Children Left Standing in the Crossfire

The newspaper article that caught my eye was linked off of an email list I receive from the NCTE. From The Washington Post, the headline said, "Virginia Is Urged to Obey 'No Child' on Reading Test." It caught my eye because it was about "No Child Left Behind." I've heard school principals rechristen, "No Child Left Standing," in reference to the legislation put in place by the current administration. The topic is particularly interests me, as the complex issues surrounding equal access to quality education seem nearly irresolvable, inexorably intertwined with poverty, community violence, and institutionalized racism. For instance, in San Francisco schools have slowly resegregated, because of the ruling in 1997 that race cannot be a factor in determining school assignments. Some SF schools have more than 60% of a single race represented (often African-American and Latino, both underserved populations), and test scores are commensurately low. The city is searching for a new method of school assignments that would guarantee diversity, therefore raising school's collective scores. But I have to wonder, do they believe that the collective scores would rise due to an influx of students who test better, the retention of teachers who teach more effectively, the parent involvement that accompanies the privileged population of children, or a combination of these with other factors. "No Child" ought to guarantee that test scores are no lower in a school with a homogenous student population than in one with a diverse population, right? However, "No Child" doesn't address the fundamental reasons why the underserved populations don't thrive in school such as poverty, absent role models, overburdened parents, gangs, drugs, and violence in their communities. So, when I see an article that has "No Child" in the headline I read it.

This article, published February 1st, 2007 starts, "The U.S. Department of Education threatened yesterday to take 'enforcement action' against Virginia if any school districts defy a federal mandate to give reading tests to thousands of immigrant students." It seems that in defiance of the U.S. Department of Ed, Virginia educators refuse to administer the Standards of Learning test because "students who haven't mastered the language are likely to fail a traditional test and that it is unfair to administer it." Three school districts in Virginia have refused to administer the grade level test to ELL and are administering a skills-appropriate test in its place. Last year, federal education officials refused to accept those tests insisting that the grade level test must be administered to determine if the students are "able to read at grade level." This year, those same officials are unconscionably threatening to withdraw their funding from these school districts.

There has been a lot of resistance to the "No Child" legislation among educators. Having a handle on student progress and benchmarks for teacher feedback are indispensable. On the other hand, we've all know the arguments against testing: that it is incapable of measuring success and learning in a democratic fashion, failing marginalized students of color, poor populations, and English language learners.

Parents who have access to the Internet and are tech-savvy go to www.greatschools.com to read reviews and see the test scores for most of the country's public schools. In nearly all cases readers of the site can determine the socio-economic profile of the school generalized solely by test scores. If Virginia school districts choose an alternative testing method that measures actual student learning and delivers meaningful feedback to the teacher, while withholding the Standard of Learning exam until such a time that the student is prepared for it, then this demonstrates a sophisticated sense of responsibility to the students and an acute understanding of the act of testing itself. As a benefit to our society, test scores might not be blatantly correlated to the wealth and privilege of a student body, evidence of socioeconomic and racial profiling. The Virginia school districts state, "[we'll put the] Standards of Learning test 'in front of the kids when they've learned enough English to have it in front of them."' By waiting until the students are ready to test successfully they are radicalizing the testing experience for their students and altering the profile for their school. The students will not have to take a test that they will most certainly fail, this will prevent the downward spiral for these immigrant children of shame over failing something they have no chance of passing. It also drives home the message that this test is patently unfair. As the Deputy Secretary of Education Raymond Simon points out, "The whole point of No Child Left Behind is to find out what they know and don't know and target resources…" If an entire student population is unable to perform at grade level, what is the point of testing them if the resources aren't available to them anyhow?

Further reading:
Va. Is Urged to Obey 'No Child' on Reading Test
By Maria Glod
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, February 1, 2007; Page B01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/31/AR2007013102120.html
San Francisco Chronicle
SCHOOLS AT A CROSSROADS
Hard lessons as S.F. public education faces crisis
Nanette Asimov, Heather Knight, Chronicle Staff Writers
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/05/28/MNG4GJ3R251.DTL