Surely it is time for Arkansas government officials to realize the futility of grading, financially rewarding or punishing public schools based on the percentage of students who perform poorly on state-mandated standardized tests. As far as I can tell, these policies have had little, if any, significant impact on student academic performance.
The one constant appears to be the percentage of at-risk students in each school district, with schools with higher percentages being designated as failing or "in need of improvement." A cursory examination of the location of schools which were rewarded with extra funding for having an acceptably low percentage generally follows a pattern of wealthier sections of the state with lower numbers of at-risk students. This is nonproductive since it takes money away from school districts that have a higher percentage of at-risk students, plus it does nothing to help the low-performing students in the school district deemed successful.
It is time to recognize that we have a cultural, societal problem that public schools cannot successfully overcome by themselves. After all, public schools are funded for group instruction which, to be effective, requires that students come to school motivated to learn. However, education is a long-term investment with a delayed payoff. Poverty, which is a major factor in identifying at risk students, is 24/7, 52 weeks a year every year!
Kids do not have the maturity to see the eventual benefits of education without adult encouragement, but they can see an abundance of wealth enjoyed by others. This immediate need relegates education to the back burner for many students. The flight of students ready for group instruction (regardless of ethnicity) to charter schools is resegregating many public schools into the easier-to-educate and the more-difficult-to-educate. And since there is a higher percentage of minority students in the at-risk category, if charter schools continue to proliferate, we are headed right back to court intervention, which, if it had been effective the first time around, we wouldn't still be in this mess.
Discouraging? Yes. But there is plenty of evidence of what needs to be done to effectively deal with this problem. There are many at-risk students who are making adequate to better academic progress.
I am proposing a four- or five-year five-step plan, based on research, that is focused on students rather than schools.
Step 1. Designate, or hire, an outreach director or coordinator in the state Department of Education whose first task would be to secure funding from the governor or Legislature, or from a grant, to conduct research into positive factors that contribute to the success of at-risk students and negative factors that impede student academic progress. Many of these factors are already known, but the research should be conducted for verification.
Step 2. Analyze the results from the sample schools investigated, focus on the factors deemed most important, and develop a comprehensive statewide plan to promote the positive influences and counteract or eliminate the negative factors inhibiting student achievement.
Step 3. Appropriate state funding for an outreach counselor for every school district whose sole responsibility is to identify all at-risk students in the district and all community resources currently available to mentor these students (like Keith Jackson's P.A.R.K. program). The outreach counselor would also be responsible for developing and soliciting new community support networks and coordinating the pairing of students with community resources. The outreach counselor would also be responsible for tracking the academic and behavioral progress of students.
Step 4. To address the ever-present financial pressure of poverty, funding should be sought (state Legislature, grant request, etc.) to initiate a work-study program for qualified students in a small sample of schools. The federal work-study for college students could serve as an example. Eligible students could work up to 10 hours a week on school grounds, the cafeteria, etc., or even in public parks or other available facilities. Students in this program would have to maintain at least a "C" average in courses required for graduation to remain in the program.
Step 5. If the ongoing evaluation of the implementation of this plan indicates significant improvement in the achievement of the targeted students in the sample schools, expand the plan to all Arkansas public schools. If the work-study part of the plan produces the desired results, Arkansas' congressmen should petition the federal government to expand the work-study program to include income-eligible high school students.
This is a logical, research-based plan which, if implemented and proven effective, would greatly improve the lives of many of our citizens and, as a result, improve the economy of our wonderful state. Let's do it!
------------v------------
Longtime educator Larry McNeal lives in Waldo.
Editorial on 08/16/2018