From the Editor

I just found out that my daughter’s school isn’t making Adequate Yearly Progress as defined by the No Child Left Behind Act.
This is somewhat of a shock, given that the school routinely ranks among the top in the state.
Confused, and more than a little concerned, I started digging for information. What I found was, frankly, even more puzzling.
It seems that, overall, the school’s students did just fine on the test—indeed, they scored roughly15% above the state average on all standards. So how in the world did they end-up sanctioned by the feds?

Turns out, the school’s small population of special education students, and even tinier contingent of English language learners, didn’t meet the benchmarks set by the government. As a result, the entire school was rated “Not making AYP”—a dubious distinction schools dread, because after two years of such designation they are subject to government intervention measures.
I’m not sure what to make of the situation. Does it mean my daughter’s school isn’t properly educating its special education and English language learner students? Are they being ignored, pushed aside, ill served?
Possibly. But I rather doubt it, given the caliber of the teachers and the involvement of the parents.
Still, I think it’s good that the test revealed an area of weakness at an otherwise stellar school. It’s important to have unbiased assessments that help you improve what you’re doing.
Except…that’s not really what these high-stakes tests are accomplishing, are they? Instead, they’re paralyzing teachers, stressing out kids, worrying parents and turning once-vibrant school communities into collective nervous Nellies anxious about making Adequate Yearly Progress as defined by folks who live a thousand miles away.
I absolutely think schools should demonstrate that they’re adequately educating their students. And the best way to do this is through standardized testing.
But.
I don’t think these tests should be used as massive hammers to smash schools to pieces. Every single expert on standardized testing —both pro and con— maintains that such testing should not be used as a sole marker of performance, either individually or collectively. Instead, standardized testing should be one method, used in conjunction with other reliable sources, to gauge student learning and school effectiveness.
Pearce Middle School in Austin recently lost its life to the guillotine that is standardized testing under No Child Left Behind. Last year, the school improved in four of the five core subject areas tested, according to AISD. In science, however, just 31% of the 8th graders met the passing standard—that was an improvement of 8% over the year before, but not enough to satisfy Uncle Sam, who sounded the death knell. The school had not met AYP for five consecutive years, the magic number for closure, so the Texas Education Agency shut it down.

Except, not really. It was simply dragged through the coals of public embarrassment and “repurposed”. Pearce opened again this Fall with essentially the same student body — 95% of whom are economically disadvantaged. The school has a massive new plan in place “to ensure that all students demonstrate high academic achievement and develop confidence and character to succeed in high school and beyond,” according to the Repurposing Proposal. I hope it works. But study after study has demonstrated that the key factor in standardized testing success is….zip code. In other words: kids from poor areas have a harder time passing these tests. I don’t mean to suggest they can’t do it —they absolutely can, as schools like KIPP Austin College Prep and Harmony Science Academy have demonstrated— but using one factor to judge the success of a school whose population is below the poverty line seems punitive when we know that being poor is a primary reason for non-passage.
Some state lawmakers feel the same way, and in the last legislative session they passed HB3, which will allow the Texas Education Agency to use multiple factors, not just TAKS scores, when gauging a school’s performance. While HB3 does have its downsides—the graduation standards alone are giving some people conniption fits—it seems to be a step in the right direction on the standardized testing front. Of course, only time will tell whether it changes anything.
In the meantime, it’s up to us parents to put these tests in perspective. Yes, they are an important means of assessing certain facts students should know. But they don’t measure drive, determination, enthusiasm or creativity — all of which contribute to a child’s success later in life. And, I might add, to a vibrant school community.
As for my daughter’s school, I refuse let its dire designation turn me into a pessimist who starts throwing rocks instead of compliments. If this test has shown where the school needs improvement, then it has done its job and now we —administrators, teachers and parents— need to do ours without sinking into frustration, worry or finger pointing. I just hope we can pull up the scores before the feds pull us down.
Fingers crossed.