Critical Thinking & Analysis -- An Essential 21st Century Skill

One of the real joys of my job is the opportunity to observe exciting teaching and learning; this past Friday I was fortunate to observe two wonderful social studies lessons, both of which pushed 5th graders into greater critical thinking and analysis.  Unless you are lucky enough to be in today's classrooms, you probably are not aware of the extent to which teaching and learning has changed.  Students are no longer simply memorizing and regurgitating names, dates, and conclusions; rather, they are thinking hard about historical situations, analyzing the different interests of the parties involved, and working toward their own analysis and understanding using primary sources from the time.  This kind of analysis is frequently mentioned as a 21st century skill, and I completely agree that all of our students need to develop this ability and to become excellent critical thinkers.  Seeing what's happening in our classrooms is wonderful; students are indeed being taught these skills, and they are responding with engagement and learning.

Sometimes, though, I am puzzled by what appears to be a lack of critical thinking in some of the media reporting today about educational issues, and it seems to me that everyone could use the lessons I saw last Friday in the two 5th grade classrooms.  Recently, for example, newspapers reported the results from the international PISA testing, pointing out that the overall U.S. results were in the middle of the group, and using this to again say that our schools are failing.  Interestingly, though, this year's PISA results were reported somewhat differently, in that the U.S. data was provided disaggregated by schools at different poverty levels.  When you look at the disaggregated data and take the U.S. schools with a poverty level of 10% or less those schools outscored every other nation except Shanghai.  The newspaper articles I saw did not mention this, though -- they were fine with simply reporting what they saw as yet another failure of U.S. schools, and didn't think it important to point out that our schools in affluent areas outscore the world, while our schools in poverty-stricken areas come in last.  Drawing on what they learned last Friday about propaganda, and about presenting information to achieve a particular purpose, I think our 5th graders might now ask what the intent or purpose is of those who wish to paint all our schools as failing, and hopefully as adults they will continue to ask these kinds of questions, delving deeper, and demanding thoughtful answers to important questions. (You can find the disaggregated PISA data on-line, if you are interested, and/or read a related article by Gerald Tirozzi in the NASSP Newsleader -- http://www.principals.org/NewsLeader.)

NCLB Measures vs. Actual Student Achievement

I recently read a very interesting paper from the Center on Education Policy entitled "How Many Schools and Districts Have Not Made Adequate Yearly Progress?  Four-Year Trends" (available at http://www2.ed.gov/admins/lead/account/consolidated/index.html).  Aside from the obvious fact that over time more schools and districts are failing to make AYP (inherent in the definition of AYP, which requires equal increments of progress, in all subgroups, toward the goal of 100% proficiency by 2014), the paper contained some fascinating comparisons and illustrated huge discrepancies in NCLB performance among the different states.

But do the differences in NCLB performance really reflect actual comparative student achievement?  In 2009, in Massachusetts, 79% of school districts did not make AYP -- a huge percentage! -- and these districts are thus subject to federal sanctions, which could include replacing principals and teachers, paying for private tutoring for students, and/or transporting students to other schools and districts, all of which are costly.  In addition, the publicity about the NCLB "failure" of Massachusetts schools decreases parental and community trust and support for the schools.  By comparison, in the same year, 2009, in Alabama, only 2% of districts did not make AYP -- thus, only 2% of Alabama districts are subject to federal sanctions and 98% of Alabama districts are regarded as doing well.  Are Alabama schools really that much better than Massachusetts schools?  Well, on the last NAEP testing, Massachusetts schools were 1st in the nation on the 4th and 8th grade math tests, while Alabama schools were 50th. (The other NAEP test results show similar, although less dramatic, differences.)

This comparison raises many questions for me -- among others, why are we in Massachusetts setting ourselves up for failure, criticism, and compliance with expensive and detrimental sanctions when our schools are doing well on the NAEP national tests and are doing better than other states where the schools are not subject to the sanctions? The federal sanctions seem almost designed to be detrimental to good schools (and there are many good schools and districts in Massachusetts that did not make AYP).  There also is no evidence that any of these sanctions is effective in improving schools. So. . .  why are we in Massachusetts setting ourselves up for federal sanctions and loss of local control and support for our schools when other states are not?  Is there a political agenda being served here?  And, if so, whose agenda is it?  I think these are important questions to think about and to answer, before we end up doing serious damage to our public school system. . .