High Stakes Community Schools

This Monday's lecture was a sort of mock town hall meeting where Dr. Langholz and Dr. Knick presented their plan for increasing student achievement in High Stakes Community Schools. It began with Dr. Langholz, the superintendent, giving a speech about how this plan will be implemented in the district, then followed with Dr. Knick giving a speech on specifics with the curriculum and how this plan will improve student achievement. After this, certain groups of people presented opposing sides to the plan. First was the local teachers' union who believed that teachers would be unfairly judged by their students' standardized test scores and that this plan would just bring on unecessary work for the teachers. They also felt that the $1,000 incentive for teachers was completely out of line because teachers should not have to be bribed to teach well. Next to present was a group of parents of low achieving students who felt that this plan would penalize their children in many ways. They stressed that self-esteem is crucial for these kids, and being held back could be detrimental to their development not only as a student, but as a person. They also argued that the proposal of making these students go to summer school would only make them resent school more because it would feel like a punishment for not being smart enough. The next group of presenters were representatives of the schools fine arts programs and the local art community. They argued that the proposal completely left them out, therefore communicating to the students that the fine arts are not important and should not be taken seriously. Leaving them out of the proposal shows that having intelligence in the fine arts is not valued at all in the education system. Finally, the last group to present was in support of the proposal. They were college students coming back to tell the school board how unprepared they were for college because they were not challenged or pushed in school and were not expected to achieve at a certain level.

I thought that this activity was a great way for us to see all of the issues that come up when trying to enforce an act such as the No Child Left Behind Act. For the most part, I did not support the proposition that Dr. Langholz and Dr. Knick had. Their proposition is strictly based on research which leaves no room for exceptions, but places the students in a category that almost labels them as statistics rather than individuals. I understand that schools need to keep their students learning, but students often develop at different stages. I have personally experienced a situation where I was not progessing with my age group in fourth grade Math class. That is not to say that I was damaged for life by this, in fact I ended up years later doing exceptionally well in Math. I also think that the proposition limits teachers' creativity. If the only goal in the class is to make the students ready for a standardized test, that they will mostly forget later anyway, that is absurd. The classroom is a place for students to grow socially and possibly spiritually, not just mentally, and this proposition does not encompass those other important developmental categories for students. There was actually only one proposition that I felt may work: the two week inservice for teachers, because I think that it can never hurt for teachers to get new ideas and refresh their curriculum. Like I said, I do think that schools should be producing adequate students for society, but I think that there is a different way to do so. Overall, I thought the "lecture" was a great way for us to really understand what issues we may face as teachers in the future.