教育类文章精选：SLOWING DOWN A QUICK FIX
3 SLOWING DOWN A QUICK FIX
Ending "social promotion" sounds great. But L.A. discovers it could mean flunking half its students
In the past few years, reformers have embraced a disarmingly simple idea for fixing schools: Why not actually flunk those students who don't earn passing grades? Both Democrats and Republicans have begun attacking the practice of "social promotion"--shuttling bad students to the next grade, advancing them with peers even if they are failing. Make F truly mean failure, the movement says.
Last week in Los Angeles, the reformers learned just how ornery the current system can be. According to a plan released Tuesday by the L.A. school district, ending social promotion there will take at least four years, could cost hundreds of millions of dollars--and probably would require flunking about half the district's students. That's a pessimistic assessment, but it's not just bureaucrats' caterwauling. Rather, L.A. school superintendent Ruben Zacarias was an eager convert to the crusade against social promotion. In February he unveiled an ambitious plan to end unwarranted promotions in five grades during the 1999-2000 school year--a full year ahead of the timetable set by a state law.
At the time, Zacarias acknowledged that his goal would be hard to meet. He estimated that as many as 6 of every 10 students would flunk if they had to advance on merit. Zacarias wanted to spend $140 million in the first year alone to help these kids. Why so much? Because a mountain of research shows that ending social promotion doesn't work if it just means more Fs. Kids who are simply forced to repeat grades over and over usually don't improve academically and often drop out. Zacarias wanted more tutoring, summer school and intensive-learning classes. Unqualified students wouldn't rise to the next grade; nor would they be doomed to redo work they already failed. It was a forward-looking pla