Aurora's bold plan

Boston 'pilot' model worth trying in attempt to boost scores

The Rocky

Published November 12, 2007 at 1:03 p.m.

Text size

More Editorials

Give Aurora Public Schools credit: Administrators and the teachers union are working together to try to address the alarmingly low test scores in the district.

Only time (and CSAP) will tell, however, whether the shared decision to introduce Boston's "pilot schools" model in selected schools beginning next school year will eventually improve student performance across the district or benefit only a limited few. There is reason for hope but also for doubt.

On the hopeful side, students in Boston's pilot schools are outperforming their counterparts in Boston's traditional schools, according to a study by the Center for Collaborative Education. But these results are somewhat suspect because the demographic mix of students in the pilot schools does not match the overall makeup of the district, skewing toward a predominance of white students even though the district is only 15 percent white.

Aurora is pledging that the student bodies of its pilot schools will reflect the composition of its overall student population. If so, it will present a true test for the pilot concept.

The district Web site notes that its 32,000 students "come from 100 different countries and speak more than 90 different languages." Such diversity is a formidable challenge in any learning environment.

Also on the hopeful side are Aurora's stated selling points for this experiment: smaller class size, greater flexibility that will allow more creative instruction, increased accountability and greater staffing freedom with relaxed union work restrictions. Research suggests, however, that such decentralization must be done carefully.

The November 2006 issue of of the newsletter of the Center for Comprehensive School Reform and Improvement, based in Washington, D.C., featured research conclusions titled, "7 Actions That Improve School District Performance." Action No. 1 was, "Take a Systemwide Approach to Improving Instruction."

In other words, school reform should not become a green light to the creation of a hodgepodge of curriculum and instructional strategies that vary widely from school to school. Not only will these differences confuse students who change schools - and low-income students tend to be more transient - it will also result in widely differing educational experiences (and achievement) among students.

The independence of pilot schools must be tempered by curriculum decisions and instructional approaches that align with district standards and assessments, even as the schools exercise newfound freedoms in other areas. A daunting task, to be sure.

Among the other research-supported actions advocated by the school reform center are implementing strong accountability systems, emphasizing professional development, expanding leadership to include faculty, basing decisions on data rather than hunch, and taking a long-term approach to reform. On the hopeful side, Aurora is incorporating all of these into its pilot school thinking.

But the Center for Comprehensive School Reform and Improvement offers this caution, too:

"The efforts of heroic principals, innovative charter schools and inspiring classroom teachers who single-handedly turn around low-performing schools or classrooms are to be zealously applauded and encouraged, but ultimately their efforts produce 'isolated islands of excellence.' Large-scale improvement requires systemic effort . . . "

That is Aurora's ultimate challenge.

Subscribe to the Rocky Mountain News