 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|||
 |
 |
|
||
 |
|
You
are here: Will the Real Leaders Please Stand Up?
In 2000, minorities constituted 39 % of public school students in kindergarten through 12th grade, of which 17 % were black (Hoffman, K.; Llagas, C.; Snyder, T, 2003, p.26). Most black students attend public schools where minorities represent the majority of the student body (Hoffman, K.; Llagas, C.; Snyder, T, 2003, p.xi). If then, the acknowledgement of the prevalence of the black student in public education is known, as well as where most black students are concentrated, how then can the plight of the Black student change from one of predictable consternation to one of academic security?
While 17 % of the public school population is Black in grades kindergarten through 12th grade, 13 % of Black students 16-to-24-year-olds have not earned a high school diploma or equivalent(Hoffman, K.; Llagas, C.; Snyder, T, 2003, p.40). What is happening to Black students as they pass through the public education system? A simple statistical snapshot provides a suggestion. In 1999,18 % of Black students in grades kindergarten through 12th grade had repeated at least one grade; 35% of Black students in grades 7 through 12 had been suspended or expelled at some point in their school careers; 15 % received services under the Individual with disabilities Act (IDEA) (Hoffman, K.; Llagas, C.; Snyder, T, 2003, p.38; 32).
This minority population is undoubtedly significantly represented in the public school system; however, the Black student is over represented in a cadre of domains that are predictors of academic risk and failure. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, in 1998, 71 % of entering kindergartners from Black or Hispanic families had one or more risk factors, compared to 29% of those from White families and 61% from Asian families. The percentage of first time kindergartners with two or more risk factors was four times greater for Blacks (27%) and five times greater for Hispanics (33%) than for their White peers (6%) (Hoffman, K.; Llagas, C.; Snyder, T, 2003, p.68). Protecting the academic prosperity of all students, especially those from minority backgrounds is an issue most urban schools are facing, many without success.
Although these statistics are stunning, they are not surprising, for this trend has existed for decades. What is alarming is the chronic inability of the public school system to improve outcomes for this student population. It seems as if a silent salience and acceptance of this trend is pervasive, inevitably precipitating the acceptance of a chronic academic and social injustice for the Black student. The public school system has tragically failed in its responsibility to provide academic security and equitable opportunities for the minority student, specifically the Black student.
Under No Child Left Behind, states are working to close the achievement gap and make sure all students, including those who are disadvantaged, achieve academic proficiency (U.S. Department of Education, para.1). The No Child Left Behind Act leaves no question as to the responsibility of the states to address the needs of all students regarding academic prosperity. In response to the disturbing achievement gap between African-American and White students the Department of Education has acknowledged the following challenge and solution.
The challenge: even though schools are desegregated, public schools have failed to deliver the promise of a quality education for African-Americans.
The solution: Attack the soft bigotry of low expectations and demand that schools close the achievement gap between African-American and White students (p.1).However, achieving the reality of closing the achievement gap for urban schools is unquestionably an exigent endeavor. It is an endeavor that will shift traditional paradigms of leadership to those that pioneer inventive methods of leading and organizing schools. According to Lezotte (1991) through his work with the correlates of effective schools, he concludes:
…that leadership is a viewed as a dispersed concept that includes all adults, especially teachers. This is in keeping with the teacher empowerment concept; it recognizes that a principal cannot be the only leader in a complex organization like a school. With the democratization of organizations, especially schools, the leadership function becomes one of creating a "community of shared values". The role of the principal will be changed to that of a "leader of leaders," rather than a leader of followers. Expertise is generally distributed among many, not concentrated in a single person (p.3).
School principals obviously hold the ultimate responsibility of building leadership. As pioneers of the No Child Left Behind era, principals must realize the potential leadership of teachers and additional stakeholders on the building or campus level. In order for urban schools to effectively reform and address the needs of all learners, especially those learners from disadvantaged populations, traditional views of leadership must be abandoned and the role and plight of urban educators must be elevated to attain their leadership potential.
The leadership capability of the school counselor has been tremendously overlooked. Most school counselors have a master's degree and are typically the only people in the school with formal training in both mental health and education (ASCA, p3). This formal training positions counselors in a very unique, however often inappropriately utilized place on the building level.
Unfortunately school counseling has lacked a consistent role from state to state, district to district and even school to school. This has lead to a misunderstanding of what school counseling is and what it can do for a school. As a result, school counseling programs are often viewed as ancillary programs instead of a crucial component to student achievement, and school counselors have not been utilized to their fullest potential(ASCA, p1).
In addressing reform efforts, counselors should be an integral force in planning curricula to meet the needs of all learners, especially the needs of disadvantaged learners. Counselors are not only concerned with the academic plight of students, but their individual experiences, future aspirations and social and emotional health. Effective counselors are concerned with the holistic well being of all students on a campus, without neglecting the specific needs of those students that require intensive services or students from disadvantaged backgrounds. It is well within the scope of their position to offer responsive services to students that present need. Counselors in partnership with administrators are a crucial force responding to the No Child Left Behind challenge. However, due to administrative pressure, counselors are pulled in many different inappropriate directions. As a result, their time in delivering direct services to students is compromised.
It is a counselor's responsibility to build a guidance curriculum centered on the specific needs of a campus that will improve the academic achievement of all students. For those students with multiple risk factors, many of whom come from minority backgrounds, the counselor integrates services that address the individual needs of that student through individual planning or responsive services, in addition to the guidance curriculum. In order for students to achieve academic proficiency, delivery of academic content cannot be the only driving force in orchestrating academic success. Students must have the social and emotional stability to focus and concentrate on academic content without mental interruptions of circumstantial life, social and community conflict. Needless to say, the school counselor cannot resolve student life issues. However, the school counselor can teach appropriate coping skills to address life issues so they do not interfere with the attainment of goals – such as student academic success.
Teachers, without question, are stakeholders that have a considerable impact on the academic proficiency of the African-American student. However, the teacher turnover rate and the ability to attract highly qualified teachers is as much of a challenge as preparing Black children for academic success. Black student populations tend to have higher concentrations in the South and in urban areas around the country. Especially in these areas, school systems and leaders of school systems should be strongly encouraged to invest in professional development activities to prepare urban leaders, i.e., teaching professionals to adequately meet the needs of minority students.
In addition, urban leaders should be encouraged to network and participate in professional organizations that address the specific needs of the student population they work with. This professional development and alliance must be inclusive of a component that develops a cultural awareness and appreciation of minority groups and trends that are common among low socioeconomic populations. When teaching professionals have a clear focus and comprehensive understanding of the common lifestyle practices, communication styles, and styles of learning associated with specific minority populations, then student achievement is inevitable. Excellent performance by students and excellence in the curriculum is not a matter of miracles, however; it only appears to be so. There are many living examples of the fact that hard work and clear focus can transform the educational condition of our students, and even the condition of educators that serve them (Hilliard, 2002, para. 7).
With the challenges that lie in staffing public schools with effective and committed educators, also lie the challenges of successfully teaching the minority student, specifically the Black student in spite of the obstacles. While efforts to recruit and retain quality staff are vital, of primary importance is the provision of adequate and equitable academic instruction on behalf of the current student population. While other issues are being addressed the interest of protecting the academic and life interests of an active generation of students must not be lost in the shuffle.
Placing the blame for the failure of the system to adequately educate the African-American child is not as important as becoming conscious as to who should be held accountable for the vast inequities that ultimately result in an achievement and socioeconomic gap among minorities and non-minorities. No system or stakeholder is impervious. All stakeholders are accountable for the responsibility to effectively educate a population that undeniably has a predictable risk for school failure before matriculation.
It is apparent that the failure of the system is not due to the lack of ability to retrieve specific training opportunities to support the academic plight of the Black student. On the contrary, there is a vast array of literature, texts, services and professional associations that are easily accessible for any instructional leader, advocate or teacher to utilize in addressing this population. Failure of the public school system to the minority child, specifically, the Black child, is not from a lack of knowledge, but an improper or restrained effort to adequately apply available tools, resources and information with established rates of success.
Efficient practices of urban systems migrating towards improving the academic plight of minority children is to have a firm understanding of test data and how to use test data to improve the delivery of instruction and proper identification of select populations in need of customized instructional services, not including students identified as receiving services under IDEA. Hilliard (2004) contends that:
…some psychologists and educators began to be concerned about alternative meanings and values of the testing/assessment enterprise in schools. A few took action to develop approaches based on a new paradigm. However, even today, testing and assessment activities tend to be compliance activities, not to be confused with activities that inform instructionally valid design (para. 8).
Testing should not be approached as a simple exercise that must be executed, but rather a tool that can be used to identify pedagogical deficiencies and instructionally neglected populations in a system or on a campus. Urban leaders should be able to disaggregate data in order to determine what type of instructional service are needed as well as how and to whom they should be delivered. This may include targeting a male or female population, a minority population; the economic disadvantaged population, a specific grade level or specific academic goal that was not adequately mastered. Simply, test analysis should reveal the delivery and type of instruction a system needs to target, redirect, and be reinforced to enhance the achievement of the urban student, specifically, the minority student.
Knowledge of effective pedagogical practice is meaningless without the wisdom to effectively implement practices that manifest change in the performance of underachieving minority students, specifically Black students. The knowledge is available, as is the wisdom that guides good practice. When urban systems and urban leaders accept the responsibility and stand accountable to embrace the needs of minority children, specifically, Black children, student prosperity is destined to follow. This would involve letting go of some traditional practices and embracing the actual needs of students as they change from generation to generation. In addition, it would mean an abandonment of allegiance to some internal political networks and an accompaniment of true and honest advocacy for children, specifically children from low socioeconomic communities and minority backgrounds. The children are present; where are the true urban leaders?
References
Hoffman, K.; Llagas, C.; Snyder, T. (2003). Status and Trends in the Education of Blacks. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
Hilliard, Asa. (2004). Assessment Equity in a Multicultural Society. Retrieved January 29, 2005, from http://www.newhorizons.org/strategies/assess/hilliard.htm
Hilliard, Asa. (2002). Cultural Pluralism in Education. Retrieved January 29, 2005, from http://www.newhorizons.org/future/Creating_the_Future/crfut_hilliard.html
Lezotte, Lawerence W. (1991). Correlates of Effective Schools: The First and Second Generation. Retrieved January 29, 2005, from http://www.effectiveschools.com/Correlates.pdf
U.S. Department of Education. Four Pillars of No Child Left Behind. Retrieved February 23, 2005, from http://www.ed.gov/nclb/overview/intro/4pillars.html.
U.S. Department of Education. Reaching Out…Raising African – American achievement. Retrieved February 23, 2005, from http://www.ed.gov/nclb/accountability/achieve/achievementgap_aa.pdf
Dr. Kimberly McLeod is an Assistant Professor in the College of Education's Department of Counseling at Texas Southern University. She has served in the K-12 public school system for over 10 years. Her experience includes professional accolades as a teacher, counselor and administrator. She has a particular interest in addressing the needs of schools that are embracing reform efforts and addressing the needs of minority students and students from low socioeconomic backgrounds. She believes to achieve academic proficiency students must have a balance of academic and social integration in a rigorous curriculum. She currently teaches students in the graduate program for the University. mcleodkr@tsu.edu
©September 2005 New Horizons for Learning
http://www.newhorizons.org
info@newhorizons.orgFor permission to redistribute, please go to:
New Horizons for Learning Copyright and Permission Information