Latest News and Comment from Education

Wednesday, February 4, 2015

Complicating Poverty | educarenow

Complicating Poverty | educarenow:



Complicating Poverty

In Academic State Champs: Michigan’s Top 25 School Districts, Michigan’sBridge, an on-line magazine, has come out with an attempt to rank schools in a way that factors in the variable of poverty.
Any attempt to rank schools that factors in the concern of poverty must be better than most, right?
I guess so, if you accept that the competitive, market driven model of ranking schools is acceptable, or that rankings based on achievement data is in any way useful.
And if you accept that poverty can be considered without also considering the ways in which race functions in our society and schools.
And if you accept that the real way to change children’s education is by addressing in-school factors while avoiding the impact of out-of-school factors.
I, on the other hand, accept none of these.
Allow me to explain.
But before doing so, let me applaud this attempt by the Bridge.  I think it is a genuine dive into the issue of poverty.  At least they accept that poverty has an impact on education. However, by accepting the myths I outline below, Bridge continues that failed narrative of “failing schools,” which hurts all of us, especially our kids, by misdirecting good intentions.
Myth 1- standardized tests measure learning.
In determining its rankings, Bridge makes the fundamental assumption that test scores measure learning.  They don’t. Bridge recognizes that, “To a frustrating level, school test scores track the socioeconomic status of the children who walk Complicating Poverty | educarenow: