A TALE OF TWO ARKANSAS
PERFORMANCE REPORTS
Summary:
Two reports on student performance underscore the problem: the state Department
of Education has failed to acknowledge there is a problem.
(January 2012) A new student
performance report by the Univ. of Arkansas-Fayetteville’s Office for Education
Policy (OEP), following surveys from the state Department of Education (2011)
and the Policy Foundation (2005-2008) underscore a problem: the department’s
failure to admit there is a problem.
The OEP1
report lists Arkansas public schools in the order of their Iowa Tests of Basic
Skills results. The survey found 38
schools in Pulaski County, including 23 in the Little Rock School District2
scored less than the 40th percentile. The 50th percentile is the U.S. average
on the national test.
Education Department
Report Highlights Problem
The OEP report is welcome news to
those who support performance measures for Arkansas K-12 public education. Schools whose students consistently score low
on national standardized tests clearly have a problem.
Yet only four3
of the 23 Little Rock Schools failed to meet or exceed standards in a 2011 report compiled for the department of
Education by the National Office for Research, Measurement and Evaluation
Systems at the Univ. of Arkansas-Fayetteville.
The report found that 97%
of Arkansas public schools, including the other 19 in Little Rock whose
students scored less than the 40th percentile are “meeting” or
“exceeding” standards.
The
problem is that the state Department of Education does not recognize there is a
problem with Arkansas K-12 public education.
Instead, the department attempts to advance the idea that virtually
every public school, including those with low test scores are “meeting” or
“exceeding” standards.
High Expectations
There is a better way than denial to
address this problem: high expectations.
“For too long,” the Policy Foundation
noted in a 1998 report4,
“Arkansans have bought the myth that children's social, ethnic, economic, or
cultural backgrounds have impaired their ability to effectively learn in our
public schools. The excuses, especially among educators, are rampant: They
point to minorities, blame single parent homes, and cite low socio-economic
backgrounds. Some say rural children are disadvantaged, others comment on
inner-city conditions and gangs. These are factors to be sure, but these same
educators often overlook that public education has weakened its standards,
dumbed down the curriculum, and socially promoted children.” One example: the state
Department of Education’s reliance on Arkansas benchmark exams to the exclusion
of national standardized tests like the ITBS.
Dr. Thaddeus Lott, a
Texas charter school official told Foundation researchers, “It's a myth that if you're born in a poor community
and your skin is a certain color that you can't achieve on a higher
level.” The truth is that all
children can learn when challenged by high expectations.
Markets Aren’t Fooled
Market
participants, including businesses and entrepreneurs that make hiring decisions
are not fooled by the department’s failure to acknowledge there is a
problem. A skilled labor force is a
factor of economic production.
Enterprises that cannot find skilled workers in Arkansas will seek them
in other markets.
Arkansas payroll employment was
1,177,700 (November 2011, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics), a decline of 23,500
jobs since January 2007, despite a national economic expansion that has entered
its third year (National Bureau of Economic Research.
1
The OEP findings by Dr. Gary
Ritter were published in The Arkansas
Democrat-Gazette (Jan. 1, 2012).
2 The Little Rock schools that scored
less than the U.S. average and their percentile ranks are (elementary) Meadowcliff and Mabelvale (38); David O Dodd and Franklin
Incentive (37); Stephens (36); Baseline and Wilson (34); Bale (33), Washington
Magnet (32); Romine Interdistrict (31); Wakefield
(30); Geyer Springs (29); and Watson (27); (middle) Forest Heights (35);
Mabelvale (32); Henderson (30); Cloverdale Aerospace (26); (high schools) Hall
(27); McClellan (26); J.A. Fair (24); and (non-traditional schools) Hamilton
Learning Academy (18) and Felder Alternative Academy (9).
3 The
four Little Rock schools were Wilson, J.A. Fair, Hamilton, and Felder.
4
“Restoring Public Education’s Academic Mission,” Arkansas Policy
Foundation, September 1998.