One of the reasons American students don't do as well as they could is that we don't ask enough of them. Students--and sometimes parents-- think teachers who assign lots of homework or expect hard work are "mean." And many people think that if we give students more demanding work, more of them will fail or drop out.
But one high school principal in New York state took the risk that raising the academic bar would also raise student achievement. And it turned out that he was right. In New York, students must take Regents courses and fairly rigorous Regents examinations to receive a Regents diploma. Most (but not all) of the students in the Regents track are college-bound. Weaker students generally take less demanding non-Regents courses and easier competency tests to graduate.
Six years ago, Fredric Cohen, principal of John F. Kennedy High School in Bellmore, faced faculty discontent over the non-Regents courses in his school. Cohen says that these classes consisted of two types of students--the "can't do's" who have trouble with the work, and the "won't do's" who don't put any effort into school work. Isolated in their non-Regents classes from the rest of the students, these were "angry, self- loathing youngsters who learn little and are viewed by teachers as hostile and uneducable." Cohen proposed a radical change: eliminate the non-Regents classes and integrate those students into Regents classes. The results have been impressive, and the two other high schools in the district have followed suit.
Fifteen percent more students in the Bellmore-Merrick district now take Regents exams. This means that about 120 more students per grade are taking more rigorous courses and more challenging tests--and meeting higher expectations. In English, 80 percent of students pass the Regents exam, compared with 61 percent four years ago. In Sequential Math I, 87 percent now pass the Regents exam, up from 71 percent. Cohen notes similar, but less dramatic, improvement in other subjects.
How do they make it work? Teachers are not told which students in their class would have been the non-Regents students. The faculty place a lot of emphasis on student effort, rewarding diligence and denying rewards to those who don't bother to try. Interns from a local university provide extra help to slower students. Teachers modify instruction to accommodate the can't do students learning outcomes, and they have little trouble passing the Regents courses. The "won't do" students fail, Cohen says, not because they can't complete their assignments, but because they don't attempt them.
Some seniors must attend summer school to make up failed courses so they can graduate. If non-Regents courses were still available, these same students would have been able to graduate with their class--but only by taking lower-level classes, putting in minimal effort, and meeting only minimal standards. Extra effort is required for them to pass the Regents exam, but this shows they can achieve a solid level of proficiency in a subject, not just squeak by.
There have been some interesting side effects. Since the non-Regents students are no longer isolated from the rest of the student body, more students overall are involved, as Cohen puts it, "in the mainstream of student life," participating on teams and in other activities. The former non-Regents students are proud that they are taking classes and exams usually taken only by the smart kids. Vandalism is down.
Some of the top Regents students have developed higher aspirations, asking to move to advanced classes. Plans are under discussion to eliminate some advanced Regents classes to encourage the high-achievers to reach even higher by taking an Advanced Placement (AP) course instead. Already more youngsters are taking AP courses. The net effect has been to raise both the floor and the ceiling of achievement at Kennedy High.
Cohen readily admits the system isn't perfect. If too many "won't do" students end up in one class, they can cause problems and must be moved. And he's dissatisfied because they haven't yet figured out how to motivate the "won't do's." But so what if the system isn't perfect, if it's pushing more students--at all levels--to higher achievement?
If we continue to ask little of our students, we will continue to get what we ask for. Some people argue that raising academic standards and expectations is elitist. But which system is more elitist--one that expects high achievement of only a small group of students or one that expects it of most? The system we have now only challenges a small group of top students and consigns the rest to mediocrity because we think they can't do harder work. Bellmore's experience shows that this isn't true. Asking more of all students--and giving them the help they need to do harder work -- will actually make our education system more equitable and less elitist.