The Dysfunctional Linking of Achievement and Race - Higher Education

Higher Education News and Jobs

The Dysfunctional Linking of Achievement and Race

Email




by Aaron N. Taylor

For all its inadequacies, No Child Left Behind is based on a solemn premise — the belief that all children can learn. Children of color. Poor children. Children with disabilities. All of them. This powerful notion is embedded in the manner in which the law requires schools to report achievement data disaggregated among various demographic groups that have historically been left behind. No longer could schools hide yawning achievement gaps behind rosy overall stats that only told part of the story. And NCLB’s end-goal of 100 percent proficiency by 2014 represents the most powerful policy statement the federal government has ever made about the ability of schools to close these gaps.

Many states, however, have determined that universal proficiency is an unrealistic goal — at least based on the NCLB timeframe. In response, the Obama Administration has allowed states to apply for NCLB waivers if they set other “ambitious” goals for raising student achievement. So far, 34 states have been granted NCLB waivers, and the new goals set by many of them raise troubling questions.

Twenty-six of the waiver states have set goals that base achievement benchmarks on the race of the student. The most barefaced example is probably Florida. In that state, 74 percent of Black students and 81 percent of Hispanic students are expected to be reading at grade level by 2018, compared to 88 percent of White students and 90 percent of Asian students. Many states have taken similar approaches to Florida; others, like Missouri, simply lump Black students, Latino students, English Language Learners, and students with disabilities together in a pitiful heap of lower expectations.

Related:  America’s Schools of Education Must Improve

State education officials have argued that the standards are interim snapshots on the path to universal proficiency. Florida officials assert that all students should be proficient by 2023. But that is cold comfort. NCLB passed in 2001; so even if Florida meets its new projections, it will have taken more than two decades to do so. Children born in the year NCLB passed will be of college age — and far too many of them will have never made it to college due to having been left behind. And of course, there is no guarantee that universal proficiency will be achieved even then. In fact, the odds are much more in favor of another political “fix” letting states off the hook.

Shifting public and political sentiment have created a fierce urgency that these standards fail to embrace — and in many ways militate against. The waivers essentially absolve states of the imperative of ensuring that all kids receive an education that prepares them for a life of productive citizenship. Moreover, the symbolic implications of these standards are just as profound as the practical. What message is sent when skin color is used to define achievement, and by implication, ability?

The Supreme Court recently heard arguments in the Fisher v. Texas affirmative action case. Most commentators predict that the court will greatly limit the permissible use of affirmative action in higher education admissions. So at a time when racial preferences, even those long deemed compelling, are under attack, the establishment of racially differentiated educational standards represents a cruel irony. If affirmative action is wrong, this is abhorrent. It epitomizes the “soft bigotry of low expectations” that NCLB was meant to end.

Related:  Adolescent Mentorship Programs: Does Race Matter?

The NCLB waiver process has been a political masterstroke. It has allowed the Obama administration to impose its education priorities while bypassing the ineffective and obstructionist Congress. This improvised approach to lawmaking, however, has undercut the best thing about NCLB — its underlying premise. And given the bipartisan excitement that greeted the passage of NCLB, it is doubtful that race-based achievement standards would have survived a functional political debate on the topic. So in many ways, this is an all-too-familiar story — one where kids bear the brunt of adult dysfunction.

The author is a professor at Saint Louis University School of Law. You can follow him on Twitter at @TheEdLawProf.

 

RELATED ARTICLES >>
The High Price of Pregnancy While on the Academic Job Market Not long ago I penned a piece about the “joy” of being pregnant in graduate school. What I neglected to cover in that article was the high price of being noticeably pregnant while on the job market, and beginning a career with a baby on the way. With...
The Problem Behind GMU Law School Name Change I was very excited to come to George Mason University School of Law (GMUSL). I knew that GMUSL has a great legal writing program, which I know will be helpful in my career. Jacquelyn Branscomb is a law student at George Mason University School of...
Why Small Liberal Arts Colleges Should Embrace Diversity Smaller, largely historically White colleges got a wake-up call when they found their easygoing, liberal-minded students lined up chanting “Black Lives Matter” and vehemently demanding inclusion and justice for all. As a professor who has been wor...
UC Berkeley Responds as Student Among Dead in Attack in Nice UC Berkeley officials confirmed a second UC student studying abroad has died this summer when the body of Nick Leslie, 20, was found three days after a terror-linked truck rampage in Nice, France, according to multiple news reports. Leslie, 20, a ...
Semantic Tags:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *