Badin vs. Versailles
Law Enforcement Memorial Day
-1.JPG)
American Idol 2012 finale
Dayton Daily News education reporter Scott Elliott writes about schools, kids, teaching and learning.
Home > Blogs > Get on the Bus > Archives > 2006 > March > 29 > Entry
Reading, ‘Rithmatic … and nothing else
On Sunday, Sam Dillon wrote in the New York Times about a new study from the highly-regarded Center for Education Policy that shows class time is sinking on subjects not tested under No Child Left Behind.
This is not a new problem. But the trend is potentially more severe now with NCLB so narrowly focused on reading and math.
In 2000, I wrote in the Dayton Daily News about Cincinnati’s Taft High School, where kids were forbidden to take any untested subject until they passed a state exam (excerpt below). But at least back then, Ohio’s state test covered five subjects — reading, writing, math, science and citizenship.
Even back then, some were complaining that kids were learning less history to instead focus on citizenship and missing out on important studies in art, music and other “specials”.
It’s one of the byproducts of high stakes testing — when we create high incentives for everyone to pass tests, those tests can become more important than anything else. This is one of the most common complaints I hear from parents. Twice in the last week, a father has lamented to me about how his kids seem to do nothing else but prepare for tests.
What’s the solution? How can we ensure subjects that have been viewed as important to learning for hundreds of years — music, art, foreign language, physical education — remain a part of our kids’ education? One solution is more tests. We can test all those subjects too.
What’s your solution?
Here’s the excerpt from my six-year-old story on Taft High School. To me, it doesn’t sound much different than the examples in Sam’s piece in the Times:
Last October, Ohio Gov. Bob Taft praised a new program at a high school named for his grandfather as a model for inner city schools across the state.
That program at Taft High School blocks freshmen from taking art, music, foreign language or gym until they pass the ninth-grade proficiency test.
“They made a very convincing case to me that if those kids don’t learn the basics - the reading and the writing - and if they don’t get them right away in ninth grade, they’re gone. They’re out on the street. You’ve lost them,” Taft said in an interview Friday.
Taft High School has elevated passing the ninth-grade proficiency test to its top priority for incoming students - at the exclusion of almost everything else.
Freshmen who still need to pass the test - just about everybody at Taft - spend four class periods a day in core courses - English, math, science ans social studies. Two other periods are reserved mostly for test preparation.
School administrators say passing the proficiency test is so important to student success that they must make it the No. 1 goal for freshmen.
The approach horrifies some educators who believe music, art, physical education and foreign language are vital parts of learning that should not be an afterthought.
“I think that flies in the face of what a well-rounded education would be for youngsters,” said John Mahlmann, executive director of the Virginia-based National Association for Music Education. “I think it’s outrageous.”
Freshman Cynthia Jackson thinks every suburban Ohio kid who dreads dodging kickballs in gym class should be thankful. While kids at other schools play games in gym, she keeps working on her basic skills.
Jackson believes the school will help her with the ninth-grade proficiency test, which she must pass to graduate. But she admits that thinking about the test wears on her. At Taft, very few students in Jackson’s freshman class spend any part of a school day in sport, in song or at an easel.
To even set foot in a foreign language class, a Taft freshman must be in the top 5 percent of the class - measured not by grade-point average, but by proficiency test score.
Permalink | Comments (2) | Categories: Testing
Comments
By Sawber
March 29, 2006 11:41 PM | Link to this
Well said Mary. Reading and math are skills. With just these two skills, someone can learn almost anything they want. Without them, it’s nigh impossible. If they haven’t mastered the basic foundation that most other learning is based on, do they really need to learn about Futurology or even Art History? If the concentration of classes on reading can get them to the point that they have the basics, they can learn about the topics that interests them on their own. Up to now, has the emphasis on well-roundedness over (or even on par with) understanding the basics served our students well? Nope. Besides, it’s not like the advanced students are losing classes to make way for reteaching things they have already demonstrated proficiency in. The ones that need the help are getting it.By Mary
March 29, 2006 3:46 PM | Link to this
Why are students in the 10th year of publicly funded education at roughly $10,000 per student per year or roughly $100,000 per student total investment still struggling to pass a standardized (minimum standards) test in math and reading? Those are basic life skills. Also why aren’t students allowed to take the test at anytime and then get on with their education? My initial take is it is whinning and a continued resistance to change and accountability by students, parents and staff. If we can’t do any better than this, then why spend any money at all on education?