Stuckness
Ricky B. Eades
Lamar University
EDLD 5333 Leadership for Accountability - SU1 11 - EA1251
It is a downright dirty shame that we measure student performance, for the most part, through summative assessment. And, consequently, use the numbers in regards to progress as opposed to achievement that can’t be measured with percentages. I will go out on a limb and state that you could venture onto an academically unacceptable, continually failing AYP, campus to interview teachers and they would tell you that their kids are achieving, but the progress can’t be measured in numerical value. So what do we do about schools such as these that are stuck? How do we raise standardized test scores to acceptable levels? Also to ponder, what about those high performing schools that are increasingly leaving certain subgroups behind? We have implemented many reform efforts to rectify the “stuckness” dilemma, but the fact of the matter is that many low performing institutions “are not performing much better than they did in 1983”. (Lashway, 2003) This is some valuable information with the inference being that all the strategies, activities, programs, and personnel replacements have not fixed the problem to any measurable degree which leads us back to the drawing board of uncertainty. It seems that the pat answer in education to solve an academic performance issue is to throw money at it. For example, and I have never exactly understood the rationale in this, is to give campuses thousands of dollars for consistently not meeting average yearly progress. Thus, for lack of a better word, reward schools for low performance. Should it not be the other way around? How about we give Exemplary and Recognized campuses those monetary incentives! But, even if we did this, the stuck problem is still not fixed and remains a thorn. I do have a proposal for you to consider. I am going to contend that the problem originates in the home rather than the school and this is where the reform must first take place. A classroom becomes a family in a sense and the teacher inherits all the complications that are associated with this bond. When we begin to believe that “educators need to be the village for every student” (Richardson, 2005, p.33) then we can start on the needed reform. When we use terms such as “buy in” and “consensus”, it is usually directed towards the campus. These terms must engulf stakeholders, such as parents, of our low performing students. Moreover, educators are realizing that low performing schools go hand in hand with the achievement gap. “Many struggling schools serve largely minority populations whose test scores persistently fall below those of white students”. (Lashway, 2003) So in a nutshell, the answer for reform is to provide students a warm and caring environment and their parents a basketful of support.
References:
Richardson, M. (2005). Consensus leadership. Principal Leadership, 6(4), 32-35.
Lashway, L. (2003). The mandate to help low performing schools. Eric Digest 169. Retrieved from http://eric.uoregon.edu/publications/digests/digest169.html
Ushomirsky, N & Hall, D. (2010). Stuck schools: A framework for identifying schools where students need change---now. The Education Trust. 1-19.
