Dear Representative Miller:

Millions of Americans applaud your intention to amend and repair the No Child Left Behind legislation.More flexibility and more sensible approaches to education would be a big help. 

HERE ARE SOME THOUGHTS

1. Holding high schools accountable for graduation rates is not fair or reasonable because it has been shown through research that social issues, families and peers play a much more important role in dropping out of school than the schools themselves.Yes, schools can and do help.But of the most important reasons for dropping out, boredom in school and lack of attention by teachers are not the major reasons.Much more important are financial problems, drug problems, juvenile justice problems, pregnancy and through no fault of the schools, youngsters falling so far behind in their studies they cannot catch up.Schools should try to empower youngsters and motivate them to finish, but there is a limit to the schools' ability to overcome the social malaise that hovers over so many of our youth, especially those from poverty.And sometimes a dropout is good.Without intense psychiatric care, some kids who are psychopaths or incorrigible, menace the ability of teachers to conduct classes and rob fellow students of a chance for a good education.They can be a plague on a school and when they dropout, the school is better off.Please do not use graduation rates as a criterion for high school success.

2. Judging teachers on the basis of test scores is a really, really bad idea.Research shows that poverty is the major underlying cause of lack of academic performance in schools.Kids from poverty start school way behind and most can never catch up because both better students and those not so blessed both progress positively.Teachers in suburban, well-to-do neighborhoods can excel with little or no effort, whereas teachers in inner city schools who work their brains out has a hard time bringing their students up to par because of the starting handicap.The KIPP model seems the only one that consistently brings poor students up to adequate levels. But that requires d different kind of school:one that operates 9-10 hours per day, has Saturday and summer classes, allows principals leeway to hire and fire teachers and requires the parents to become an integral part of the child's educational program.But without such enormous funding to accomplish this, it would be very unfair for teachers.I believe that if you would switch teachers who teach in suburban schools with teachers who teach in inner city schools, the resulting student achievement would not change.It is a known fact that kids from middle-upper class families can excel with very little help, whereas kids from poverty, on average, cannot.

3. Improvement cannot go on forever.As students hit the peak of their abilities, they cannot continue to improve their scores year after year.To attempt to do so, leads to cheating and other forms of abhorrent behavior.Each child has several types of intelligence.Some are good at math and poor at reading and vice versa.That is not bad---that is reality.To expect every child to be good at everything is too idealistic and unreasonable.   Just look around you in the House of Representatives and see the cross section of Americana that exists.So it is important to recognize reality and understand that great variations in children's abilities exist and need to be accepted.

4. Proficiency in most states amounts to ABOVE AVERAGE.For some reason, people have not recognized that.In fact, in Korea, which has been first in the world in math, only 70% of their students attain proficiency.And in Sweden, which has been first in the word in reading, 66% did not achieve proficiency.To expect our children to do better than the best in the world cannot be defended.  So proficiency is too high a goal for some and too low for others.There cannot be one goal for all students.Each student needs his own goal based upon the abilities of that child.

5. And finally, the enormous job that public schools are doing needs to be recognized.We live in a very different world today.In 1970, about 10% of white and 25% of black children were born out of wedlock.By 2000, that was 25% and 70%.The import of this is monumental.Research shows that the majority of these children will grow up in poverty and it also shows that most children from poverty start school far behind, which then leads to high rates of delinquency, joblessness and school failure.What is worse, in 1970, 30% of the teenage females who had children were single; but by 1997, this percentage had increased to 78%.Teenage pregnancies are more likely to result in children with developmental disabilities and thus, a lower probability of succeeding in school and in life.And another factor that has been almost totally overlooked is the impact of lead poisoning on poor children.Lead poisoning causes reduced mental function and ability and can produce a violent persona.Although lead-based paint was outlawed many years ago, houses in older, mostly poverty-ridden neighborhoods still contain lead-based paint.Paint flakes containing lead then become ingested by small children today.

Yet, in spite of all of these challenges, American public schools have been improving over the past 20 years, without the albatross of NCLB.Instead of helping schools excel, NCLB is a hindrance that narrows the educational experience, stresses out both teachers and students and prohibits too many from seeing education as vital, significant and fun.The onerous sanctions inherent in NCLB need to be abandoned to create a law that provides a helping hand rather than a slap in the face.

Thanks for your efforts.

Martin B. Solomon, Ph.D.
Columnist EdNews.org

Published August 9, 2007