With his State of the Union speech, President Clinton demonstrated that he is indeed the education president. The American public has been demanding higher academic standards. They are right, and, with the President's leadership, we are now far closer to reaching that goal.
In laying out his national crusade for education standards, the President brought up a question that people often ask: Is it fair to raise standards when some youngsters are so much better prepared to meet them than others? Most people have no problem with demanding more of students who go to schools that have adequate resources and where achievement levels are already high. But what about youngsters who go to schools where there may be no decent library or science lab or even enough textbooks to go around--and where achievement levels are often in the cellar?
Isn't pushing these kids to meet higher standards just adding one more burden to their lives? President Clinton's answer was a good one--"Raising standards will not be easy, and some of our children will not be able to meet them at first. The point is not to put our children down but to lift them up. Good tests will show us who needs help, what changes in teaching to make, and which schools need help." As President Clinton says, setting standards will help us help these children. It is the lack of common, high standards for all our students that is cruel and unfair and that perpetuates the inequities in our education system.
The truth of this proposition comes alive in "School System Shock," a terrific essay by an African-American student, which appeared in the school reform newspaper Rethinking Schools (Winter 1996/1997). Melony Swasey, the author of the article, says she had always been confident that she was doing well in her inner-city school. She was in honors classes all through high school and had a good grade-point average--in fact, she was one of the top ten in her class--and she had no doubt that she was headed for success in a good college. But when she transferred for a year to a suburban high school, she found herself in a totally different league--one she hadn't even known existed:
The classes I have as honors at Kennedy [her old school] are considered only regular college prep classes in other schools. I realized that those of us who are top-notch at Kennedy might be cut down to an average level in more competitive high schools--schools that have higher standards of education ....
When Melony returned to her old inner-city school, she saw it with new eyes. She saw the "inadequate library and obsolete books in the classrooms," and she saw that academic standards were often flimsy: "Many of the clubs and classes ...bear respectable names or titles, but don't carry the weight or the full challenge that they should." Perhaps most devastating, she saw the low expectations of the adults in the school--which the students came to share:
Inner-city students aren't even expected to excel. We are sometimes granted honors for completing only part of a task, while students in more affluent areas are expected to do more to get the same recognition. We are pitied by outsiders who sometimes try to "help" by giving us undeserved praise. Thus, we often don't expect much more of our own selves.
Melony is no whiner and she is not assessing blame--or giving up--but she does have a clear eye. She understands the devastating effects of a system that stacks the cards against some students in some schools. And she worries about her friends who still don't understand the way in which they are being shortchanged. What will happen when they leave Kennedy and discover that they can't compete on an equal footing with kids from suburban high schools?
I feel for my friends ...because most of them are focused on a goal--a goal that is easily attainable for better-prepared students--but never stop to look at their competition. I believe, because of our inadequate preparation, many of us will naively go out as confident soldiers and be knocked down before we even reach the front lines.
Melony concludes that she and her friends have to realize they "are part of an unbalanced society where unequal education is permitted and accepted." But they can't let that realization deflect them from their goals. Her conclusion should shame us all.
There is no doubt how Melony Swasey and her friends would respond to the question about high standards for all. Some schools will need extra resources and extra help, as President Clinton has said, and we have to be prepared to give them. But as for the argument that it is somehow kinder and more humane to expect less of poor kids in low-achieving schools, Melony's essay--and President Clinton's push for national standards-- reveals how patronizing and destructive it is.