Problems inhibiting permanent change in low-performing schools

Ω

The story of America’s failed efforts to turn around the lowest-performing schools can be summed up in the tale of Markham Middle School. Located in the Watts neighborhood of Southeastern Los Angeles, Markham’s student body is predominantly low-income Latino and African American students. In 1997, the state of California labeled the school a low-performing school. In that year, the average Markham student scored at the 16th percentile in math and the 12th percentile in reading. Since then, the situation has only gotten worse.

Under the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) law, school districts are supposed to take dramatic action when a school like Markham continues to show such low student performance. Yet in the new Education Sector report Restructuring 'Restructuring': Improving Interventions for Low-Performing Schools and Districts, Senior Policy Analyst Rob Manwaring finds that school districts and states often avoid making the hard choices that might lead to real reform.

Manwaring documents how few states and districts use the tools provided to them by NCLB. Instead of closing schools or replacing personnel, districts and states most often choose other, less aggressive actions. So they hire consultants. They redesign the curriculum. They create smaller learning communities.

Markham Middle School has tried most of these reforms with no success. It has also received over $3 million in state and federal remediation funds. According to Manwaring:

"Markham Middle School is still, educationally speaking, a wreck. Sixteen percent of teachers are working under an emergency credential, 30 percent of classes in core academic subjects are taught by teachers who are not 'highly qualified' … only 3 percent of students scored proficient in math, and only 11 percent met that goal in English."

The Obama administration has made "turnaround" a major priority—vowing to fundamentally restructure and reshape the nation’s lowest-performing schools. And, with $3 billion in the stimulus and more promised through the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, there is a unique opportunity in the months and years ahead to dramatically improve our country’s lowest-performing schools.

Not all turnaround efforts will be successful, but allowing the status quo to continue in these lowest-performing schools is also not acceptable, argues Manwaring. Improvement funding is already being distributed to states, and it will be largely up to states to ensure that districts use this funding to support sustainable reform at their lowest-performing schools. Granting the funding is only the first step. States must follow through and ensure that districts meet the commitments that they are making by receiving these funds.

Restructuring 'Restructuring' lays out a series of specific policy changes that can be made at the local, state, and federal levels. As the federal government begins the reauthorization of ESEA, this new Education Sector report provides an excellent opportunity to broaden awareness of this issue—and to lay the groundwork for policy changes at all three levels.