Image from Flickr, by ajaxofsalamis |
California,
which had some of the toughest academic standards in the nation, had to dumb
down its curriculum and its expectations for students when it approved the
Common Core Standards (CCS). One example is Algebra I, which used to be
required for all eighth graders. Now, like other states that have adopted the
CCS, California will allow students to take either Algebra I or an alternate
course that includes some algebra, while the as yet unwritten new CCS exams
will focus on content from this alternate course.
Many
teachers and student advocates argue that this is appropriate since not all
eighth graders are ready for algebra. When students are placed in courses for
which they lack the requisite skills they are far more likely to struggle or
fail, thus contributing to low self-efficacy and disillusionment with
school—both reasons why some students later drop out of school. Furthermore,
classrooms with large numbers of students who are not academically ready for a
course can contribute to discipline problems and a poor academic environment in
which a critical mass of students starts to believe there is no hope of
passing, so why bother. This can bring
down the expectations, self-efficacy and motivation of the students in the
middle (i.e., those who could pass with a little extra support), thus
undermining their chances of success.
From the
perspective of middle schools and school districts, delaying Algebra I allows
them to improve their test scores (fewer students failing high stakes algebra tests
because fewer would be taking them) and their graduation rates (fewer kids
failing classes, in general). But this completely ignores the underlying
reasons why so many eighth graders aren’t ready for Algebra I and merely passes
the problem on to the high schools, where the kids may still lack the academic
skills to succeed in the class. Studies indicate that 80% of students who
retake algebra continue to fail the class (according to Inside Bay Area).
There are,
no doubt, several factors contributing to this problem, but one is likely the
social promotion that goes on in the lower grades, with students being passed
from one grade level to the next, regardless of whether they have mastered their
courses. One argument made in support of social promotion in the earlier grade
levels is that holding students back is bad for their self-esteem and therefore
harms their long-term success. However, if they are allowed to fail and move
on, they continue to have low self-efficacy (i.e., “I cannot get good grades in
school”) while picking up the mixed message that it doesn’t really matter
(i.e., “I get to move on with my friends to the next level, regardless of
whether I do homework, pass exams or classes”).
More
significantly, success in math, like in reading, tends to correlate with
students’ socioeconomic backgrounds and prior academic success in school. There
are certainly some very bright children who are “math-challenged.” Einstein was
said to be one. For these students, delaying when they take algebra may help
them develop the academic maturity and discipline necessary to pass the course.
But for those who are failing Algebra I, along with English and other classes,
the problem is much deeper and more intractable. They may have numerous other
problems (e.g., poor attendance, bad study habits, learning disabilities, low
literacy, a history of failure and concomitant low self-efficacy) that will
follow them throughout their academic career, regardless of when they take
algebra and that have their roots in the students’ socioeconomic backgrounds
(e.g., low income students often lack health insurance and, consequently, have
higher rates of absenteeism).
Deferring
the problem to high school has ramifications beyond students’ progress in
future math classes. Basic algebra is necessary for high school chemistry and
biology, courses students are likely to take in the ninth and tenth grades (and
fail if they lack the essential math skills). Of course, even students who do
take algebra, but fail it, may also have trouble in science, but at least there
is a chance that they were exposed to enough algebra to succeed in science. Not
taking algebra at all significantly decreases this possibility, as does
ignoring the root causes of mass algebra failure.
Another
concern is that the creation of two math pathways will allow schools to fall
into past bad habits of tracking students based on race or socioeconomic
backgrounds. Indeed, a recent report (see Inside Bay Area) showed that some schools were
placing black and Latino students in lower level math courses even when they
had the skills and prerequisites for advanced math classes. This could also
lead to tracking in science classes and reduction of black, Latino and low
income students taking college preparatory and ultimately Advanced Placement
science and math classes.
Critics of
the new Algebra I requirement argue that success in Algebra I is good predictor
of future college graduation, while avoiding algebra in middle school may pull
students off the college-bound track. When the 8th grade requirement
was implemented, black and Latino enrollment in the class skyrocketed—from 24%
to 60% for African-Americans, and tripling for Latinos to 63%—(again, see Inside
Bay Area). Even though pass rates for these groups are as low at 60%, there
are still more black and Latino students passing the class than in the past
(because more are taking the class).
No comments:
Post a Comment