nominally high performing
One of the huge fallacies of performance-based accountability systems is the misconception that nominally low-performing schools don't know what they are doing and that nominally high-performing schools have something to teach them.
[snip]
Most high-performing schools in our highly segregated society have gotten there not by knowing a great deal about instructional practice or improvement but by getting and holding on to students in high socioeconomic groups. The practice in most nominally high-performing schools is emphatically not about improvement but about maintenance of a certain level of confidence with the surrounding community. When I speak about improvement with people in these schools, they often look at me as if it had nothing to do with them. Most of the knowledge about improvement is in the schools where improvement is occurring, and most of those schools are, by definition, schools with a history of low performance.
A Plea for Strong Practice
Richard Elmore
The funny thing is that inside a high-performing district everyone "knows" the schools are high-performing because of the families. The families know it; the school knows it. It's an open secret.
But while people know this, they don't ask what value the school is adding to what the students brought with them to school. Instead the schools is assumed to be high-performing because the students are high-performing (and student performance is never seen in comparison to private or international schools).
Can't remember whether I've mentioned our middle school principal's Back-to-School-Night skit performed in the fall of 2006 a few short weeks after he'd taken his position here.
It was a skit inspired by No Child Left Behind.
"I don't like No Child Left Behind," he said. "But it does have one good idea, which is evaluating the quality of your school. It's a good idea to evaluate the quality of your school. So I'm going to tell you the 4 characteristics that determine the quality of a school."
Off to the side were standing 4 middle school girls holding poster boards flat against their legs.
"The first characteristic in evaluating the quality of your school," the principal said, "is the school."
Girl number 1 turned her poster over revealing characteristic number 1: School.
"But if you're putting it all on the school," the principal continued, "that's too much."
In retrospect, that was the moment I should have started sending away for applications to Catholic schools. That I didn't see this at the time can probably be attributed to the fact that I was curious to discover what other characteristic one could use to evaluate the quality of one's school besides the quality of the school.
"The second characteristic you can use to evaluate the quality of your school," the principal said, "is the quality of the students."
The second girl from the left turned her poster board over.
Students
"The third characteristic is quality of the parents."
Poster board: Parents
"The fourth characteristic is quality of the community."
Community
"You have a quality community," the principal said. "I've been driving around your town admiring all the nice lawns with the beautiful grass. In my old school, one day I was walking a student home and there were some boys standing in the street and one of them said, 'Principal, do you want to buy some drugs?'"
And there we left it. Proof positive that we have a high-quality middle school because we have high-quality students, high-quality parents, and a high-quality community.
All of which it is possible to determine by the quality of our lawns.
No comments:
Post a Comment