Gov. Christie
A few months ago New Jersey Governor Chris Christie said that "Maybe we can stop the arguing and bickering for a while," referring to the ongoing acrimony between him and the New Jersey Education Association. It appears that the Governor is acting on his words. He hasn't said anything Youtube-worthy against teachers, and after last month's elections did not change the Democratically-controlled legislature, Christie implored lawmakers to pass legislation aimed at providing vouchers for children in poor districts, opening more charter schools, and improving teacher quality.
The problem is that these proposals are flawed. For the most part, parents and students in high-achieving districts know that Gov. Christie isn't talking about them when he refers to the broken education system in New Jersey. Residents in a town such as Haddonfield, where the average SAT score is 1732, don't have much to complain about because their children aren't being denied admission to the schools of their choice. In addition, those same children end up graduating from college at very high rates. This success is repeated all over the state; New Jersey ranks in the top five nationally in every academic category in K-12 education.
So where are the complaints coming from? It's hard to say. There have been little if any calls for the kinds of changes that Gov. Christie claims so many parents want. When polled, most parents report that they are satisfied with their children's education. This doesn't suggest that improvements couldn't or shouldn't be made, but it clearly illustrates that much of the rhetoric regarding New Jersey's public schools is terribly out of step with reality. Even the schools that perform at the very bottom rarely get called out by the parents and students whom they serve.
Another critical point that Gov. Christie chooses to leave out of most discussions regarding education is what takes place outside of the school day. He recently asked, "We spend $20,000 a year on Camden students...and what do we have to show for it?" Good question. For almost two decades Abbott schools--the 31 lowest-income districts--have seen dramatic increases in state funding. In theory, it looks plausible--the more money spent per student, the greater the achievement. But a closer look at the numbers reveals that the status quo is alive and well; students in Camden, Paterson, and Atlantic City are earning the same scores on state and national tests as they did in 1990, so it clearly isn't about the money. Pointing a finger at teachers and schools is politically expedient, but it doesn't provide answers to why low-income students consistently underperform.
One place to look is the home. According to the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), parental involvement is key. Students whose parents read books with them during their first year of primary school show much higher scores than those whose parents do not, regardless of family income. But how do we legislate better parenting?
To be clear, there is a "shameful learning gap in the state," as Education Commissioner Chris Cerf said recently in discussing the Governor's bills. Changing tenure laws and opening more charter schools will not, however, change the fundamental problems plaguing students in low-income areas. Every governor, state education commissioner and legislator knows this, but continuing the cunard makes for great press, and it makes the problem look solvable. Until governments are willing to either admit that education gaps, just as economic gaps, are a fact of life, or do something about the problems of poverty, nothing will change except who gets unfairly blamed. No matter what happens in the state legislature, there is one thing we can count on: high-achieving districts will continue to develop academically well-prepared students, and low-income students will maintain the status quo.
The problem is that these proposals are flawed. For the most part, parents and students in high-achieving districts know that Gov. Christie isn't talking about them when he refers to the broken education system in New Jersey. Residents in a town such as Haddonfield, where the average SAT score is 1732, don't have much to complain about because their children aren't being denied admission to the schools of their choice. In addition, those same children end up graduating from college at very high rates. This success is repeated all over the state; New Jersey ranks in the top five nationally in every academic category in K-12 education.
So where are the complaints coming from? It's hard to say. There have been little if any calls for the kinds of changes that Gov. Christie claims so many parents want. When polled, most parents report that they are satisfied with their children's education. This doesn't suggest that improvements couldn't or shouldn't be made, but it clearly illustrates that much of the rhetoric regarding New Jersey's public schools is terribly out of step with reality. Even the schools that perform at the very bottom rarely get called out by the parents and students whom they serve.
Another critical point that Gov. Christie chooses to leave out of most discussions regarding education is what takes place outside of the school day. He recently asked, "We spend $20,000 a year on Camden students...and what do we have to show for it?" Good question. For almost two decades Abbott schools--the 31 lowest-income districts--have seen dramatic increases in state funding. In theory, it looks plausible--the more money spent per student, the greater the achievement. But a closer look at the numbers reveals that the status quo is alive and well; students in Camden, Paterson, and Atlantic City are earning the same scores on state and national tests as they did in 1990, so it clearly isn't about the money. Pointing a finger at teachers and schools is politically expedient, but it doesn't provide answers to why low-income students consistently underperform.
One place to look is the home. According to the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), parental involvement is key. Students whose parents read books with them during their first year of primary school show much higher scores than those whose parents do not, regardless of family income. But how do we legislate better parenting?
To be clear, there is a "shameful learning gap in the state," as Education Commissioner Chris Cerf said recently in discussing the Governor's bills. Changing tenure laws and opening more charter schools will not, however, change the fundamental problems plaguing students in low-income areas. Every governor, state education commissioner and legislator knows this, but continuing the cunard makes for great press, and it makes the problem look solvable. Until governments are willing to either admit that education gaps, just as economic gaps, are a fact of life, or do something about the problems of poverty, nothing will change except who gets unfairly blamed. No matter what happens in the state legislature, there is one thing we can count on: high-achieving districts will continue to develop academically well-prepared students, and low-income students will maintain the status quo.
posted by olgapolites at 3:52 PM
0 comments
