BEEN THERE. Done that. This popular rejoinder is a message to the new President from the editor of the award-winning, iconoclastic monthly publication Catalyst, which has been following school reforms in Chicago for more than a decade. Editor Linda Lenz points out that the core reforms proposed by President Bush were in Chicago's Petri dish a long time ago. The Windy City has tried annual testing from kindergarten through eighth grade. It has mandated improvement plans, and it has placed penalties on low-performing schools that failed to improve. Practically speaking, Lenz says, parents can transfer their children to any school in the system that will accept them. Chicago's schools no longer merit the verbal abuse dumped on them by former Secretary of Education William Bennett, who labeled them the worst schools in the country. Yet they certainly haven't improved very much, despite the considerable spin from the district's top officials. Given the number of years Chicago has been working on its problems and the amount of punishment inflicted on its failing students, the results have been quite minimal. Data from standardized tests might identify schools that need help, but they don't say much about the level of learning that takes place in them. True to what researchers have been trying to point out to anyone who would listen, the longer students take the same tests, the better they do. Texas, California, Florida, and other states may certainly claim that the test scores show that their students are learning more. However, introduce a new test in any of those states, and Sisyphus' rock crashes back to the bottom of the hill. And the climb must start all over again. That's one reason why teachers, administrators, and parents can't depend on test results to tell them if all students are getting an equal chance to learn. So far, though, tests and penalties represent the paths of least resistance for policy makers. When the current standards and assessment movement first began to get organized, there was a third component to the effort - opportunity-to-learn standards. However, state policy makers feared both the cost of implementing such standards and the potential litigation if they promised to provide appropriate opportunities for all students to learn and then didn't deliver. If policy makers at all levels are serious about improving student learning, then it's time for them to acknowledge that students must have full opportunities to learn. Research in Chicago and elsewhere, for example, makes it explicit that teachers' instructional behaviors have more to do with student achievement than any other factor. The Consortium on Chicago School Research, in a series of reports for the local Annenberg Challenge, found that children do better on basic skills tests when their instruction and curricula really challenge them to think. Moreover, it turns out that the teachers who can teach this way have been the beneficiaries of good, intensive professional development. The revelation that poor, minority children thrive with the kinds of teaching usually reserved for gifted children should come as no surprise to anyone who has been paying attention. A 10-year-old study for the U.S. Department of Education came to the same conclusions. Need more? Lauren Resnick, in research on the public schools in Pittsburgh, found that well-informed practice can overcome the achievement gap between white students and minorities. In schools that did a good job with comprehensive reforms - aligning curriculum, instruction, assessments, and professional development to high-quality content - minority students outperformed white students who were in schools with poorly implemented reforms. Like their students, teachers also need opportunities for high-quality learning. And they rarely get it. Unlike the business community, schools are rightly reluctant to pull teachers away from their work in order to get professional development during the school day. …
Read full abstract