Reinventing America's high
schools
Wilfredo
Laboy
When is a passing score actually a
failing score? Answer: When the test
measures factors that are
irrelevant—or at least
insufficient—in assessing a desired
outcome.
If we’re truly measuring proficiency
in our schools, we must first examine
what it takes for our students to be
successful in today’s world.
Otherwise, we have set a standard for
mediocrity, and base our ideals of
proficiency and success on an antiquated
notion of our society and world
economy.
Our nation’s educational model dates
back more than a century-and-a-half.
Based on an agricultural calendar, high
schools were designed to send graduating
students to the fields or to the
factories. At the time, this model was
effective in preparing young people to
enter into a mainly industrial and
agricultural workforce. The basic
concepts of reading, writing and
arithmetic were all that were needed in
those days, and the educational model
worked.
Fast-forward to 2008. Our world is vastly
different in almost every aspect.
Science, technology, medicine,
international politics, art and music,
and media have all undergone
advancements, discoveries, paradigm
shifts that likely would have boggled the
mind 150 years ago. Almost every job and
every employer demands that employees can
operate in the
“information-age” and have the
cognitive and problem-solving skills that
businesses and organizations succeed.
A new global economy brings
competition of skilled laborers from
nations around the globe. With such
dramatic shifts in our economy and
society, why then has the model upon
which we operate, evaluate, and manage
our high schools remained almost the same
for more than a century?
I believe the basic foundation of our
nation’s high schools is outdated
and obsolete. Our measures of proficiency
are only an indicator of meeting a
century-old standard of success. Most of
our nation’s schools are devoid of
rigor, particularly in the later high
school years. Students are expected to
learn content that is a mile wide and an
inch deep, rather than focus their
studies on rigorous pre-college or
career-oriented coursework.
By adhering to those old ideas and
standards, the result is that students
lack the subset of skills that are
necessary to compete for admission into
the college of their choice and are
unable to compete in a global economy.
According to a study by the
Massachu-setts Division of Unemployment
Assis-tance, it’s estimated that
between the years 2000 and 2010, our
state’s economy will have produced
more than 300,000 new jobs, with half of
those jobs requir-ing at least a
bachelor’s degree. However,
according to a study sponsored by the
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation,
bare-ly a third of our nation’s high
school graduates had completed the
coursework necessary for admission into a
college or university.
That same study found that in
Massachusetts, those numbers fell to 29
percent for African-American students and
14 percent for Hispanic students.
Furthermore, the study also found that
one out of every four students in
Massachusetts drops out of school. Among
African-Americans and Hispanics, the
drop-out rate climbed to 41 and 54
percent, respectively.
As tragic as these numbers are, it’s
no surprise that high school students are
disengaged, disenchanted and
disinterested in school. Our
instructional strategies are designed in
a manner that is irrelevant to
students’ lives. Simple reading,
writing, and arithmetic may still be core
skills, but if presented in the abstract
and devoid of real-world relevance, they
leave students disconnected with the
concepts.
Federal and State officials have been
calling for education reform for years.
But, as much as university scholars and
so-called education industry experts talk
about making lesson content relevant, the
very structure and delivery of this
content is completely counterintuitive to
how students and adults process and learn
information.
When you consider the old educational
model, it’s easy to understand why
so many students are ill-prepared for
college. Our schools are not designed to
help students develop the analytical,
reasoning, and problem solving skills
necessary to succeed in a
career-oriented, university environment.
Our schools need to be places that
stimulate and challenge students. The
instructional day must be restructured,
teaching must stress students’
mastery of the content, schools must be
smaller, and learning must be project
based. We need to bring skills, concepts
and data into a setting that is relevant
and actionable for these young people. We
need to fan the flames of their interests
and passions, and help them use their
time in high school as a catalyst and an
accelerator for their future career
success.
Making lesson content relevant and
interesting has been a topic of school
reform for many years. Helping students
prepare for future careers is something
to which every dedicated educator
aspires. However, the very conduit for
delivering these skills remains its
greatest impediment to achieving those
goals.
The basic foundation and structure of the
American high school is obsolete. And to
break free of this antiquated model, it
means moving ahead with the courage and
the vision to reinvent high school
education. Retrofitting the old model
will not suffice. We have 150 years of
evidence that supports this idea.
Innovation requires that we abandon our
reliance on an old model. Innovation
requires that we embrace something new,
foreign, and perhaps at first, cumbersome
and frustrating. Changing a paradigm is
not easy, as we are all creatures of
habit. But I submit to you that it is
this same habitual nature that has lulled
us into complacency and into a state of
obsolescence in our schools. Because we,
as a nation, have been unwilling to break
old habits and step out of our comfort
zones, we have settled into an
educational model that is sadly outdated
and inadequate.
Lawrence Public Schools has made a bold
and dramatic shift. We are one of a small
number of high schools in the country to
embrace an academy-focused high school
model. Also known as Small Learning
Communities (or SLCs), the model entails
creating smaller centers of learning,
typically focused on particular areas of
interest. Under the direction of our
headmaster, Dr. Thomas Sharkey, and our
principals of core content instruction
and academy principals, we are
rearchitecting the framework upon which
we will build our instructional
strategies.
We are exploring the best ways to
integrate technology and professional
mentoring into instruction and student
development. We are examining the optimal
roles and responsibilities of our
headmaster, our principals, and our
faculty—all centered-on providing
the absolute best education for our
children.
Focused on the skills and knowledge
required in today’s society and
economy, core content is being taught
through the lens of six areas of
interest: Business and Finance; Math,
Science and Technology; Health and Human
Services; Leadership and Humanities;
Performing and Fine Arts, and
International Studies.
By giving students the opportunity to
embrace their interests and career
pas-sions, we create opportunities for
them to take ownership of their
education, to make the content and
lessons relevant to their lives, and to
participate in a more engaging
educational experience.
Reinventing our high school education
framework is a complex process,
especially given the fact that we are
making these changes in real time.
Already, we have begun to feel the pain
associated with abandoning certain
processes, policies and traditions.
I have sat in numerous school commit-tee
meetings listening to the complaints and
petitions of community members regarding
things such as school uniforms, course
and elective selections, and other
matters associated with dividing a
3,000-person student body into six
smaller academies located on one campus.
I take every one of these comments to
heart, and consider such feedback as an
important component in our efforts to
refine and reinvent our high school.
However, this process has just begun.
We will continue to refine our approach
in instruction, assessment, mentoring,
and overall administration management.
This is a new model and a new paradigm,
and few districts have had the courage to
forge ahead with an ambitious new
direction such as this. Few have made the
commitment to honor their students
potential has we have.
Unless education is grounded in the
concepts, skills, and realities of
today’s economy, any measure of
proficiency—for student and school
administrators—is irrelevant. For
educators, the measure of proficiency
should be an indicator of students’
ability to succeed in the outside world.
I challenge my colleagues and peers in
Lawrence and across the nation to
consider what it means to be truly
proficient.
While we may face our own challenges in
Lawrence in meeting academic achievement
levels, I believe that even the most
“high performing” schools
across the nation have still leave their
graduates short-changed in terms of the
skills they will need later in life.
As we move forward, this effort requires
the patience, support, and involvement of
every member of the community. Changes of
this magnitude are very difficult and
take time. However, I believe we have the
opportunity and the ability to create
something that truly serves the needs of
our children.
We have the opportunity—and the
obligation—to create a better
educational model for our young people.
Wilfredo Laboy is the
superintendent of the Lawrence public
school system. You can email Lawrence
Superintendent Wilfredo Laboy at wlaboy@lawrence.k12.ma.us
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
All
pictures and material are
(C) copyright, Valley Patriot, Inc., 2008
|
