Abolish K-12: A New Vision of Equity
Suzanne DeMallie
University Lecturer | Author | Speaker | Education Advocate | Former Teacher, Non-Profit Director, & CPA
When a school administrator told me that my student had to be promoted to fifth grade, despite my recommendation and the parent’s blessing to retain him, I felt like I was going to vomit. ?It was one of the saddest days that I ever encountered as a teacher. ?But my disappointment wasn’t in the decision, it was in the reasoning. ?I was told: “Too many other fourth-graders with even lower abilities would be moving on to fifth grade. ?He needed to move with them.”
Why did I recommend his retention? ?I wanted to stop the bleed—the hemorrhaging that happens when students fall too far behind grade-level expectations. ?He was already testing three years behind in math and two years behind in reading. ?With only three academic months remaining, he still could not independently complete any fourth grade math work. ?Throughout the year, I watched his self-esteem evaporate despite my best efforts and use of researched-based interventions. ?If he was promoted, he would not enter fifth grade with the pre-requisite skills necessary for success. ?Sure enough, that’s what resulted.
Academic Standards Tied to Grade Levels
States have academic standards that their students are expected to meet in each grade level. Forty-one states and the District of Columbia have adopted the Common Core State Standards to use as their measure of what students should know and be able to do in English language arts/literacy (ELA) and mathematics at the end of each grade, kindergarten through twelve (K-12). ?The Common Core Standards were established to ensure that “every student was ready for success after high school” regardless of where they live or what they choose to do; i.e. go to college or start a career.
Students throughout the US are placed into grade levels primarily based on their chronological age. ?They begin kindergarten at roughly age five, presumably spend one school year in each grade level, and graduate from high school after completing twelfth grade at age eighteen. ?Thus, standards are primarily tied to chronological age, even though age is not explicitly stated.
Academic standards increase in rigor as students are promoted through the K-12 school system. ?When students fail to meet the proficiency standards and then move to the next grade level without the necessary pre-requisite skills, standards at each successive grade level become harder to achieve and the void continues to grow. ?Even the most skilled instructor will have difficulty filling the gaps. ?The resulting damage seeps beyond academics into areas of self-image, interest in school, and behavior.
A National Education Crisis
I wish I could say that this experience was an isolated event—that most students I taught entered my class in September with all or most of the pre-requisite skills and were promoted in June having achieved all or most of the current grade-level standards. ?But that just wasn’t the case for me or my colleagues at the Title I school where I taught. ?It also wasn’t typical for many of my peers who taught elsewhere in the Baltimore County Public School system, the twenty-fourth largest school district in the country. ?And, I’m deeply saddened to profess that as I talk with educators from around the United States—including administrators and former superintendents—this seems to be a common nationwide problem.
If you have any doubt as to the validity of my claim, take a look at some recent standardized test scores. ?The 2019 NAEP reading scores show that almost two-thirds of our students can’t read proficiently and while the math scores may appear to be a slightly better (at least for fourth grade students), the trend across grade levels highlights a significant concern. Only forty-one percent of fourth-graders, thirty-four percent of eighth-graders, and twenty-four percent of twelfth grade students scored proficient or better in math. ?Forty percent of the twelfth grade students scored below the NAEP Basic level. ?Not only are the proficiency levels extremely low, but the math scores decline as students “progress” through the school system. ?Perhaps the word “pushed” should be used instead of “progress.” ?Clearly, the gap continues to widen as students advance through the K-12 school system without having acquired the necessary skills in prior grade levels.
Just as I was shocked by the seemingly nonchalant reason given to me by a school administrator for passing this student along, I am appalled that this practice—promoting students from one grade to the next, despite failing to meet the proficiency standards—is so widely accepted as the norm in our education community. ?Maybe I haven’t been desensitized to this custom because I haven’t been in education my entire life—I was a CPA before I became a teacher—but this is wrong!
As a former elementary school teacher, I know how difficult it is to teach a curriculum to students when they have not met the proficiency standards of the prior grade level.?For example, the fourth grade math curriculum required students to work with numbers up to the one-million’s place; however, many fourth graders, like the student that I suggested be retained, couldn’t tell me what ten more or ten less would be of a given two-digit number, subtract with regrouping, measure to the nearest quarter of an inch, count money, use a number line, or round a three-digit number to the ten’s place. ?Students who were reading one or more grade levels behind had great difficulty reading and comprehending mathematical word problems. ?To be clear, poor reading skills have a deleterious effect on all subject areas because curriculums, textbooks, and assessments are written using language appropriate for the grade level in which they are used.
Yale University researchers found that three-quarters of poor readers in third grade will remain poor readers in high school. ?One high-school math teacher recently asked me, “How can I teach students about coordinate planes when they don’t even understand how to use a number line?” ?If children leave elementary school without the basic reading, writing, and mathematical skills, we are setting them up for failure—not only in the academic world, but also in the real world. Wasn’t the point of Common Core to ensure all students are ready for life after high school?
So I simply ask, “Why?” ?If the problem is so wide-spread, why don’t we do anything to correct it or stop it? ?Where is the tourniquet? ?Do we fail to recognize or treat the problem because we are embarrassed by the number of students who aren’t proficient in reading or math? ?Is it that our current system is easier than a restructured system that might work better? ?Is it that to redo the system is to admit that the current one is failing?
If this were a test, I would select “all of the above.”
Accountability for Meeting Proficiency Standards
Am I so na?ve to believe that proficiency standards should mean something but that they can only mean something if we hold students accountable for attaining them? ?Does it really matter how rigorous the Common Core standards are—or any state standards for that matter—if we don’t do anything when students fail to meet them? ?And while I’m suggesting that students need to be held accountable, the responsibility belongs to all of us.?It’s not just the children who are failing to meet the standards, the structure of the educational system is failing to teach and reach all learners. ?The root of the problem lies with the foundation of the K-12 system.
Our 21st century K-12 school system was designed in the 1800’s and hasn’t changed much since. ?We don’t really tie proficiency standards to individual courses or skills. ?We align the standards to grade-level content in elementary and middle school (i.e. First Grade Math, First Grade Reading, Second Grade Math, Second Grade Reading, etc.). ?Furthermore, we primarily place students in each of the K-12 grades based upon their chronological age. ?We don’t deviate from this age-based grouping until high school, and by then, it’s too late to help those who didn’t acquire the knowledge and skills expected in grade levels one through eight.
We have to recognize and admit that not all five-year-olds have the ability level to achieve the kindergarten standards for each subject within the same period of time—one school year—before moving on to first grade. ?The same can be said about every child, across all ages, all subjects, and all grade levels. ?If all children could equally progress and learn the same things within the same period of time, one could assume that every student graduating high school should have the same knowledge and abilities, be eligible for admittance to the same colleges, and be capable of holding the same jobs. ?Obviously that is not the case.
Equity in Education
We are all different, from birth to death. ?Our neurology develops at its own pace and each of us has innate strengths, abilities, and weaknesses in our intelligence, creativity, stamina, mental health, physical health, etc. ?We are also all different kinds of learners and have been exposed to a variety of experiences in our home environment.
We know these things as adults. ?That is why, as adults, we choose hobbies and careers that we’re good at and that we like. ?That is why, as adults, we tend to be attracted to people who can compensate for our weaknesses. ?And yet, academic expectations are a “one-size-fits-all.” ?We expect all children to be equally good at everything and to reach the same targets within the same period of time—one school year. ?A 2018 educational report from Australia debunks this expectation. ?It revealed a five to six year spread in abilities amongst students within the same grade. ?Any kindergarten teacher would tell you that students enter the school system already with varying degrees of academic readiness. ?Our current K-12 school system merely perpetuates it.
When I first started graduate school to become a teacher, one of my professors explained the difference between equality and equity as it pertains to education. ?She said, “Equality is giving every student the same thing in order to learn. ?Equity is giving each student what they need in order to learn.” ?I quickly saw what she meant when I entered the classroom as a teacher for the first time. ?Asking teachers to differentiate instruction isn’t enough to meet every student’s individual needs.
As much as we continue to hear the word “equity” in the news, especially in regards to education, the current K-12 school system is not equitable because it assumes that every student can meet the same proficiency standards for each subject within the same period of time. ?That is equality, not equity. ?Where are the equity advocates in this fight? ?Who is fighting for the students who graduate from high school unable to read, write, and do basic math? ?Who is fighting for the students who drop out of high school because they are tired of feeling like a failure each day because they are unable to work independently and are constantly getting feedback in the form of grades that say, “You can’t do this!”—grades that are meaningless because, in most cases, the students get promoted to the next grade level regardless of their poor grades.
In my home state of Maryland, a story was publicized earlier this year about a high-school senior in a Baltimore City public school who had only passed three classes over his entire four years of high school, and yet was slated to graduate up until the story became public. With a grade-point-average of 0.13, he ranked above half of his graduating class—meaning that more than half of the students who graduated had a grade-point-average lower than 0.13. ?While the high school received a lot of negative attention as a result of the story, the feeder schools (elementary and middle schools) deserve the same level of scrutiny. ?Students don’t begin high school and suddenly forget how to read, write, and solve mathematical problems. ?Those problems originated long ago in elementary school—likely in the very beginning. ?The problem was that the system allowed the students to “hemorrhage.” ?We must stop the bleed!
领英推荐
A New Vision: Competency-Based Progression
Holding students back who haven’t met the proficiency standards for a particular grade level may not be the answer, particularly if we don’t do anything different in the repeated year. But promoting them isn’t the solution either—that is equivalent to a surgeon handing a patient a Band-Aid. ?To do so increases the number of high-school drop-outs and produces a graduating class that isn’t truly ready for college or careers. ?So here’s an idea—you may call it progressive, radical, or just different. ?I would call it equitable.
What if we abolish the established K-12 school system and create a competency-based system that consists of courses with varying levels of expertise and allows students to transition from one course level to the next at their own pace, and only after they have demonstrated proficiency of the standards for that course. ?Once a student has demonstrated proficiency, the student would earn credit for the course. ?Students would officially graduate the public school system when they have earned enough credits—much like college. Furthermore, the progression through each course would be completely independent; thus, math courses would be completely independent of the progression through reading courses, science courses, art courses, etc., allowing each student to follow the path of their individual strengths.
In order to make the transition between levels more fluid, the school year might need to be divided into semesters or trimesters. ?But, unlike the current system that may have “marking periods” used primarily to start and end grading cycles, the new divisions would provide opportunities for students to transition to the next higher course level even if it was mid-year. This would accommodate extended time at each level if needed, but no more time than necessary—as students may only need three extra months to meet the proficiency levels in a course and not an entire extra school year. ?We would also need to consider if there is a statute of limitations. ?When has a student reached their maximum potential in each subject? We would need to establish a realistic minimum level of proficiency for reading, writing, and math—one that all students must achieve unless they have a legally mandated individualized program of instruction. ?And if a student could not move beyond that minimum level, other courses and programs should be offered to set them up for success in the real world. ?We should consider increasing access to a variety of trade school courses. Not everyone wants to or needs to go to college.
Benefits of the New Vision
This type of equitable progression would eliminate the age-based homogeneous groupings that exists today. ?Classes would consist of students with different ages, likely within a limited range. ?A mix of ages has some benefits. ?Older students could work as mentors with the younger students. ?They could use their emotional maturity and age-related experience in other areas—such as technical skills or communication skills—to steer collaborations, counsel, and even tutor the younger ones. ?Responsibilities such as these can encourage the older students to be a role model and removes the stigma that can result when students are held back. ?It also is beneficial to learning itself. ?Comprehension is solidified when anyone is required to explain their reasoning or provide instruction.
There are many other benefits to this type of plan:
?Challenges of the New Vision
While there are many benefits, there is no doubt that a restructure of this magnitude is complex and full of challenges. The most obvious issues include:
Potential Solutions
Yes, there would be challenges, most of which would need to be addressed by each individual district. ?But surely the education leaders, with the advice and counsel of teachers, could conquer them. ?For example, maybe buildings currently used to group students by age and grade level could be used to group students and teachers by subject matter. A campus set-up would be ideal where practical.
Or, we could keep students and teachers in the buildings as they are, but use virtual instruction as needed for situations where a student may need to access an instructor or class not at their location. ?The pandemic has shown there are some benefits to virtual instruction. This is one of them. ?Virtual instruction can help individualize instruction.
Another possibility is having classes with a defined band of age ranges, similar to the Montessori approach. ?The Montessori schools have three-year age ranges 3–6, 6–9, 9–12, etc. Courses and teachers that normally work with those ages would then be available to that cohort of students.
A different alternative could be what New South Wales, Australia is doing. ?They have agreed to try out an “untimed syllabuses” proposal after it was recommended following a two-year review of the curriculum. ?Schools are still organized into year groups but each group works at a different curriculum levels. ?Most importantly, each student will progress to a new syllabus at their own pace once they have mastered the prior syllabus.
These are all ideas and methods that we can look to for advice and suggestions. ?We may not need to completely re-invent the wheel, and we certainly need to test-drive that wheel before it is fully implemented. ?Teachers, parents and students should never be on the receiving end of untested, unproven, and unplanned ideas in education.
We Must Do Something Different
Skeptics will read my suggestions and dismiss them as too extreme . . . and there may be some truth to that assertion. ?But, what we are doing is not working for a majority of our students. ?If we truly want our students to be creative, innovative, forward-thinking problem solvers, then we need those same qualities in our education leaders.
Education has tried changing the standards, curriculums, instructional tools, assessments, teachers, and administrators. Here is the problem—you can't change how quickly each student learns. ?So let’s at least consider adapting our educational structure to their individual pace rather than imposing artificial curriculum pacing guidelines that in many cases, result in superficial promotions and graduations. ?A diploma needs to be more than a piece of paper. ?It should represent a promise that students are truly ready for college, a career, and most importantly, life.
?Suzanne Rupp DeMallie is the author of?Can You Hear Me Now?. She taught for seven years in the Baltimore County Public School system. Research into her own son’s learning difficulties led her to author the Classroom Auditory Learning Issues resolution, adopted by the National PTA in July, 2007. Her work has appeared in The Official Journal of The American Consortium for Equity in Education, TeachThought, Our Children Magazine, T.H.E. Journal, Towson Times, and The Baltimore Sun. She has presented at the National School Boards Association’s Annual Convention; to national, state, and local PTA groups; and to politicians. Suzanne was awarded a National PTA’s Life Achievement Award in May 2007, the highest honor from the nation's largest child advocacy organization and designated a 2021 Champion of Equity by the American Consortium for Equity in Education.
?