|
Sitemap
| Jobs
|
Contact Us
|
Building Smart Education Systems |
Voices in Urban Education
Archives
Toward Proficiency
VUE Number 14, Winter 2007
| VUE Home | Archives | Order Print Copy |
From "Basic" To "Proficient"
By Robert Rothman
Robert Rothman is a Principal Associate & Editor of VUE at the Annenberg Institute for School Reform at Brown University.
> Author's biography
The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act created an audacious goal for American education: by 2014 —
just seven years from now — all children must be "proficient" in reading and mathematics. And the law
puts teeth into its rhetorical admonition by holding schools strictly accountable for bringing students
along on a trajectory toward that goal. Schools that fail to demonstrate "adequate yearly progress" toward
the 2014 target are subject to increasingly stringent sanctions.
The proficiency goal in effect turns the notion that "all children can learn" — a staple of school and district mission statements — into national policy. Yet, while there is widespread support for this idea, the "proficiency for all by 2014" goal has become increasingly controversial.
Some of the controversy stems from the law's fine print. Although all students are expected to be proficient, NCLB leaves the definition of proficiency up to each state — and states have defined it in widely varying ways. As a result, in some states, nearly all students are already proficient, while in others fewer than half of students have reached that level of achievement.
In addition, some commentators have stated that the goal is unreachable. At a recent forum sponsored by the Campaign for Educational Equity at Teachers College, Robert L. Linn of the University of Colorado at Boulder stated that at the current rate of improvement, only half of fourth-graders and 39 percentof eighth-graders would be proficient in mathematics by 2014, and only a third of students at either grade would be proficient in reading by 2018. At the same forum, Richard Rothstein of the Economic Policy Institute suggested that the goal of proficiency for all is itself an oxymoron: if the goal were high enough, not every student would be able to reach it, and if it were low enough for every student to reach, it would not constitute "proficiency" in a real sense.
Despite these very real issues, there is a widespread recognition that the level of performance for many students, particularly students in urban schools, must be substantially higher than it is now if these students are to have any prospect for a fulfilling, productive future. The reforms that districts and schools have undertaken over the past two decades have brought students from below the basic level of performance to basic, at best. Much more is needed to bring them to proficiency.
But what, exactly, is proficiency? And what would it take to bring students to that level? This issue of Voices in Urban Education offers five perspectives on these questions.
Edmund Gordon defines proficiency as "intellective competence," and suggests ways that schools and communities can develop such competence in young people.
> Full text
Lauren Resnick and Lindsay Clare Matsumura note that expectations for students have increased substantially over the past few centuries and they offer examples to illustrate the "bright line" that separates the previous goal of basic performance from proficiency.
> Excerpt
Louis Gomez, Phillip Herman, and Kimberly Gomez outline the characteristics of proficiency in one subject area, science, and show how students who appear to be far below grade level in reading ability are able to demonstrate higher levels of skill.
> Excerpt
Richard Sohmer and Sarah Michaels describe a program that began as an after-school club which 6 Annenberg Institute for School Reform enables previously low-performing students to demonstrate high levels of ability by drawing on the knowledge they come to school with..
> Excerpt
Rhonda Lauer suggests that proficiency encompasses more than academic competencies and examines efforts under way in Philadelphia to develop broad competence among students.
> Excerpt
These articles suggest that there is somewhat of a consensus on what constitutes proficiency and that, in the consensus view, proficiency demands fairly high levels of ability. These abilities, moreover, are not just "a little more" than basic skills; they are qualitatively different. Achieving them takes more than simply ratcheting up teaching and learning.
There is also a growing recognition that schools alone cannot accomplish this task. Affluent families already know this; children from relatively well-off families not only receive high-quality instruction in school, but also visit museums, join clubs, and engage with professionals in the workplace. Children from low-income families tend to lack these resources, so the inequalities they face in school are magnified.
The challenge is to marshal the resources cities have for learning and make them more widely accessible, particularly for youths who have been poorly served in schools. Only then, with stronger support for learning in and out of school, can we move all students toward proficiency.
Archives
Toward Proficiency
VUE Number 14, Winter 2007
| VUE Home | Archives | Order Print Copy |
From "Basic" To "Proficient"
By Robert Rothman
Robert Rothman is a Principal Associate & Editor of VUE at the Annenberg Institute for School Reform at Brown University.
> Author's biography
The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act created an audacious goal for American education: by 2014 —
just seven years from now — all children must be "proficient" in reading and mathematics. And the law
puts teeth into its rhetorical admonition by holding schools strictly accountable for bringing students
along on a trajectory toward that goal. Schools that fail to demonstrate "adequate yearly progress" toward
the 2014 target are subject to increasingly stringent sanctions.
The proficiency goal in effect turns the notion that "all children can learn" — a staple of school and district mission statements — into national policy. Yet, while there is widespread support for this idea, the "proficiency for all by 2014" goal has become increasingly controversial.
Some of the controversy stems from the law's fine print. Although all students are expected to be proficient, NCLB leaves the definition of proficiency up to each state — and states have defined it in widely varying ways. As a result, in some states, nearly all students are already proficient, while in others fewer than half of students have reached that level of achievement.
In addition, some commentators have stated that the goal is unreachable. At a recent forum sponsored by the Campaign for Educational Equity at Teachers College, Robert L. Linn of the University of Colorado at Boulder stated that at the current rate of improvement, only half of fourth-graders and 39 percentof eighth-graders would be proficient in mathematics by 2014, and only a third of students at either grade would be proficient in reading by 2018. At the same forum, Richard Rothstein of the Economic Policy Institute suggested that the goal of proficiency for all is itself an oxymoron: if the goal were high enough, not every student would be able to reach it, and if it were low enough for every student to reach, it would not constitute "proficiency" in a real sense.
Despite these very real issues, there is a widespread recognition that the level of performance for many students, particularly students in urban schools, must be substantially higher than it is now if these students are to have any prospect for a fulfilling, productive future. The reforms that districts and schools have undertaken over the past two decades have brought students from below the basic level of performance to basic, at best. Much more is needed to bring them to proficiency.
But what, exactly, is proficiency? And what would it take to bring students to that level? This issue of Voices in Urban Education offers five perspectives on these questions.
Edmund Gordon defines proficiency as "intellective competence," and suggests ways that schools and communities can develop such competence in young people.
> Full text
Lauren Resnick and Lindsay Clare Matsumura note that expectations for students have increased substantially over the past few centuries and they offer examples to illustrate the "bright line" that separates the previous goal of basic performance from proficiency.
> Excerpt
Louis Gomez, Phillip Herman, and Kimberly Gomez outline the characteristics of proficiency in one subject area, science, and show how students who appear to be far below grade level in reading ability are able to demonstrate higher levels of skill.
> Excerpt
Richard Sohmer and Sarah Michaels describe a program that began as an after-school club which 6 Annenberg Institute for School Reform enables previously low-performing students to demonstrate high levels of ability by drawing on the knowledge they come to school with..
> Excerpt
Rhonda Lauer suggests that proficiency encompasses more than academic competencies and examines efforts under way in Philadelphia to develop broad competence among students.
> Excerpt
These articles suggest that there is somewhat of a consensus on what constitutes proficiency and that, in the consensus view, proficiency demands fairly high levels of ability. These abilities, moreover, are not just "a little more" than basic skills; they are qualitatively different. Achieving them takes more than simply ratcheting up teaching and learning.
There is also a growing recognition that schools alone cannot accomplish this task. Affluent families already know this; children from relatively well-off families not only receive high-quality instruction in school, but also visit museums, join clubs, and engage with professionals in the workplace. Children from low-income families tend to lack these resources, so the inequalities they face in school are magnified.
The challenge is to marshal the resources cities have for learning and make them more widely accessible, particularly for youths who have been poorly served in schools. Only then, with stronger support for learning in and out of school, can we move all students toward proficiency.
|
Annenberg Institute for School Reform Brown University, Box 1985 Providence, RI 02912 |
Telephone: 401.863.7790 Fax: 401.863.1290 |
AISR_info@brown.edu
|
© all material AISR