ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1997, Roanoke Times
DATE: Saturday, April 26, 1997 TAG: 9704280012
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-11 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: PAT WITTEN
YOU PUBLISHED the 1995-1996 state report card for school systems within the Roanoke Valley on April 10. The headline of the news article was innocuous: ``Students feel need to succeed.''
As a former Parent-Teacher Association leader, I couldn't help but compare that headline to some about five years ago when every perceived flaw of the Roanoke city school system got banner headlines. Just as I thought those headlines were unfair, so, too, is the sweeping under the rug of the poor performance of the city schools on this report card. The schools scored the lowest in all listed categories, except in the dropout rate where it scored the highest of 12 local school systems.
At a time when city taxpayers are being asked for more money for our schools, I'm outraged at this poor performance. We were 11 to 22 percentage points below the state average, yet not one word about that was mentioned in this article. If these were students' grade-point averages, teachers would give them a failing grade. Shouldn't the students' parents expect passing grades from the school system?
Each year, city taxpayers are asked to increase funding for schools. For every year that I can recall, we have complied. After all, more money means better schools, right?
In the past 10 years, we've seen more than $13 million spent on city magnet schools. Often, we think of this money as a gift from the federal government. But this is our hard-earned tax dollars! How effective has this spending been? What are the measured results?
City taxpayers also spend millions on renovating schools. This spending is over and above the $6,000-plus tax dollars per student per year that we spend.
Now look at the value we're getting for our money. Only 49 percent of 11th-grade students scored above the 50th percentile on their standardized tests. By the time students take this standardized test, they have been in school 12 years (kindergarten through 11th grade). Therefore, we've spent $72,000 on their education to that point.
Fifty-one percent of our students failed to meet the most basic standards. Out of 12,500 students, that equals 6,375 students. Over the years, we'll spend $459 million for their education, and what will they have to show for it?
We're obviously not getting our money's worth now, so is it wise to keep throwing more money away? Is money the problem?
Suppose you were sick and went to the hospital to be made well. What if you were given only a 49 percent chance that this would occur, but still you had to pay the high costs of medical care - whether or not you benefitted. Would you accept that?
Where else but in our children's education is a 51 percent failure rate acceptable? How can taxpayers allow more than half of our children to go through city public schools, have them leave without achieving minimum levels of education, and not demand change?
No more excuses. The answer isn't money. We need to see results.
Other inner-city school systems throughout our country are trying new concepts in education with success. These include voucher systems and charter schools. They benefit all students, but the greatest benefit has been for those students with less choice because they're economically disadvantaged. Wouldn't a $6,000 voucher give any student a lot of choices?
If our public schools cannot improve the outcome for our students, perhaps it's time to try alternatives. Maybe future funding for our schools should be based on those who meet the basic standards of learning for their grade level. Those not meeting the level could have a $6,000 voucher to go to the school of their choice - public or private.
After all, the purpose of spending this money is to ensure an education for each child. If we're going to spend this amount per student, why can't we expect results?
PAT WITTEN-of Roanoke is a former president of the Roanoke City Central Council Parent-Teacher Association.
LENGTH: Medium: 75 linesby CNB