The purpose and value of an education part IV: Case in Point
An editorial by Bruce Desmond

The State Department of Education very recently announced that, according to recent MCAS results, the Kennedy School and the Healey School, are considered underperforming schools. Based solely on MCAS scores, the state has given them this de-facto label declaring them underperforming. Let me tell you all right now, without any hesitation, neither of those schools is underperforming. That’s not to say there aren’t improvements to be made, there are always improvements to be made. It’s a continuous process of evaluation, recommendation, and implementation. However, there are teachers and programs in each of these schools that have been and should be used as models for schools around the state. The work produced by the students and staff in these schools continues to be recognized year after year on a national level. Yet, the state believes that this one test is enough to declare an entire school as underperforming. At the risk of repeating myself, the majority of people don’t realize that standardized testing on a large scale, such as MCAS, is based on the erroneous assumption that everyone who takes the test has an equal chance of passing. That simply isn’t true.

The world isn’t that simple. All kids aren’t the same. They have different strengths and weaknesses. They have different backgrounds, different home environments, different problems and different abilities. The Somerville Public Schools educate Regular Ed students, Special Ed students, ELL students, and students of many different cultures and economic backgrounds, and they all have to take the same standardized test. The state doesn’t take into consideration that some of the ELL students and their families have only been in this country a very short time, or the Special Ed students who overcome severe disabilities and conditions just to get to school, yet give a 110% of themselves each and every day pursuing an education and being a valued and productive part of the school community. It doesn’t take into consideration the kids that have part time jobs after school or at night, trying to help out at home. It doesn’t consider the kids who are at home at night but have no help or support because mom or dad are out working their second or third job trying to make ends meet.
For the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to create one standardized test and make a judgment of every kid and every teacher and every program in these two schools, based solely on that one test is not only ludicrous, it’s immoral. The de-facto label of “under-performing” demoralizes staff, students, and parents, as well as the overall spirit of the school. When I say it causes more harm than good, this is exactly what I mean. Furthermore, I submit to you that the people sitting in judgment, and handing out this label have never stepped one foot into either the Kennedy or Healey schools, and yet they have the nerve to assume they know more about your school and the progress of your  child’s education than you do. It simply isn’t right.
  Whether readers agree with my thoughts on education and standardized tests or not, I hope you can keep an open mind to alternative methods of making school systems accountable, and I do believe they should be held accountable. The following are alternatives that would provide an accountability that should satisfy the state without sacrificing educational integrity or placing ridiculous labels on schools.

• Standards and proficiencies should be developed by the local school districts for each grade level and ability level.
• Curriculums and schedules for curriculum implementation should be developed locally.
• All standards, proficiencies, curriculums, and curriculum schedules should be submitted annually to the Massachusetts Department of Education for inspection.
• Methods of student assessments should be developed by teachers and consist of student’s portfolios and annual departmental tests with equal weight being given to both when determining a students progression in that subject area.
• Assessment results for each district should be submitted to the Dept. of Education on an annual basis for recommendations concerning adjustments to any of the locally developed categories.
• The 990 hours rule for the school year should be eliminated and we should return to the standard 180 day school year. This would allow local districts more flexibility in scheduling the school day.
• Create summer curriculums within the commonwealth’s college and university system for teacher development and renewal of certification. Renewal procedures should remain the same as they currently are under the Dept. of Education.
• Allow unannounced spot inspection and auditing of schools and school systems by the Dept. of Education and/or the New England Association of Schools and Colleges.

These methods would combine local control with the current system of state involvement in public education. School districts would be accountable to the state for the development of responsible curriculums. Locally developed curriculums would insure the creation of systems that meet the needs of that local student population, and curriculums and assessments would be created by the people who are most aware of the student’s strength and weaknesses while still being monitored by the state. Millions of taxpayers dollars currently spent on testing agencies would be saved and hundreds of school systems around the commonwealth could review the most effective plans being used by other districts and adopt them for their own system. No system is perfect, but this alternative is a healthier, more effective way to educate the wide spectrum of kids and still remain accountable to the state. More importantly, it is more responsive to the students, the teachers, and the families of the commonwealth.
In conclusion; It is true that an education should be used to enable a person to contribute to the economic well being of both themselves and their community, but to limit it to simply this goal makes it only a mechanical process with a shallow purpose. It links each person’s value only to what they are able to purchase, consume, and produce. Eventually, the dignity of an individual human life would go unrecognized, and the values and principals our country was founded upon, would begin to decay and vanish. We can do better. 

Bruce Desmond is an Alderman at Large, President of the Somerville Board of Aldermen and a member of the Somerville School Committee