The evil admissions standards

A while back, one of the Journal Sentinel "community columnists," a teacher at Rufus King High School, argued that schools in the voucher program could choose their students. A supporter of the choice program wrote a letter to the editor pointing out that voucher schools were required to use a lottery if applicants exceeded spaces, but Rufus King teachers could and did choose its students.

An underlying theme in both the arguments is that there is something wrong with admissions standards. Even those benefiting from the standards, like the teacher at Rufus King, seem to think they are wrong for other people. Years ago, I took the lead in allowing MPS high schools to implement an admissions process. This proposal was strenuously denounced as a threat to democracy. I noticed, however, that those most adamantly opposed subsequently sent their children to the schools with admissions standards. Apparently they felt their children would benefit by being among other children who were serious enough to go through the process.

It appears many people look for schools with high admissions standards for their own children but oppose them for others. This seems to square with the common practice in education of people expecting others to put their children in schools we would not choose for our own.

More broadly, this opposition to matching students with classes and schools makes no sense. Of course, students can be chosen for the wrong reasons. But how would an MPS ninth-grade teacher, for instance, effectively teach a class whose reading skills ranged from those of a typical third grader to those of a high school graduate? From time to time, I partially learn something on my own and wonder if I should take a class in it. But I hesitate because it is hard to tell whether the class will teach me what I already know or whether I will be completely lost. Matching a student and the educational challenge seems the first step in successful education.