Mediocrity: Deplorable, Yes. Until We Consider the Alternative

By Rona Wilensky

Batten down the hatches! The governors have come back from last year’s National High School Summit and are actually proposing fixes for the nation’s high schools. ( "States Target High Schools for Changes," Feb. 8, 2006.) Those efforts generally fall into three categories: forming commissions, improving the collection of data, and the hands-down favorite, changing high school core curricula and/or graduation requirements to more closely align with four-year public colleges’ entrance requirements.

What all these initiatives have in common is that they cost relatively little and generate just enough controversy to make the governors look like they are doing something. They are the elements of a perfect political program, which of course is not the same thing as being the elements of a perfect school reform. This is especially the case for proposals that demand that students take and pass more and harder courses. Such proposals certainly meet the test of political viability, but do they serve students, schools, or even the nation? I say no.

Why would I make such a claim? The answer lies in the dramatic difference between the relatively simple act of raising standards through a stroke of the pen and the much more challenging and expensive work of making it possible for all students...