December 22 2008
Comfortably astride its high horse, The Advocate recently made its editorial case against adoption of a curriculum that is more in tune with reality than the current stress on “rigor” – apparently accepting as an article of faith that if too many students are failing and dropping out of high school, it is because classes aren’t hard enough. The state’s newspaper of record argued that some formerly low-performing schools are now improving their academic records.
The Advocate editorial came in response to some in the legislature who propose a vocational/technical track in high school. For appropriate students, it would de-emphasize the college-bound curriculum and prepare them for entry into the work force or additional work-related training.
The Advocate downplayed or ignored some important issues, such as the amount of money being showered on the showcase schools mentioned in the editorial. In this letter to the editor, LFT President Steve Monaghan explains the crucial role that adequate funding plays in a successful school, and brings up the subject of a bolder, broader approach to education that does not try to shoehorn all students into a college-bound mold.