Education system doesn’t measure results well

By Jonathan R. Narcisse

On Jan. 8, 2002, President George W. Bush signed into law the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, which enjoyed overwhelming bipartisan support. The late Sen. Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts championed the legislation in Congress. The Iowa delegation supported the measure unanimously. The hope was to create a standard of excellence for public education in the United States.

Nearly a decade later, we find anything but a standard of excellence or authentic measurements for excellence in our public schools.

In September, the Culver administration released “The State Report Card for No Child Left Behind” for 2008-09. Of Iowa's 1,442 public schools, 293, or 20.3 percent, were identified as schools in need of assistance. Of Iowa's 362 public school districts, 24 or 6.6 percent were identified as districts in need of assistance.

Of the schools in need of assistance or failing schools in Iowa, 140 are located in Iowa's 10 largest cities – Ames, Cedar Rapids, Council Bluffs, Davenport, Des Moines, Dubuque, Iowa City, Sioux City, Waterloo and West Des Moines. Only 25 are in school districts with enrollments fewer than 1,000.

Of the 33 high schools serving Iowa's 10 largest cities, only one - Dubuque Hempstead - isn't officially failing.

Is the criteria that determines “official” relevant? Are 96.97 percent of our urban high schools really failing? Are 100 percent of our 257 school districts with fewer than 1,000 students really succeeding?

Or is the real problem the lack of true academic leadership that should have initiated meaningful standards to determine excellence, success, and progress for our students?

The absence of true leadership from politicians has led to the perpetuation of a system that fails to serve students' long-term interests.

Iowa has a growth model. What does this mean? Have we established true measurements to ensure student progress or are we gaming the system?

The legislative focus is on small districts consolidating, yet this standard suggests it is our largest districts that need fixing. Why isn't there a correlation between the conversation to improve education in Iowa and the primary measurement we use to judge our schools?

As the legislative session progresses, we know education will be a hot topic. It always is. Especially education funding. At what point, however, do we address statewide standards?

In 1991, the Fisher Commission was convened toward the task of restoring fiscal integrity to state government. Leaders of both parties implemented many of the findings.

In 2010, the Culver administration and the Legislature should convene a similar commission tasked with creating meaningful statewide standards and measurements, and establishing meaningful data and research-driven strategies to improve education. It should include an in-depth examination of best practices, ways to create true parent and community support and engagement in schools, strategies to create a pre-k through 16 education system, teacher education and training, administrator education and training, and strategies to best use Iowa's state and local tax resources to fund education.

This process should be inclusive but most of all it should be based in one primary outcome – what is best for our students.

Jonathan R. Narcisse is a long-standing statewide education advocate and most recently was a member of the Des Moines school board.