So the news is that depending on how you count, Maine's graduating either 80 or 83% of students. While I admire the attempt to create a meaningful and consistent method of tracking, the larger point to me is that one out of five...or is it one out of six...young people are not graduating high school. That need not be.
Maine is way behind the innovation curve. While other states and cities eagerly adopt a wide variety of proven models, most Maine communities offer one middle school and one high school, with a vocational program and often an "alternative school" that serves largely students who behave themselves out of the traditional classroom.
As public policy, Maine expects that one large school (Westbrook just opened a $34 million, three story middle school)to serve every child well despite there being no evidence anywhere that such an approach works. You can still predict a graduation rate by looking at the socio-economic profile of the host district. What kinds of innovations consistently help students graduate and thrive in rates that beat the predictive factors? Small schools. Replicable schools. Community-involved and focused schools.
With only one exception of note, Casco Bay High School in Portland, Maine has not only not gone that route, but has gone the opposite route - forcing smaller schools to consolidate looking for the wrong kinds of efficiency...those that enable mediocrity to continue and accept that 17-20% dropout figure as the cost of doing business. Boston is having success with both Pilot schools and Charter schools, and more than half of NYC's public (some charter, some city-run) small schools show evidence of actually reducing the achievement gap. Why, especially if we can do this in a way that costs no more per student (and costs much less when you factor in the eventual additional costs that quite reliably track with not-graduating from high school) are we not eagerly growing such schools ourselves?
No comments:
Post a Comment