by Brian
Jay Mathews recently wondered if one of the reasons our students do so poorly on high stakes tests in math is because of a poor education in middle school. I taught math in our middle school for 10 years before returning to our high school, and I have been hesitant to play a blame game with my colleagues. I think they work just as hard as I do, and in my district I think the teachers are highly qualified. But I think Mathews may be on to something.
He points out that even though the middle school students are required to take state exams there are really no consequences for poor performance. The 8th grade students who do not meet standard on their math test still end up in my Algebra class the next year. If we're serious about this accountability issue why start with high school graduation? Why not tell them they have to stay in 8th grade until they meet standard on the math test?
Or for that matter, why even let them in to the middle school until they are proficient at 5th grade math? A student can stay in the public school system until they are 21, so what's the hurry? It's pretty clear that social promotion isn't working in the era of high stakes tests, so let's make them repeat the grade if they don't pass the test.
So I'm with Mathews on blaming the Middle School, but not for the same reason. Teachers at the middle school level deal with the same issues we all do with regard to student motivation and parental support. But if I keep getting students who don't have the skills necessary to learn Algebra, then I am going to start blaming the practice of social promotion.
DrPezz – you’re right about the GLEs!!! What a mess trying to get those to connect to what’s on the WASL/HSPE/Whatever it will be next year. If it wasn’t so sad, it would be funny.
I think our current system of math sequencing is just weird, and ineffective. If you’re a certain kind of kid, I think you can connect to the abstract and purely-academic chain of “pre-integrated, integrated I, algebra, trigonomety” and whatever. For me, except for one year with one teacher who made us do push ups, none of that made sense. I didn’t learn math until I had to use it, building things and doing things with my money and my home.
I am in denial, I guess, that there isn’t a math track for kids like me, for whom working through a text book meant nothing. If I’d had to pass an end of course exam, I would have failed. At least earning the Cs and Ds (and that one 104% in geometry) made me feel like I was done with it and could move on.
Blaming social promotion may feel good, but apparently it’s entirely academic. From what I’ve been told, retention of a student is the decision of the parents, not the school. In 27 years of teaching, I’ve retained a total of two kids, but in both instances, it was up to the parents to make the final call, and up to me to talk them into it.
The level of reliance on standardized tests and what is not covered on standardized tests bother me. Not everything that is important can be narrowed down to a single score or numerical value.
Plus, not one of the WA State Language Arts GLEs has anything to do with content. In addition, admins often seem to think that these tests are the end-all be-all of education and teachers are often pressured to boil down their classes to GLEs only.
I actually think I’d be far more in favor of standardized tests if social promotion did not exist. Then, at least, those being tested at that standard would ALL have the reasonable likelihood of meeting that standard because the likelihood that ALL had the necessary preparation would be greater.
So what do we do Brian when generational poverty in our society persists because what’s “good enough” with urban, poor kids woefully under prepares them for college and/or stable, middle class jobs?
Seat time is the qualification for graduation? Really? What “doors or opportunity” are open to these kids compared to the middle class ones down the street?
Dr. Pezz– what’s bad about standardized tests? A standardized test is simply an assessment where everyone is placed in as similar a situation as a possible and asked to perform the same task and judged on the same criteria. I’m channeling Daniel Koretz here, but nearly everyone who says they’re against standardized tests just don’t feel the inferences drawn from them are valid.
I don’t believe being against social promotion means being for standardized testing. That’s not a fair statement of the arguments made so far.
I’m against standardized testing and social promotion. I think both harm education.
Full disclosure: I am more opposed to high-stakes tests in Algebra and Geometry than I am to social promotion. I really like what Rob D. said:
“There is something appealing about the message of social promotion (even if it is broken)- we will not fail you. Give us 13 years and we will educate you to the best of our ability and at the end of your schooling doors or oppourunity will be open to you.”
Here’s one example. My son is a Marine, and you have to graduate from high school to be a Marine. (They do accept up to 5% of their recruits with only a G.E.D.) He is serving with men and women who never passed an Algebra or Geometry course in high school. But they are serving our country with honor and valor. It doesn’t take math to do that.
So if you’re in favor of high-stakes tests, let’s end social promotion and make the students accountable for their own future while they are in elementary school. But if you think that’s a little crazy, let’s just do our best for 13 years and let them find their own future.
‘All children are gifted; some just open their packages later than others.’
There are many students who will have trouble in each grade as they progress from one to the next. This is a problem that has always been an issue, so let’s not just blame the child’s previous teacher. Today’s education system is designed for children to meet certain standards in each course that they take. We all know that this doesn’t happen and yet the standards remain the same and the student progresses to the next grade. How can we solve this problem? The current solution by school administrators is to ignore the fact that students are slipping through the cracks. The administrators are under pressure from the board of education to push children through school because it costs tax payers additional money to hold students back. The school also will look statistically poor for not having a high enough graduation rate. If the child gets frustrated from getting held back, they also are more likely to drop out of high school.
Teachers ultimately must find ways to reach students and change the culture of learning in the United States. Many students don’t appreciate learning and as a result fail to learn the necessary skills to succeed at the next grade level. Instead of pointing the finger at other teachers, we need to all pledge to instill a love for learning in our students.
We live in the era of “everyone gets a trophy.”
Social promotion is not working. Allowing students into Freshman English with 3rd, 4th, and 5th grade reading levels does not work. Putting kids in Algebra who can’t multiply and divide does not work.
The system has trained kids to not have to meet any sort of standard. A mother at our parent-teacher conferences told me she knows her son will not pass his English class because he can barely read; she tried to have him held back and the school refused. Even our parents know pushing kids through is failing our youth.
No trap here- I was held back in elementary school. It was the best thing to happen to my schooling. Excuse my wavering tone & logic. The comment section isn’t the best place to work through my stance on these issues. I’m conflicted.
I don’t like the idea of an 18 year old in Algebra I. As s/he looks at their classmates 3 years younger it is a reminder of the school’s failure to educate them (something we’ve been guilt of) and a reminder of their intellect (true or not).
I am also not ready to “punnish” a first grader for not meeting standard and holding them back because I don’t believe the cause is a student’s effort. The issues are often larger than the student and I’m not sure holding the student “accountable” solves anything. Instead what it may do is create an inequitable education system where those most prepared to succeed do and those who are not fall behind.
There is something appealing about the message of social promotion (even if it is broken)- we will not fail you. Give us 13 years and we will educate you to the best of our ability and at the end of your schooling doors or oppourunity will be open to you.
A better solution than ending social promotion is ending promotion.
The entire concept of age-based grade seems antiquated to me and is clearly failing many students. Folks, if you can’t do basic arithmetic, fractions, and the like by high school you’re not gonna be successful in your algebra, trig, and geometry classes. You want to find disengaged students? Put them into situations they’re woefully under prepared for (or over prepared) every day.
I really hate folks who push technology as a tool for direct instruction. I just don’t believe the Math Blaster games I played were a good substitute for learning math. However, the one thing that is exciting about hybrid schools like the School of One or Rocketship is breaking the single teacher, single class, single standard paradigm.
I’m reminded of a piston compressing gas– the most efficient way is to push just slightly more than you have to in order to get the piston moving at all. Push harder than that and you just waste a lot of energy. Push any less hard and you get nowhere. Seems like learning is the same way.
I’m having a really hard time reading and misreading tone in this conversation… Rob D. says this:
“If we remove social promotion we will come face to face with some realities of our society and be forced to have some difficult discussions which most people would rather avoid. It is easier to believe we’ve done all we can and pass students forward with altruistic hopes.”
I hope I’m not backing into some trap…but I agree that statement, and I think the only way to really change any system is to face the ugly realities and to have the difficult conversations. Sorry, Mrs. Smith, Jimmy hasn’t yet shown he’s ready to move on to seventh grade, so we’re going to keep him in sixth. I know that’s a tough conversation, but (1) Jimmy will get the additional practice he needs and will thus be more likely to succeed later and (2) with the right kinds of support, Jimmy will perhaps be a bit more motivated to invest effort (if that was in fact the reason he didn’t succeed).
I say we get rid of grade designations altogether. What that would look like might emerge in a later blog post…
IMHO-As I understand it social promotion was education’s way of dealing with a high drop out rate which was (sometimes) caused by a student continually failing and finally giving up. The thinking was- it is better to have these students complete four years of high school than to have them drop out at age 14.
I don’t believe we have ever effectively dealt with the underlying issues of why certain students are not successful in American schools and why the demographics of those students fall along racial, social, and economic lines.
If we remove social promotion we will come face to face with some realities of our society and be forced to have some difficult discussions which most people would rather avoid. It is easier to believe we’ve done all we can and pass students forward with altruistic hopes.
In the future they’ll become a statistic and suppress the high stakes test scores but they won’t be here next year as a reminder of what we (school, family, and society) have failed to do.
Why move kids forward into courses for which they are not ready? This system sets kids up to fail.
Selfishly, I’m tired of taking all of the kids who have failed in middle school and then being judged harshly when those kids don’t perform well at the high school. Well, no kidding they didn’t do well.
So many kids enter high school with the mentality that they can fail and just move on; it’s been the only system they’ve known.
At some point we have to start making kids earn credits before high school. Idaho is trying this right now, so we’ll get to see a test case in action.
I don’t know if I follow your biology comment, Brian.
If size were all that mattered, why would I have an 4’6″ 85 lb freshman sitting next to a 6’4″ 240lb freshman who is almost a full year younger than the former? And guess which one performs better in class…
While size may matter, I think we’re underserving kids when we think calendar age is an effective means of grouping kids in order to facilitate learning best. I am all for a kid having to demonstrate mastery before moving on. I guess I mis-read your original post, because I though that was the angle you were taking as well. I guess I’m the minority here?
Rob D., you did get my point. I don’t like it either. Implicit in this whole debate is the assumption that schools are doing worse now than they did 30 or 40 or 50 years ago. From personal experience I can say that our public schools are far better than they were 40 years ago, when I graduated from high school.
Mark, biology gets in the way, doesn’t it? Size matters.
Actually, Rob D., I’d be in favor of all three of the suggestions you make, even though I think you make them facetiously.
I receive many ninth graders each year who have moved forward because of social promotion and well-meaning teachers and parents who don’t want to hurt the child. However, it only sets them up for failure. Why not stay where you are until you do what needs to be done and show what needs to be shown to prove that you are ready to move on to the next, more challenging level?
And not let them out of preschool unless they can sit in circle time? Kindergarden unless they can begin to read.
And maybe ELL students need to remain at the grade they entered our system until they are proficient linguistically.
I get your point but I don’t like where this may lead us. This may be the gateway to “value added assessment” and more use of “differentiated instruction.”
Exchanging the set of social promotion problems for those of an assessment system I have little faith in and a hot topic teaching model is not appealing either.