A Report Card

One of the things that drove me to run for the Richmond School Board was curiosity. We've all seen the numbers and heard the stories of waste and incompetence in the school system, and I wondered, "Is it really so bad and what can be done to fix the problems?"

I feel very fortunate to have had the opportunity to serve for two years and answer those questions for myself. So that the effort does some good other than my own gratification, I attempt here and in next week's column to pass on my impressions and offer suggestions to the incoming board and the city about how we can have a better school system.

My observations are, of course, by no means definitive. In a system of 24,000 children and more than 2,000 teachers, there are many experiences and levels of satisfaction. There are some parents who are tickled pink with the education their children receive, and many others who say that things are OK. My impression is those opinions don't form a majority.

The most important element of any school system is academics. Everything else should be built around support for delivering knowledge to children, which happens mostly in the classroom. In this regard, there has been a good deal of improvement over the past few years.

There is plenty of credit to go around on this count. First recognition must go to the teachers, who have transformed their way of working and have concentrated on making sure their kids are test-ready.

If pressed to identify an individual responsible for the change, I would name Yvonne Brandon, currently the interim superintendent, previously the assistant superintendent for instruction during our years of improvement. Her command of the data, analysis of what they mean, and insistence on conformity to standards has provided the bedrock for the improvements we have seen.

. . .

I recently spent several days in the classrooms of some of our most challenged schools. In every single class, the teacher wrote on the board what was to be accomplished that day, usually tied to an SOL (Standards of Learning) objective. That reveals an impressive degree of focus and clarity of purpose that certainly didn't exist during my school years.

Though they are often derided by the education establishment and even parents, I don't believe we would have anything to celebrate now without the SOLs. They are based on the principles of Core Knowledge developed by Virginia's own E.D. Hirsch, and enacted in their present form through the far-sighted efforts of Kirk Schroder, past president of the State Board of Education.

The SOLs are based on a simple but powerful insight Hirsch developed through his research: Reading comprehension is tied to knowledge and not simply the mechanical ability to decipher words through a combination of sounds.

This does not mean the SOLs are a panacea. They come with the problems that accompany most any test: time diverted from new learning and an emphasis on the specific knowledge to be tested.

The SOLs are a fine set of guidelines and measurement tools, but they would be impotent without the stick provided by part of the federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) legislation.

What NCLB has done is put schools on a wartime footing. For a very long time classroom incompetence went undetected. Grades were issued and kids graduated, only later to discover the deficiencies of their educations.

Now poor teachers have nowhere to hide. Failure turns up in test scores, and administrators -- who are eager to avoid sanctions -- address those problems. As at the start of any war, peacetime indolence quickly came to light and many educators not up to the task weeded themselves out. That exodus, coupled with strict content-area tests for new teachers, raised the quality of the teaching pool.

. . .

Not all academic news is good. Though the performance of our poor children is above the state average, children not considered poor are below average. There is also evidence that our brightest children, as a group, are suffering.

SAT scores for students hoping to go to college are well below the state average. Similarly, the pass rate for Advanced Placement (AP) tests is about 15 percent, compared with 60-plus percent statewide, even with our participation rate only a third of the state average.

We have made academic progress, but there remains much to do. Initial efforts are reaching a plateau. New strategies need to be put in place now if we are to see continued improvement. This is especially true for our most capable children.

. . .

Academics are the most important -- but far from the only -- thing an education should deliver. Time spent in school should prepare students to understand and live in the world around them. Part of that living is being able to interact with others and understanding the value of good behavior.

In many ways, the soft skills we impart are more important than the hard. Few employers are going to care if an employee can factor a polynomial equation, but many care very much about showing up on time, being neatly dressed, and speaking standard English.

To the degree that young people are not exhibiting the qualities most people consider basic, the fault is our own. It is not a part of our policy or our system to take on such challenges. Many teachers consider that not to be a part of their job. If it isn't part of the job, we as a community need to make it one. I know that so many kids aren't learning these soft skills at home -- which makes it even more important that they learn them at school.

At one time, far in our progressive past, public education was considered a way to "elevate the masses." It was viewed as a means of leveling the playing field, so that everyone had a chance at success and not just people from "good" families. We need to remember that goal.

There's no real point in arguing whether we should focus on behavior or academics, because they can't be separated. Someone who is not paying attention likely isn't learning. Students who can't be convinced to tuck their shirttails in are unlikely to grasp how important it is to use good grammar.

Shirt tucks are actually a point of contention within the system. Board policy says shirts should be tucked in. And yet, visit any high school and you will see many students -- even teachers -- with shirt tails stretching toward the ground. I mention this not because tucked shirts enhance learning to any degree whatsoever, but as an illustration that we are unable to set standards and maintain them.

The inability to create an orderly and respectful environment becomes a greater problem as children grow older. By high school, the unresponsive fifth-grader has become a safety problem.

. . .

How do we create a respectful environment? Not by cracking down. As someone accustomed to military discipline and who fully supports the idea that consequences should follow actions, I think we long ago passed a point of diminishing returns with cracking down.

The idea that we should press harder has resulted in an application of discipline that is harsh, loud, and inconsistent. It's an interesting paradox that the louder and tougher RPS personnel seem, the worse the behavior of students. With metal detectors at the doors and security guards at every corner, our high schools -- and some of the middle schools -- feel more like prisons than places of learning.

Our goal should be to train people for their place in a free society, not prison.

One solution to our behavior problems is to remove disruptive children from regular classrooms until they are ready to behave. While the school system should and does work at educating students as long as they are in the district, our first emphasis must be the majority of students who show up ready to learn. When I visited Armstrong High School during a recent period of troubles, there were no stronger supporters for removing troublemakers than the students themselves. The privately run Capital City Program (CCP) has been a godsend for dealing with the hardest high school cases. From many accounts, our high schools are much safer and more orderly with the coming of CCP. But the program doesn't address the middle school problem, neither does it accept special education students, who constitute 20 percent of our population and many of our discipline problems.

. . .

Better than transferring problem students to alternative environments would be to institute a system that encourages positive social behavior from the beginning.

It can be done.

It would start with insisting that teachers receive respect from students, parents, and administrators. There should be an unwritten rule -- if not a policy -- that teachers are considered knowledgeable, professional, and correct until proven otherwise. Such an attitude would require that, in return, teachers conform to well-tailored standards of dress and demeanor.

The No. 1 request from the Richmond Education Association (REA) is enhanced safety and security. This is not an unreasonable request. Many teachers maintain an orderly and respectful class. We need to take it to the next level by emulating their examples throughout the system.

Teachers and administrators who are having trouble should be given more training. This is something teachers, parents, and students all want. We're helping no one by not giving it to them.
Keith West will be leaving the Richmond School Board in January. He has represented the 7th District. Contact him at .