There are two ways to fix a failing school system. One is from the top down. National and state lawmakers have used a variety of techniques to boost academic achievement. For instance, President Bush's new education law, passed this January, aims at increasing federal funding for poor urban districts, while at the same time calling for even more proficiency tests. On Tuesday, representatives from several big-city school districts, including Buffalo, met with officials from the education department on how to implement the law.
At the same time, the Supreme Court held a divided session yesterday on whether or not it is constitutional for a state to hand out vouchers to students in poor-performing school districts like Cleveland, Ohio's.
Although these top-down measures deserve some praise for their intent, they are also plagued with underlying problems. First of all, they are slow. The new federal tests won't be released until at least 2005. Second, they can't see the trees from the forest. The government often uses politically sound, blanket measures. Their success is largely determined by whether or not test scores have rose, and if enough money was invested or wasted in the process. Individual schools and students are thus relegated to matters of fiscal policy.
This forces the issue back into the hands of the people who have to live and work with the problem. Instead of fixing schools from the top down, they work from the bottom up, and can determine from first-hand experience if their students are actually learning anything.
That's why teachers and administrators, such as Kensington High School Principal Geraldine Horton are the most vital components of the learning process. Horton was recently featured in The Buffalo News as a principal using the limited resources the city and the state provides to help improve her school.
Before last semester, the school was suffering from severe disciplinary and organizational problems. Tardiness was rampant (according to The News, about 200 students every day), and gang-related violence made its halls unsafe. Consequentially, Kensington was well below the state standards in test scores and other proficiency measures.
But since Horton became principal last December, the school has improved remarkably. Horton moved older, disruptive students with little credit hours into alternative learning programs, making the school safer. She also created special remedial classes to help boost student scores. Mixing a "get-tough" approach with a certain amount of sensitivity, Horton listens to student concerns as well as teachers', and works with both sides to reach resolutions. As a result of the changes, average tardiness has dropped from 200 to about 60 students a day, and parents, teachers and students alike feel that their school is much more safe.
State and federal lawmakers should look at the example provided by Horton and other educators like her, and re-examine their own efforts. Applying millions of dollars to the bleeding schools and enforcing rigorous test standards are only worthy measures if done correctly.
Leave it to administrators like Horton to pick up the slack. But in reality, she didn't single-handedly improve Kensington by herself. Horton actually had the assistance of officials from the state education department to help her reorganize the high school. Unfortunately, not every school can have a leader like Horton.
This is where the state and federal government should come in. These agencies must institute policies that solve the problems of troubled schools on the individual level, by implementing measures that make sure the most competent teachers and administrators are in place. But until that actually happens, Horton's example should be modeled by every principal and every teacher in any district.
Photo: Breadchastick / Wikimedia Commons
