I spent my Friday night with a 5-year-old.
Her name is Marissa, she's a family friend of my girlfriend and she expects to be the flower girl in our wedding, or else. And Friday was the Fall Festival at her elementary school, Madison Simis in Phoenix, which meant I was going, or else.
Not to sound like someone's dad, but when I was her age, fall festivals were a few booths in a stuffy gym where a small piece of plastic that had "Made in Taiwan" printed on it was a nice prize.
Not here.
There were three astrowalks, two climbing walls and a balloon guy. There were prizes, pony rides and a frickin' petting zoo.
This was obviously a school that could afford such luxuries. No wonder Simis earned an "improving" grade from the state.
The Arizona Department of Education released the "Achievement Profiles" for every public and charter school in the state last week. Schools were rated as "excelling," "improving," "maintaining" and "underperforming," based on a combination of AIMS and Stanford 9 test scores, dropout rates and fuzzy math.
And the results are in: 227 schools were ranked "underperforming," while only two were considered "excelling."
And not surprisingly, most of these underperforming schools are in poor areas in Phoenix. Wealthier districts such as Tempe, Scottsdale, Gilbert and Deer Valley escaped unscathed.
It's no coincidence that higher rated schools have the bling-bling for pony rides, while underperforming schools can't afford new computers.
But it's not just about money.
Performance reviews are based in part on scores from the incomplete and inaccurate AIMS test. Students have been failing this thing for years, which is why we shouldn't be surprised that schools as a whole are failing.
Underperfoming schools that don't shape up by next year will be officially dubbed "failing." The state apparently has very little patience for euphemisms. And if a school is failing for two years in a row, the state will intervene. If that doesn't work — well, it must be because those students were stupid after all.
The threat of state intervention is supposed to be enough of a kick in the ass to get these schools in shape. Public humiliation helps, too, since every school grade was printed in The Arizona Republic and underpeforming schools were required to mail out a "shame on us" letter to everyone in the district.
But educators don't seem to care much, greeting these grades with either a "we won't let this keep us down" or "screw what the state says" attitude. Really, the new grading system is just another reminder that a diploma from an Arizona school is only good for lining birdcages.
In other news: The sky is blue, Bush is an idiot and the D-backs will make it next year.
And as for "maintaining" and "improving" schools, no one is sure which one is better. "Improving" ain't so bad, but it could mean that the school improved from "god-awful" to "piss-poor."
"Excelling" seems to be the only grade worth shooting for, but since only two schools earned it, we've got a better chance of a Cardinals Super Bowl.
The state better address the real problems instead of labeling schools, or they'll be "underperforming" as well.
How about repealing English immersion? Or giving AIMS the heave-ho? Or putting money into inner-city schools that desperately need it for qualified teachers, new supplies and decent facilities?
Labeling isn't the solution to Arizona's public education. We know they're bad, now what do you plan to do about it?
Mark Broeske is an English Education Junior. Reach him at mark.broeske@asu.edu.