An Adequacy Update

Intelligence in the Classroom. I'm afraid we will be chasing after the "education adequacy" for the LAST 100 YEARS, and not the next 100 years.
It's time we spoke about "intelligence in the classroom" without "Lake Wobegon" glasses.
A good point was made by a caller remarking about the different learning styles, and the extreme need for vocational education. Many schools offer vocational education, but parents are not getting over the fact that their kids "need to go to college." Get real. EVERYTHING
HAS CHANGED in the last ten years, except the education system, and our expectations from that system. So let's base ADEQUACY on REALISM. And let's start the discussions.

Here are some facts from a wonderful 3 day series in the Wall St Journal by Charles Murray, that ran January 2007 16, 17, and 18th on the editorial pages. In my view, these three articles should be read by every school board member, teacher, educator, legislator, and parent in our country.

I am quoting from the above referenced articles:

" Today's simple truth: Half of all children are below average in intelligence."

"..in the 2005 round of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NEAP), 36% of all fourth-graders
were below the NEAP's basic achievement score in reading.
It sounds like a terrible record. But we know from the mathematics of the normal distribution that 36% of fourth-graders also have IQ's less lowewr than 95."

"But even the best schools under the best conditions cannot repeal the limits on achievement set by limits on intelligence."

So there is the dirty little secret. Throwing money at the schools will, on average, still not help close to 36% of those fourth graders who cannot reasonably be expected to meet NEAP's definition of basic achievement no matter how well they are taught.

OK. We live in NH. Perhaps these "averages" do not apply in many of the small towns. But I am pretty sure they may be close in Nashua and Manchester. Maybe not in Hollis or Bedford. But similar numbers from the State of NH's own testing programs also are pretty bleak in many school systems.

Nashua Telegraph, January 31, 2007. Front page, above the fold: "Nearly half -49% to be exact - of third grade black and Latino students scored below "proficient" in reading, while 78% of their white and Asian counterparets scored "proficient" or above. Overall, nearly three-quarters of all third graders scored "proficient" or above in reading."

Wonderful. 25% of all Nashua third graders can't read, or read very poorly. What is their future? Pass them on to the fourth, fifth, and sixth grades where they still can't read?
What is "ADEQUACY OF EDUCATION for this 25% of our kids?

In my view, police them all up and teach them how to read and do basic math. Full Stop! THERE IS NO FUTURE IF YOU CAN'T READ. Hello?? Is anyone listening? Are we really dealing with the reality here? I don't know how to teach reading, but put them in a room with me for 8 hours each day and I will make it happen. IT HAS TO HAPPEN. The educators have been getting away with this 25% for YEARS and DOING NOTHING. Here is the reality, now that we have the testing. THIS IS CRIMINAL! FIND A WAY, or else these kids will be the terrorists of tomorrow, stealing cars, breaking and entering, doing drugs, whatever. With no future, what do we expect? They can't even read! (Does adequate education mean being "computer savvy" How do you do that if you can't read? 25% of the kids can't.)Hello???

You can debate all these points, and I would refer you to the above articles mentioned for a fuller accounting and the complete texts, which offer more proof as well as excellent solutions.
Look, to me, the goal of school is to try to maximize everyone's potential, and we all need to be able to read and write and do basic math. In other countries, kids are already separated to maximize these facts. We don't do that in America because we all believe that our child could someday be President. No one else in the world thinks like that. This possibility of unlimited opportunities is one of our great strengths in both our culture and our country.

But when we try to define "adequate education" as a "one size fits all," we end up with unrealistic Lake Wobegone "wishes" that totally are not fitting the facts about todays students and educational system, in my view.

More kids need good vocational educations. A good craftsman will be happy, successful, and productive. A "college graduate" who just goes through the motions, pushed by parents, may in fact be unprepared for the future, and end up with no marketable skills in a very changing world.
The best and brightest need to be nurtured and pushed to do great things.They will always make out well because they are smart.The kids in ther middle need as much education in as a great a depth as they can absorb. So to me, we need to define a basic education as relavent to each of these three groups. One size does NOT fit all. It never did, but for the last 100 years the bottom third could go into manufacturing jobs and make a pretty good living. That time is OVER for a lot of these kids.
So let's have a realistic discussion about the needs TODAY, and not about what OUR needs were back 30 or 40 years ago when we were students. What is the average age of the General Court? Im afraid adequacy will be defined for the LAST 100 years and not based on reality...to our peril.