Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Let's Treat the Cause, Not the Symptoms: Equity and Accountability in Texas Revisited

2001; SAGE Publishing; Volume: 83; Issue: 4 Linguagem: Inglês

1940-6487

Richard R. Valencia, Angela Valenzuela, Kris Sloan, Douglas E. Foley,

Teacher Education and Leadership Studies

The authors focus on several misconceptions, omissions, and flaws in the argument put forth in last December's Kappan by James Scheurich, Linda Skrla, and Joseph Johnson in support of the Texas accountability system. THE DECEMBER 2000 Kappan featured a very important contribution to the current discourse on standards-based reform. Thinking Carefully About Equity and Accountability, by James Scheurich, Linda Skrla, and Joseph Johnson, invited readers to take part in a dialogue on these issues.1 At the heart of our disagreement with Scheurich and his colleagues is the subject of the standards-based reform movement, which has come to dominate most discussions in education today and which has spawned a great deal of scholarly literature, conferences, symposia, and even litigation. We wish to focus here on several misconceptions, omissions, and flaws in the argument put forth by Scheurich and his colleagues. We have organized our response around the following points: the common ground share, the flaws in their historic possibilities thesis, their misconception of accountability as a dichotomy, and our vision of equity and accountability. Common Ground Although differ with Scheurich and his colleagues on a number of points, there are several on which agree - at least in part. We believe it is important to outline this common ground at the outset so that can pursue further dialogue on these issues. Historical grounding. Scheurich and his co-authors assert that we have posted a miserable academic record with the great majority of low- income children and children of color specifically (p. 294). We strongly agree. The literature on the historical and current lack of equal educational opportunity experienced by students of color is vast. Indeed, the failure to acknowledge this reality is the major reason why standards-based reform - in which testing plays a prominent role - works against students of color. Although Scheurich and his colleagues are aware of the dismal record of our society in promoting success for low-income students and students of color, they do not seem to truly appreciate the need to take into account the persistent, pervasive, and oppressive nature of such failure in addressing the reform of our nation's public schools.2 For example, such inattention by the state of Texas and its expert witnesses to past discrimination was clearly seen in the GI Forum et al. v. Texas Education Agency et al. court case.3 The state strongly underscored its need for a high-stakes test as a standard for graduation, yet was ahistorical regarding the plight of students of color. The logic of having an exit examination linked to high graduation makes sense in a perfect world in which equal educational opportunity exists. Of course, this is not the case. Thus standards-based reform misses the mark. It is structurally misdirected because it treats the symptoms of failure (e.g., poor achievement), rather than the cause (i.e., inferior schools). We agree with Arthur Pearl who notes that school failure [and success] can be fully understood only when analyzed in the broadest political, economic, and cultur-al contexts. Macropolicies establish the boundaries of possibilities.4 Deficit thinking. Citing the works of Lisa Delpit, Richard Valencia, and Angela Valenzuela, Scheurich and his co-authors discuss the significant fact that many educators view the educability of low-income students of color as limited and see them as the makers of their own academic problems.5 This is thinking, and it contrasts sharply with the view that students of color, especially those from low-income backgrounds, must be viewed as having unlimited potential. Furthermore, the latter view holds that must have high, reasonable standards for success and provide equal encouragement via democratic education.6 Scheurich and his associates are aware of the nature of deficit thinking and of its negative effects on students of color. …