COMMUNITY JUSTICE RESOURCE CENTER NEWSLETTER ARCHIVES
 

Whose Child Left Behind?
Op-ed by George Wood , principal of Federal Hocking High School in Stewart, Ohio and Director of the Forum for Education and Democracy

The Forum for Education and Democracy aims to re-center the democratic purpose of our public schools. The Forum works to promote education for democratic life based on the following guiding principles:
  • High quality schools and teachers focused on educating for democracy
  • Equitable and adequate school resources for all children
  • Appropriate democratic control of public schools
Whose Child Left Behind?

As part of the Bush administration’s education plan — the cleverly named No Child Left Behind Act — states nominate schools for “Blue Ribbon” designation. These are schools that best exemplify the intent of NCLB: making improvements in test scores with all of their students.

Just before Thanksgiving, Ohio unveiled its list of fourteen schools nominated for this award. These schools are, in the words of Ohio’s state superintendent of education, “role models for all of us as we work to improve the quality of education in Ohio and the nation.”

Now, I like role models. I try to be one as a parent, and have had some good ones in my life. As a high school principal, I have used role models for myself and for my school as we have worked to meet the needs of our students and community. So I thought it would be instructive to look at the three high schools our state is holding up as potential role models in meeting the new NCLB guidelines.

Courtesy of the State of Ohio’s web site, I learned the following about our role model schools:
  • On average, they spend $9,405 per student. The state average is $8,073, and at our school we spend $6,260.
  • The average teacher/student ratio at these schools is 1:15. At our school, we average one teacher for every eighteen students.
  • The racial makeup of these schools was interesting: They report no African-American students and less than 2% percent minority students on average. One school was all white. Our state school population includes 21.3 percent minority students.
  • Two of the three model schools reported no economically disadvantaged students; at the third only 6.1 percent of students are economically disadvantaged. In Ohio, 28.7 percent of our students are economically disadvantaged; at our school, it’s 29.5 percent.
  • Average family income in the three districts is $45,102. Average family income statewide is $43,293. At my school, it’s $24,865.
  • The special education population in these schools averages 7.7 %, and none reports any students with limited English skills. Special education students comprise 13.3 % of Ohio’s learners, 15.5 % of the students at our school.
  • More than half of the parents of children in the role model schools work in the professions (54 percent); nearly three-fourths have some college education (73 percent). In my school, 24.2 % of parents are professionals and 36.6% attended college.
  • The tax base in these districts averages $173,677 per child, compared with $116,374 in Ohio and $55,218 in my school district.
  • Average teacher salary in these districts is $50,372. Teachers at my school make an average of $32,002.
  • Kids in these schools tend not to move, with an average mobility rate of 2.4% (computed as number of students in same school for less than _ of the year). The mobility rate at our school is 15.8%.
As I said, I like role models and in many ways I find these schools to be great ones. I’m all for upping what we spend on our kids by nearly $3,200 per child; I’d love to reduce our student/teacher ratios; and I’d be happy to raise our teachers’ salaries by more than $18,000. (Given numbers like these I find it hard to believe anyone could argue that money does not make a difference.)

But in other ways, there is not much here to copy. I value all our kids and their families. The kids who lack financial resources are just as welcome as the ones who have plenty. Every kid has learning needs, not just those in special education, and we can learn much from each other. And you don’t have to be a college graduate, earn a high salary, or work in the professions to be a good parent (though the money can help).

But when I look at these models, I wonder what the message is. Does our state actually want us to model ourselves after these schools? If so, does the state stand ready to provide balanced resources for all schools? Will it lift every child out of poverty? Does it intend to provide for full employment, with benefits? Are we going to address the conditions that often cause learning difficulties, including childhood nutrition and adequate health care?

The short answer is, probably not.

And so, in spite of the fine-sounding name, No Child Left Behind will not do much to improve the lives of the children it claims as its focus — children of the poor and minorities. As these numbers show, what these children need is simply what every child needs: a safe home, access to health care and adequate nutrition, well-funded schools, and a community with the wherewithal to show that it cares. With these resources, we will indeed leave no child behind. Without them, it’s just a matter of whose child is left behind.