Tougher designation of 'low performing' schools raises troubling questions
Published September 24, 2015
Editorial by Winston-Salem Journal, September 23, 2015.
Just when we thought the state legislature’s treatment of public education couldn’t get any worse, the legislature hits a new low. It has redefined low-performing schools in a manner that greatly increases the number of those schools. But it’s giving no extra money or resources to those schools.
As the Journal’s Arika Heron reported last week, the state budget “changes the definition of a ‘low-performing school’ in a way that greatly expands the number of schools with the designation — a move that critics say serves to undermine low-income schools that are showing progress. Previously, low-performing schools were those that did not meet their academic growth expectations set by the state and had fewer than half of their students passing end-of-grade and end-of-course exams. The General Assembly just made that bar much higher. Now, low-performing schools are any that score a ‘D’ or ‘F’ on the state grading scale that was implemented last year and that didn’t exceed their expected growth.
“The change means that nearly a quarter of the state’s schools are now considered ‘low-performing.’”
The fact that the designation comes without money for fixes is confusing and perplexing. “That is a crock,” Lee Koch, principal at Ibraham Elementary School, said of the new designation. His school wouldn’t have been labeled “low-performing” under the old standard, but will under the new one. “It’s another way to destroy public education in North Carolina by changing perceptions,” he said.
And what’s worse is that, as Herron noted, “The same budget that changed the definition of ‘low-performing’ school expanded the state’s Opportunity Scholarship program, which gives low-income students grants to leave the public school system in favor of private schools.”
We can understand frustration on the part of public-school educators after years of shoddy treatment from the legislature. And the lack of transparency from the legislature on this measure is unacceptable and only added to the tension. This measure was not debated in a bill on the House or Senate floors, as the Journal noted, but was tucked into the appropriations bill.
Yet this designation issue is a serious one. Schools designated as “low-performing” must notify parents, not just that the school received a “D” or an “F,” but that it’s been tagged by the state as low-performing, the Journal reported. That hurts morale at schools, for educators, students and parents.
We have serious questions about the state’s new designation system and the way in which it was approved, giving little time for public input. Forsyth Superintendent Beverly Emory could have told legislators more about how her district developed its own scale, because the state grades did not reflect an important factor, growth.
But once again, the legislature has given educators the cold shoulder. Once again, this legislature has failed in its responsibility to engage all shareholders to better our public education system.
Once again, this legislature has failed our children, who are our future.
