David Skaggs, executive director of the Colorado Department of Higher Education, has come under attack for planning to recommend that the Colorado Commission on Higher Education rescind the entrance requirements to four-year public colleges in Colorado that were to go into effect for the class of 2010. He's accused of giving up on Colorado's students, Colorado's competitiveness and education reform.

The 2010 entrance requirements expected all applicants to all four-year public colleges in the state to have four years of mathematics at the level of Algebra I and above and two years of a world language. The requirements were strenuously opposed by rural districts that saw no way to provide these offerings to prospective college students without substantially compromising the education offered to all students. Teachers in the arts were equally opposed, knowing full well that if more math and language teachers were to be hired (assuming they could be found, which everyone concedes will be extremely difficult), they would be taking the jobs of elective teachers.

Skaggs referred to these arguments in his recommendation, citing issues of "practicality and affordability." His critics dismiss these concerns as evidence of his lack of commitment to education reform. As a practicing educator who would have to change course offerings in the face of a fixed budget, I applaud Skaggs' realization that policies that are not practical or affordable cannot possibly achieve their desired intent.

He understands, in a way his critics do not, that there is a 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 to reach those standards.

The policy analysts and education reformers who favor the raising of standards will readily admit that raising standards is merely the starting point of the long, hard struggle to get all students truly prepared to meet those standards. Alas, those of us who have watched state policy makers at work are all too familiar with their relatively short attention spans. It is virtually guaranteed that once the standards are raised, attention will quickly turn to other pressing political matters on the state's agenda. These education reformers will declare victory, claim credit for cracking a hard political nut, and leave the scene well before the body count begins. But it's a sure bet nobody will be at home when school districts come asking for the significant resources needed to actually prepare all students to meet the new requirements. Has our experience with No Child Left Behind left any doubt about the truth of this assertion?

My biggest concern is that raising college entrance requirements without attending to what it takes to change student learning will not raise achievement and will produce a variety of unintended consequences that include: affluent districts raiding experienced world language and math teachers from less well-to-do districts; placing unskilled language and math teachers in classrooms with the students facing the greatest learning challenges; dumbing down advanced math and world language classes so that students can pass them and meet entrance requirements; decreasing the diversity of the entering classes of our major universities because school districts serving students of color face the greatest challenge in meeting these standards, and overcrowding already under-funded community colleges and replacing many of their current students with those denied admission to four-year schools.

Raising college entrance requirements raises expectations for all students, sends an important message about the value of math and world languages in our increasingly technical and interconnected world and aligns Colorado with other states. These are all seen by Skaggs critics as imperative.

But the real question is: how do we genuinely improve the learning of our students? It is not enough to change incentives. It is necessary to change what happens every day in every classroom as well as to transform the community conditions that bring students to school already behind. Without a specific plan for this level of reform, raising standards is simply grandstanding.

While others castigate Skaggs for his recommendations, I salute him for recognizing that we can only chart a course of high expectations when we are ready to do the hard (and expensive) work of providing the supports that students need to meet them.

Rona Wilensky is principal of New Vista High School in Boulder.

Steps You Can Take:

1.Consider making your support of David Skaggs proposal public through conversation, editorials, letters, calls and/or emails.  You might consider contacting the governor, members of the state board of education, professional organizations of which you are a member,  and local media.

2.Contact David Skaggs, and the higher education commissioners and tell them you support the proposed revision to suspend implementation of the Phase II requirements that were scheduled for 2010. 

http://www.state.co.us/cche/aboutus/index.html