The UrbanDictionary provides one definition of “electile dysfunction” as, “Failureof the general populace to vote in any given election.”Apparently the results of last year’s town electionare perceived by some as failing to provide a mandate when it comes to theconduct of the Southbridge school committee.
Despite the fact that the two candidates who wereelected achieved that goal by a betterthan two to one margin over their next nearest competition, efforts at acounter-revolution persist.
This was clearly in evidence at last night’s schoolcommittee meeting.
Followers of The O’Zone who read last Saturday’sarticle “NoHoliday For Southbridge School Politics” and then watched last night’smeeting must have experienced a profound feeling of déjà vu.
The meeting was rife with factional division. The “temporaryacting superintendent” was effusive with self-praise during his Report of theSuperintendent. The same person was uncharacteristically unprepared when itcame to the Report of the Director of Finance & Operations.
Repeated shots were taken at the suspended Superintendent,the Middle/High School Principal, and the current leadership of the schoolcommittee. Simultaneously, the minority was unsparing in its praise for thecurrent “temporary acting superintendent”. All of these elements are in keepingwith the speculation laid out in the above cited article.
What’s apparent to me is that the minority isconvinced that these goals and tactics will win back the voters who turnedagainst them in the last election. As long as they cling to this conviction, Ifear that we will continue to have a profoundly dysfunctional situation withthe minority simultaneously seeking to restore the status quo ante as well as to convince the voting public that theywere mistaken last time around.
Changing gears, but somewhat within the same domain,is a subject that came up last night during the discussion about “interventionists”.
Pamela Abate, who the Worcester Telegram describes as“[heading] the math departments at both the middle and high school levels”spoke to the issue. In the course of her exposition, she remarked that theseinterventionists were needed because so many students move into a given gradelevel without mastering essential subject matter from the prior grade level.
This is a matter about which I am sorely vexed.
From what I have been able to gather, the wholeeducational system has become so fixated upon the socialization function thatit has taken a back seat to the educational function. Nowhere is this morepronounced than the prevailing attitude toward what is termed “retention”, whatwe used to call being held back.
Ms. Abate made direct reference to the phenomenon of“social promotion” where a student is promoted to the next grade level despitebeing unable to fulfill the academic requirements of their current grade level.Remedying this situation is the primary justification for the hiring of suchinterventionists.
My inquiries have revealed that this is a subjectthat has undergone dramatic change over the last several decades. The formersuperintendent, Dr. Dale Hanley was, I am told, a strong opponent of retention.
Perhaps my views are antediluvian, but I amconvinced that a decades-long relaxation in academic standards through an everincreasing tendency toward social promotion may have more to do with thedecline in educational performance than any other single factor.
What motivation is there for marginal orunder-achievers to invest serious effort when they know that they will beadvanced with no stigma of being held back if they do not perform? Further, towhat extent are those we perceive as over-achievers actually such when the baris lowered in this way? What potential damage is done to their psyche when theygraduate and are confronted by an environment where the standards for excellingare far more stringent?
I think that this is a subject that warrants athorough airing. It may explain a lot of why our educational system is failing –because of the unwillingness to deal with failure realistically. If we don’taccept that students can and do fail, then the blame will always be putelsewhere and the answer will always end up being to increase assessment models,personnel, tools and, ultimately, financial resources.
It also brings me back to wondering how we can havesuch sub-standard results in MCAS scores in lower grades whilethe high school manages to achieve a level I status. We have yet to receiveany kind of cogent explanation of how this can be.
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder