Repeat Offender

A few years ago the Oklahoma State Legislature passed a law stating that third-graders who score Unsatisfactory in reading on the Oklahoma Core Curriculum Test must be retained.  This law will go into effect this school year.  They were kind enough to allow certain exceptions to the law if the student can meet one of the Six Good Cause Exceptions.  If, after being held back, the student still does not score above Unsatisfactory on the OCCT he can be retained again.

If a student has already been retained once in the third grade and then scores an Unsatisfactory again, the school must provide an intensive acceleration class that focuses on increasing the child's reading level at least two grade levels in one school year.

This Intensive Acceleration Class must meet certain criteria.

1. It must have a reduced teacher-student ratio.
• Sounds great to me, often times students learn better in small groups
• One problem-who else will be in the small group?  Will it be a mix of abilities?  No! It will be all the kids that scored Unsatisfactory on the test.  Research indicates that small groups work if they are of mixed ability groups, but to use them all day for students with low academic scores is counter productive.
2. It must have a high-performing teacher.
• Great idea again, I want every student to have a high performing teacher.  Those that struggle with learning deserve a high performing teacher to increase the chance of growth out of the Unsatisfactory category.
• But wait, doesn't the teacher get graded now on how many students score proficient on the test?  How many teachers want to be stuck a class full of students that start out in the Unsatisfactory and be expected to get them to pass the test?  I am not saying it is impossible, but it is a very steep hill to climb.  Many of the students that score in this category are not just a little behind, they are more than one grade level behind.  
• This also means that the students scoring Limited Knowledge, Proficient, or Advanced are missing out on having this high-performing teacher and many of those that were on the bubble run the risk of slipping down a category thereby increasing the number of students scoring Unsatisfactory the next year.  Can someone say Catch 22?
3. It must provide uninterrupted reading instruction for most of the school day.
• Sounds good, but what does uninterrupted mean?  Does that mean no restroom breaks? No PE or Music? No calls from the office? Or no subjects in between?
• What does most of the day mean? 51% of the day? Or just more than the other subjects (40% reading, 30% math, 15% science and 15% social studies)?
4. It must give students the opportunity to master the fourth-grade Oklahoma C3 Standards in other core subject areas.
• Let me get this straight, they need to have intensive reading instruction to get them up to third grade reading level while teaching the fourth grade standards in all other subjects.
• This implies that they have mastered the third grade standards in all these subjects.
• If they scored Unsatisfactory in reading, chances are they do not have a grasp on the other subjects as well.
5. It must provide intensive language and vocabulary instruction using a scientifically research-based program, including the use of a speech-language therapist.
• Did that just imply that all students scoring Unsatisfactory also need speech therapy?
• It doesn't say it could include the use of a speech-language therapist, it says including meaning no matter if the students need it or not, they are going to get it.  
6. It must monitor student progress weekly.
• Who wrote this nonsense?  This is an insult to teachers because it implies that they don't monitor their kids.  It implies that teachers don't check, assess, evaluate, monitor, encourage, or coax their students often enough.  It almost makes it sound like the teachers don't worry about the progress of the students until the test arrives.
7. The district must also offer this student the option of being served in a transitional instructional setting designed to help them meet the fourth-grade Oklahoma C3 Standards, while continuing the remediation of the reading deficiency.
• I think I addressed this on number 4 already.

Now the part that is really impressive (implied sarcasm) to me about these regulations is the fact that the student could rejoin his fourth grade class mid year.  Sounds like an incentive to some, but in reality it is just setting the kid up to be bullied.  For those of you that have not worked with fourth graders, some of them can be relentless in their teasing.  Not only is the teasing a factor here, but also realize this student miraculously progressed more than a year in a single semester.  It must be because the teacher monitored him weekly this time around.  

My question at this point is, who wrote this garbage?  It certainly wasn't anyone that has ever worked in a school or worked with kids of diversity.  Over 80% of my kids are on free/reduced meals.  Many of those kids don't know if they will eat each night or who will be watching them (if anyone will be).  When they arrive at school they are in no state to learn and before they can learn they have to feel safe and loved.  Whether you believe in Maslow's work or not, there is significant support for this premise.  If you don't have these basic needs met, you will have little success in fulfilling the other cognitive needs.  All the Intensive Accelerated instruction in the world will not matter if the kid is hungry and doesn't have someone in their life that cares about them and looks after them.  

Another point, how does the state department score us for growth in these areas?  We may not have shown significant cognitive growth, but we have sure made progress in meeting the other needs of the students.  

The worst part of this is that it sets things up so that there is the possibility of a student being retained multiple times and the high performing instructors will likely be leaving the profession because doing well on the test insures that they will be given the worst performing students the next year.  Because they are so good at their job, they get the honor of working with the lowest scoring students in the building and are expected to bring them up to grade level.

I am a conservative person and typically vote for a Republican candidate because most of the time they line up with what I value.  If the state representatives and senators continue to churn out such asinine education legislation they will not receive my vote or any other educator for that matter (unless they are on Dr. B's Novocain and nitrous cocktail).  When parents begin to realize what the outcome of this legislation will be, I can guarantee that they will vote similarly.  

Don't get me wrong, I believe that all students can learn and can be successful.  I also know that the likelihood of that happening when survival is the primary focus of some of these students is almost nil.  How do we fix that problem?