Entry #24 - March 1, 1999
"The ads show two little girls skipping down a sunny sidewalk
while a voice-over explains that with the new, standardized curriculum a
child can move from one place to another and not be discomfited by changing
schools, since it will be "the same." Isn't fantasy wonderful?"
It was a quieter than usual week, with most of our eighth grade students
away for five days at our district's outdoor science school. We sent term
reports home again, and had our parent interviews on Thursday and Friday.
Although the process went a little smoother this time since staff are getting
used to the new format, the fact that people had to have their grades and
comments completed only a little over a month after the LAST report cards
were finished made it a rather futile exercise in many cases.
We didn't want the students to know their marks were handed in on February
1st either, lest they figure they didn't need to apply themselves for the
rest of the month! The purpose of these new standardized reports was, in
theory, to make the reporting process clearer and more meaningful to parents.
I'm not convinced that this is the actual result, at least in our multicultural,
multilingual community.
Student grades are given in percentages, their homeroom class average is
given in the next column, and the grade average (all classes at that grade
level combined) are given in a third column. Many parents were unclear which
number was their child's actual grade; this confusion was multiplied for
second-language and IEP students, who often do not get a regular grade for
the subject at all. Parents then sometimes assumed one of the OTHER numbers
was their child's grade!
The "class average" figure can be deceptive, too. In some of our
classes, over 60% of the students are Special Education pupils who are not
included in the grade average calculations -- and still more would be exempted
as ESL. What, then, does " class average" mean when only a minority
of students are the base on which it is calculated?
Confusion reigned supreme over what "passing" means. In our district,
50% is passing -- a sort of D-minus-minus. It means the work is far below
level, but the student HAS completed some assignments and shown some evidence
of learning some of the required material. (Retention in grade is a very
rare event, and may be done only under extraordinary circumstances). The
report card now states that the standard is 70% -- showing a grasp of MOST
of the knowledge and skills required. The end result seems to be that students
earning 60's are perceived as "failing." The distinction between
"passing" and "meeting the standard" is not getting
across to the community at large.
In fact, the whole "standardization" debate has people very befuddled.
We have been saturated with television advertisements recently extolling
the government's reforms to education, which include a standardized elementary
curriculum (really, only a general curriculum OUTLINE of topics and skills
for each grade: no specifics or support materials have been developed).
The ads show two little girls skipping down a sunny sidewalk while a voice-over
explains that with the new, standardized curriculum a child can move from
one place to another and not be discomfited by changing schools, since it
will be "the same." Isn't fantasy wonderful? It may be that they
study explorers in sixth grade in school A, and explorers in sixth grade
in school B -- but that's the extent of the standardization!
I tried explaining to one family that if they DID move, their child would
likely find herself at a disadvantage in her new school. She is earning
60's but, I told them, her work was well below the average for seventh grade
across the district (or province) -- in fact, it is about average for fourth
grade, but that makes her a fairly strong student in our school community.
They were very puzzled, because they thought that "everyone is at the
same standard now, aren't they?" If only! I explained that our school
has a very high percentage of students with special needs and second-language
learners, and that while they can do very well indeed with appropriate programming,
it is simply wishful thinking to believe that a Grade 7 history program
in an advantaged school with many materials, audiovisual aids, field trip
resources and staff and budget to implement creative projects and simulations
to make the subject real to the kids is "the same" as our very
bare-bones, copy-notes-from-the-board history program with NO field trips,
resources, or even videos to bring it to life.
( We have textbooks, but virtually none of the students can read them with
any degree of understanding. One student exclaimed to me, in exasperation,
" Why don't they write these books in ENGLISH??" She can read,
e.g. decode, but the syntax and sentence structure are too convoluted for
her level of language development).
The curriculum guideline may be the same for both schools, but that's where
the similarity ends. If only there WERE a real commitment to providing equal,
and equitable, educational opportunity! Unfortunately, local communities
are no longer allowed to raise money for schools through the property tax,
and our federal government does not have a role in pre-college education.
Less privileged communities seem to be stuck with a one-size-fits-all funding
allocation that doesn't take high-needs situations like ours into account.
One thing I've observed working well with our new reports is a section requiring
the students to evaluate their own work for the term and to set specific
objectives for the next. I notice that they are learning to think in terms
of incremental goals and ways to improve their own results, which is a very
positive development. Instead of vague generalities like "I will try
harder," my students this time were focusing on definite strategies,
such as, "I will take better notes in science and review them for tests,"
or "I will stay in at lunch on Thursdays for extra help in French."
Too many of our students see learning as something that happens TO them,
not something they make happen!
I see this active involvement of students in the evaluation process is a
good thing, long overdue. I wish our school was organized in such a way
as to make this an integral part of EVERY school day. Another suggestion
to bring to the school council -- if we can ever get past the latest crisis!
Read next week's entry >>>
<<< Read last week's entry
Post a comment about this
week's diary entry
Find out more about Susan
Back to Middle School Diaries index