So, if college readiness is the ultimate measure of success, I would say that if I had one theme to hammer home for schools it would be that of appropriate placement. And for me, if a capable student is appropriately placed in a class, they would be able to pass with a C or better. Now that isn’t a guarantee because there are lots of other factors involved, but if everyone does “enough” on their parts (teachers, students, parents, administrators, etc.) appropriate placement should have students at least passing classes without the need for “special treatment” or “extra” work or “intervention”. I would love to hear people’s thoughts about appropriately placing kids in classes. I think, especially in MDUSD with their “equal access” policy, essentially letting anyone take any class is a ridiculous policy, and a dismal failure. If that is to be allowed, failing students need to be told they need to get their act together (assuming they are capable), or they should be moved to a more appropriate class. I have rarely ever seen that done. And as far as letting pretty much any student into any class, I would say there is a significant percentage of students (and parents), who are not very realistic about what they think the student is capable of. I think there are too many students in many of our (MDUSD) higher level classes who take them thinking they’re just going to get a high grade because they have signed up. And to a certain extent, if a teacher of any class has too many people not being “successful”, I am pretty sure the first place the outside powers will point their finger is at the teacher. And I understand that. But, if, upon closer inspection, it is found out that the teacher is doing “enough” to provide instruction, then the finger needs to go away from the teacher and needs to go elsewhere. For my classes, most of my underperforming students have marginal (at best) skills coming in for the subject I teach. I am sure at a college level, they wouldn’t even be taking the class in the first place. But the feeling I get at the high school level is that I’m supposed to “make it work”. But, if I can “make it work” enough to get a passing grade, but they don’t test well on the state tests, then I’m still criticized for that. It is very much a no win situation.

I would very much like to see a group of college educated people come to the high school levels and look at the kids abilities that are in the upper level classes and see what they think. There are many very good, capable students. But, there is a growing percentage of students that are not ready for the higher level classes, but they take them because “they look good” or “I’m going to be an engineer/doctor/computer programmer” and there is no discussion about whether this should happen or not. And if they think that in order to increase the performance of those weaker students they just need support, I want them to give that support, see how much time it takes (which has to be outside of school or else the class will suffer), and then contemplate how many “supporters” we need based on how many of those students there are. And remember that this will most likely need to be continuing support, not just a few meetings.

I am not a huge NCLB fan. Do I agree with the principle of NCLB that underperforming students (especially certain groups or schools in lower socioeconomic circumstances) deserve to have more consideration/resources thrown their way? Yes, but only up to a point. Do I agree with the premise of NCLB that every student is capable of being academically ready for college (because that is what I constantly hear) by the time they are 18 years old? ABSOLUTELY NOT! (Unless what it takes to be successful in college is MUCH lower than it was when I was there25 years ago) As a final NCLB comment, I would like to say that politicians get involved because it is easy to draw up crap like NCLB without providing funds to support it, and it looks great for PR purposes. If any politicians read this, I’d either like to see you quit your job and come join me in the classroom, or at least get more money for schools that ends up in the classroom, not in programs.
I teach a high school college preparatory class. According to people I talk to about my job, I consistently have them tell me I must get the more motivated and more gifted/talented students. I understand their point. But, if that is truly the case, our state of education is in a truly sad state. I do not say this because the students are bad or evil as people, but because their basic academic skills (mainly referring to math and language) are REALLY bad. I teach at a school that is in a nice upper middle income area with good house values. I want to be clear that there are plenty of my students who have good solid skills, but over the past 7 years or so in particular, I find more kids taking classes that from a preparation perspective, they shouldn’t be in. But, in the educational world, especially through high school grades, no one is willing to draw the line on who should be in what class, particularly when it comes to college preparation. If you want to let anyone into a class, I don’t have a problem with that. But, if you’re going to do that and tell me that every kid that signs up for my class is supposed to make it through and perform on these tests in such a way that my school can have a good API score so the government feels I’m doing my job, I’m telling you that you must be smoking something. One of the reasons people say that college education works is that you either get the job done, or you get out, or at a minimum you don’t get to move on to higher classes. That is why only 25% of the population has at a minimum a Bachelor’s Degree. But at lower levels, if a student is performing at a low level, I find very few people who are willing to ask, “Is this student in over their head?” or “Maybe he/she should be in a different class.” What I hear is “What can we do for this student?” or “How can we get them through this class?” Now I will agree that attempts should be made to help struggling students out, but just because a student gets support doesn’t mean that the student will be successful, and some of that help should be dependent on the student showing effort (extra time or extra work). In my teaching experience I have had students that have “turned it around”, and they make for great stories, but if you ask me how many of them I have had, the number is very small. And, if I overhaul what I do just for that type of kid, I believe there are other kids who will miss out on opportunities that will enhance their ability to move forward in their education. But according to education “gurus” (who I find don’t really spend many years in the classroom before becoming a consultant) you can be everything for everyone. I wholeheartedly disagree.

I would also like to comment about the students I see in school. I think this generation of kids has not been very well prepared for growing up. Instead of trying to instill and develop independence and initiative, and being taught that the world doesn’t revolve around them and that they are only 1 of a bigger class of students, many (if not most) have been “supported” (AKA- micromanaged/coddled) in such a way that when things don’t go well, the last place they will look to change things will be themselves. I think this idea of “I’m special” has totally been oversold to them. That makes for very poor students. These are the kids who say the system screwed them over when there were similar kids next to them that took initiative and put for the effort to get better, and ended up succeeding. I think that the system needs help, but if a kid came in wanting to learn, I still think there are plenty of opportunities and teachers who will be able to help them succeed.

I am not sure how they pick the programs to use or why.
We have many years of research showing that with the right kind of instruction ELL, Special Ed and socioeconomic kids can and will learn.