give their very best if they were getting the support they need to do the job? When you have children in your class who are having to share books or get copies made of the textbook so enough can go around, when you are having to spend from your own pocket to make sure the kids all have writing materials, and when you are told day in and day out you have to structure the course you're teaching so it meets the minimal (rather than highest) requirements of the standardized test, just how enthusiastic are you capable of being?

Not everyone in life is going to succeed. Not everyone is willing to put forth the effort to achieve success. So, why are we forcing our schools to ignore this reality?

It's time for NCLB and P.C. to make a quick exit from our schools and allow the schools to push the willing kids to excellence instead of dragging them to mediocrity.