The Key Elements Of Educational Opportunity Essay

As schools were faced with these daunting expectations to meet standards, state agencies, school boards, and administration all had to re-evaluate current practices, not only in the form of what should be taught, but how it should be taught (Performance Evaluation Advisory Council, n.d.). In more appropriate terms,

As explained in Diane Ravitch's article, “American Schools in CRISIS,” educators are provided with little job security under Bush's No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and Obama's Race to the Top educational reform initiatives; where teachers can be fired based on poor standardized test scores from their students (50). The majority of new teachers already quit within five years of entering the field; “demoralized” (Ravitch 50) by the effects of such high stakes and low resources (Ravitch 52). To combat this figure, many states have decreased the requirements for becoming a teacher, even allowing online licensure in Texas (Ravitch 51). To lower the standards of the “conservators of our common future” (Barber 122) is an irresponsible practice that must be reversed if students are to succeed. Barber proposes paying early childhood educators as much as lawyers to attract better teachers. Higher wages would encourage more ambitious individuals to enter the fields of primary and secondary education. Without highly-trained and intelligent educators, who are dedicated to progress and change, students will continue to stumble through a broken system, woefully unprepared for the task of becoming productive citizens.

Teachers shape the minds of students to realize what their purpose is in life. Lately, because of certain educational reforms, it has been hard for teachers to say what they need to say. “In 40-plus states, the math and English guidelines determine the knowledge students have to master by the end of each grade, what they’ll be tested on this year, and in many cases, how teachers and principals will be rated at their jobs once those test scores are released” (Strauss). Most educational reforms are adopting standardized testing and should be reconsidered. Statistics even show that since we have taken part in reforms like No Child Left Behind, Race to the Top, and Common Core State Standards math and reading are declining. These standards tell teachers what to teach and what the students should know by the end of the school year. The reforms also evaluate teacher performance by how well the students learn the information. Some people believe educational reforms should not be telling teachers how to teach their students, and others believe that the reforms are absolutely fine the way they are. However the truth is educational reforms are yet to be perfected.

The year is 2012. In the movie Back to the Future II, two years from now, in 2016, Marty McFly travels from the past to save his family’s future. The future is almost upon us, and yet it would seem that our education system has changed little since Back to the Future hit theaters in 1985. “We still have same teachers, in the same parts, in the same schools, with the same level of knowledge, with the same equipment’s, and much the same standard of parental support” (David). Ironically, we have been steadily implementing policy after policy, increasing standards and accountability, promoting oversight and rule… the list goes on, and yet our progress seems minimal, our educators complain of underfunded classrooms, and our legislators complain of underperforming schools. The question of “how to improve our education system” is not getting satisfactorily answered because our system is not broken, merely underdeveloped. The truth is that America has made paces in improving its education technique or system; the problem that remains is for us to entrust our educators with the greater pliability and autonomy that they need to excel.

While standards and assessments tell us whether students are gaining the skills and knowledge they need, accountability systems say that if they aren’t, schools and districts have to take steps to improve. This expectation of action is critical if we want all students to graduate high school ready for whatever they wish to do next – be it attend college, train for a job that will allow them to support a

The No Child Left Behind act emerged as a result of a massive increase in the costs of schools, while failing to show an improvement in their students performances. (Paterson 32) Since these standardized test have been in effect teachers have been judged off them. The problem is that

By believing that instructors are the most important influence in a child’s education, teachers are given an unrealistic responsibility. Many policymakers believe that holding educators accountable for student success is the best way to improve public education. This asks educators to overcome these outside variables that are far outside of teachers’ control. Policymakers suggested linking teacher evaluations to student achievement, measured by standardized tests. This is not a beneficial way to hold teachers accountable because of the many outside factors that affect student achievement. A better way to hold teachers accountable is to stem out of a realistic perspective on what teachers can and should do for their students. Each part of society holds an important responsibility in increasing student achievement. Teachers should not be asked to be responsible for more than they can handle.

The purpose of this memo is to review and analyze the claims made by Diane Ravitch in her book, The Life and Death of the Great American School System, and to justly state if the authors claims are well-researched and based on facts or if her arguments and claims are biased and opinionated. More specifically, this memo will acknowledge the two central ideas of contemporary education reform today: choice and accountability. Advocates of school choice believe that it provides families with alternative options to choose their children’s education that works best for them while encouraging competition to better schools. However, opponents of school choice believe that it will erode the public school system until it is no more. Some argue that accountability is “the great cure” that will fix schools by testing and placing teachers accountable, this will encourage more effort and in turn promote student achievement. Others believe that too much accountability is the reason why our schools are failing. Ravitch seems to see choice and accountability as the main obstacles standing in the way of a thriving American school system. After much careful research, I have come to two conclusions. First, choice is not remedy to make education better; all that choice does is

In Diana Ravitch’s ‘(2010) article Why I Changed My Mind, she discussed how adapting accountability and choice into the American educational system has failed tremendously. In addition, Ravitch explained how federally ordained policies are continuously contributing to the system’s decline as well. She believes the legislators are so focused on testing and teacher evaluation that they are ignoring the root of educational challenges in the United States. With such strong emphasis on testing and test results, educators have changed their teaching strategies in an attempt to satisfy a broken structure. There is strong attention towards preparing students to pass standardized tests while simultaneously denying teachers the time to focus on content and instilling core academic concepts.

Change is inevitable. When the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) initiative finally became defunct, a new accountability system emerged. In San Francisco Unified School District, central administrative teams began a transition phase starting as early as four to five years ago when Common Core State Standards were introduced to low performing schools. As the Instructional Reform Facilitator during that time, it was exciting because new and more robust learning/content standards also required a change in our approach to instruction and assessment. This was the lever in my mind that this could help close the achievement gap. However this new initiative also brings uncertainty and apprehension for many teachers.

The current education system is founded on standard based accountability which focuses more on the attainment of common core standards and national assessment than on student learning.. In the report, A Path to the Future: Creating Accountability for Personalized Learning, written by Anne Hyslop and Sara Mead of Bellewether Education Partners for policymakers, Anne Hyslop is a Senior Policy Analyst who produces research, analysis and commentary on educational accountability and improvement, and other issues including the intersection and alignment of state and federal policy, PreK-12. Sara Mead’s background in education is diverse she has served as a researcher, writer, advisor, director, she has worked in the Education Sector, the Progressive

The authors’ also go on to mention how “American educators need to lead the development of a new, shared vision for our public schools. If they do not create an inclusive vision for our public schools and learn how to raise much more students to mastery levels of learning, the American dream and the quality of life we cherished will be unsustainable in a global economy” (Pg. 6, Introduction). Though this statement is true in theory and concept – I ask the question: “how can ALL students be held accountable for the same mastery levels if ALL students do not learn the same way, have different learning styles, varied disabilities, speak different languages, etc.?” The answer is simple: They Cannot!

A country is only able to grow and prosper through the education of each successive generation. In essence, the quality of the education system defines the potential of future leaders. Without proper teaching each country could revert, fatal mistakes defining the economy, political climate, and general future of a country for decades. The importance of education is clear meaning no country is free of the scrutiny their education system will undergo; although, some countries have far exceeded expectations. Leaders in standardized testing such as Singapore and Japan have made the benchmark for other countries to strive after. In the United States a sense of pride accompanies the general belief that intelligence is high. Score results that

A blueprint for reform was written to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act during President Barack Obama Administration. This change was to run its course through 2020. It was recognized that there was still a need for world-class education to ensure students’ success. The blueprint built on reforms already being exercised in response to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. This addressed four areas: ”(1) Improving teacher and principal effectiveness to ensure that every classroom has a great teacher and every school has a great leader; (2) Providing information to families to help them evaluate and improve their children 's schools, and to educators to help them improve their students ' learning; (3) Implementing college- and career-ready standards and developing improved assessments aligned with those standards; and (4) Improving student learning and achievement in America 's lowest-performing schools by providing intensive support and effective interventions” (“A Blueprint for Reform”, 2011, p. 3). Like all states Missouri was to incorporate this blueprint reform within the Show-Me Standards.

Current reforms and initiatives based on the national education standards focus on student’s achievement and teacher’s preparation. Educational researchers and curriculum designers continuously find problems with standards and requirements on a state level and how the state and local boards of education focus highly on advanced placement and cultural literacy. A key focus is also accountability for students, schools, and school-districts in regards to academic performance. A new factor that has surfaced is school choice (charter schools and home schooling) and character development. Progressive teachers are able to guide learners to new experiences in every lesson. However; they are sensitive to unique and different learning styles which