by Stuart Singer, The Teacher Leader
When No Child Left Behind (NCLB) was first presented in the early years of the Bush Administration it represented a significant shift in educational policy. End-of-course exams like Virginia’s Standards of Learning (SOL) were soon to become a measure of a school’s success. The initial requirement of a 70% pass rate in English and Math appeared challenging but reasonable. Of course, most educational professionals acknowledged that such a level could only be a starting point. When the SOL exams became a barrier to graduation, no one would have been satisfied with such a low target. As the Fairfax County Public Schools (VA) Coordinator of Math told me at a department chair meeting at the time, “We have to be striving for something closer to 100%.”
In the first few years before NCLB went into effect, most systems struggled to reach the 70% level but each year brought higher scores and by the time this requirement had become mandatory the majority of schools were deemed to be making Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). In slow, realistic increments the benchmarks began to rise. These initial goals continued to be well within reach.
The collision of idealism and reality
There is, however, a time bomb planted deep inside the legislation. The necessary pass rate for AYP reached 89% last year, a point that became difficult to attain for an increasing number of schools especially in the sub-groups of Special Education and some minorities. But more importantly, there was a lack of common sense at the endpoint of this relentless march upward.
In 2014 the requirement for AYP will become 100%. While such a percentage would literally leave no child behind it also empowers certain students to hold an entire building hostage by choosing to fail a test or at least not giving it their best effort.
Why would a student not give his best on a standardized test? Because some tests, although the results are included in the school’s data, are not considered barrier tests for the student. It doesn’t matter what the student makes, but it can be devastating for the school’s statistics and their AYP.
Surprisingly, as 2012 testing comes into focus, there has been plenty of activity but little effort to address this reality. Instead of facing the obvious—some children are going to be left behind regardless of the effectiveness of a school— band aids are being applied to the program. In lieu of adjusting impractical expectations, special temporary exemptions are being issued. Schools are being given additional time to reach an unreachable goal.
The irony in all of these machinations is that if the majority of schools did attain test results with no failures, it would be likely that the methods of assessment and/or grading would have to be considered suspect. Virtually every outcome of 100% is a source of concern. When Saddam Hussein would win an election with 99.1% of the votes everyone knew the results were rigged. Garrison Keillor’s Lake Woebegon children are all “above average”, a statement which is intended to be satire, not reality. Expecting a typical school to have a perfect pass rate is equally ridiculous. The result of such expectations will be to place inordinate pressure on the school staff and test creators to find ways to pass even the most recalcitrant of students. In such a case the validity of all test scores will be diminished. In addition, the recent spate of cheating scandals would likely increase in the wake of such outrageous expectations. Ask a successful teacher what they would think if every student in all of their classes made an “A” on their final exam. The answer would reflect on the quality of the test and/or whether it had somehow been compromised.
Listen to the coach
Vince Lombardi wrote, “Always strive for perfection. Though you will never achieve it, you may pass excellence along the way.” Apparently, the authors of NCLB did not read the coach’s book. Everyone wants all students to be successful. But this is an aspirational goal, not a realistic one. Any 100% rule can neither be implemented nor enforced. However, instead of changing the rule to reflect authentic academic success for as many students as possible, there has been a flood of exceptions, exemptions and excuses. It is time for a more realistic approach. While it is true that a rising tide will raise all ships, exam grade inflation will not do the same for actual student performance. A requirement of a 100% pass rate will surely lead to a disastrous scenario.