THE JOHNSON CITY STORY: FACT OR FICTION

By Aldo S. Bernardo, PhD

BACKGROUND
For the past several years, Johnson City has been considered a leader in developing a program that seems to incorporate most if not all of the ingredients that lie at the base of the educational reforms being proposed at both the state and federal levels. In fact, what is known as Mastery Learning was started in Johnson City back in 1971 by a superintendent who now heads the Institute for Quality Learning (formerly known as the National Center for Outcome-Based Education) in Scottsdale, Arizona.

Both Mastery Learning and Outcome-Based Education (OBE) have now become the leading educational fads of the 80s and 90s, while the Johnson City model known as ODDM (Outcomes-Driven Developmental Model) has received a double "validation" from the U.S. Department of Education, one in 1985 and another in 1994. As a result of such "validation" the Johnson City school district has received over a million dollars ($1,177,637) in federal and state grants between 1983 and 1994 and has hosted thousands of teachers and administrators who come to view its program. Its staff has likewise visited well over 150 school districts throughout the country holding workshops on how to implement ODDM, which one official maintains "started the OBE movement." ["On Creating an Environment Where All Students Learn: Conversations With Al Mamary and Frank Alessi," Quality Outcomes- Driven Education, December 1994, pp.35-42]

On December 30, 1993 I, along with most residents of Johnson City, for the first time had a glimpse of the total program in a series run by the local paper. My first reaction was disbelief. The program was steeped in OBE principles which I had read about but never taken seriously because I considered it a passing fad that was simply trying to revive John Dewey's disastrous "progressive education."

When I read that our district had become the Mecca of the national movement, I wrote a column for the same paper offering a strong critique of the program. I pointed out that what had been known as Mastery Learning had obviously gone beyond the academic to the mastery of desirable attitudes, behaviors, beliefs and feelings. Johnson City's ODDM was but an intensified form of OBE which required the "alignment" of the entire curriculum with the so-called "exit outcomes." These were no different that those being pursued throughout the country. They were: high self-esteem, becoming a self-directed learner, the ability to think effectively, problem-solving and decision-making skills, concern for others. Teaching techniques were likewise OBE inspired: cooperative learning, multi-age grouping, minimal failures, constant retesting and remediation, teachers as coaches or facilitators, inclusive classrooms, and the seemingly harmless mantra, "All children can learn (at a high level)."

I thereupon resolved to enlist the help of other residents to try to slow down the program, but after 23 years of stealthy and secret development, the program was too entrenched. School board meetings were dominated by supporters of the program, teachers were reluctant to talk, administrators and certain teachers had been earning handsome fees exporting the program to some 200 districts nationally. So I decided to investigate the program in some depth by examining and analyzing teachers' opinion, test scores, parent reactions, and some student graduates.

THE TEACHERS' PERSPECTIVE
An anonymous call from a teacher assured me that the teaching situation at all levels had become unbearable. Morale was at an all-time low, no criticism was allowed at meetings, the teacher association was dominated by the NEA, all "complainers" were reported, etc. The caller assured me that most teachers were unhappy and frustrated. I prevailed on the caller to supply me with a listing of all school employees. The lists were accompanied by a cryptic message: "The time is very ripe."

At this point I decided to devise a questionnaire consisting of 33 questions, which I proceeded to send to all the teaching staff in our high school and middle school. All but 2 of the questions required a Yes or No answer and dealt primarily with the teachers' views of the ODDM system and of the administration of the district. Teachers were asked not to identify themselves in any way. The letter accompanying the questionnaire made it clear that I was acting as a resident of Johnson City who had been asked by a group of village parents and taxpayers to try and determine the extent to which the program enjoyed teacher support.

The questionnaires were mailed the day before Thanksgiving, 1994. Within a few days I received a number of calls thanking me for my interest, but informing me that a campaign had been mounted by the teachers' association (NEA) asking teachers not to reply to the questions until they could meet on the following Monday. By mid-week several teachers had sent me their completed questionnaires and a copy of a memo from the union practically forbidding teachers to reply "to outside agendas that wish to erode the continuing progress we are making in Johnson City."

Over the next few weeks I received replies from about 20% of the teachers. Most replies went far beyond the Yes or No answers, with many including extra sheets for extended observations. Here are a few of the results (Questions in shortened form):

%YES %NO
Do students perform to maximum under ODDM? 19 81
Do you find ODDM confusing? 78 22
Are the use of I,test retaking,no failures hindrances? 78 22
Do you find your students ready for ODDM? 13 87
Are administrative demands under ODDM excessive? 81 18
Is there excessive nepotism in the district? 81 19
Is ODDM more favorable to administration than teachers? 82 17
Is ODDM another form of OBE? 93 6
Does ODDM better reflect realities of life? 17 82
Do national visitations to sell ODDM bother you? 88 11

A question asking with which of 21 features of ODDM the teachers disagreed showed a large majority strongly disagreeing with the following 4 features: The use of Incomplete on report cards; The retaking of tests; The no failures policy; and The extra time burden on teachers. To a question asking what the teachers would like to see happen to ODDM, a significant majority chose "Eliminated."

About 70% of the questionnaires contained voluntary remarks concerning various items as well as general remarks about ODDM. At least three were over 2 complete pages long. Some typical examples follow:

"The problem with the J.C. program is not completely the fault of the ODDM/OBE model. You have people in power who have made a lot of money selling the [model] to other school districts across the country. These people use nepotism to protect their power and hurt people (teachers) who truly use the [model] for the benefit of the students." "There are teachers in the district who have complained about the policies and practices for years. Now...these teachers are being quiet because they have only a couple of years left before they retire, or they fear retribution even if complaints are anonymous."

"Instead of furthering reforms that help students to gain control of the learning process and develop essential cognitive skills, the JC High administration has given students almost entire control of their learning and...of the teacher's role and duties....[A] growing percentage of students have been creating educational mayhem....Teachers must constantly add new duties ignore deadlines, and refuse to submit major assignments. Yet teachers have been 'told' to give all students with grades below 65 an "Incomplete," regardless of circumstances, effort, or attendance pattern....The current policy of incompletes is demoralizing and embarrassing to most teachers...."

"In the feverish rush to embrace and implant OBE and...to win hefty grants for doing so, the administration has abandoned and befuddled its control of student behavior....Most of these teachers have also experienced the frustrations that their district efforts are bringing more rewards to administrators and an elite group of teachers than to the students....OBE is corporate education's attempt to homogenize, equalize and standardize the learning experience....This reform undermines the teacher's pivotal role...."

"Even the teachers' union has been infiltrated. We have no union....We have never been allowed a voice to even vote on any of these philosophic issues, including incompletes, for 10-12 years....Yes, this is a school where there are no failures but hundreds of incompletes, students wandering the halls, skipping classes, doing their thing - with no real consequences....Call this the "little nice school of the nation" that was taken over by educational terrorists...."

"I feel that there are some very worthwhile aspects to the ODDM model, but there are many phases..and philosophy of the model that are not currently working well....[and that] need to be addressed."

"You need to understand [that] OBE/ODDM are "buzzwords," "soundbites." They are in reality nothing but political rhetoric and don't change the day to day life of the curriculum or classroom." "This philosophy is just a way to give titles to certain individuals, and to give them much more money than their teaching salary."

TEST SCORES
According to official statistics contained in the State Education Department's 1994 annual Report to the Governor and Legislature entitled "Statistical Profiles of Public School Districts," Johnson City ranks 9th overall out of 12 Broome County, N.Y. Public School Districts in third to eighth grade PEP (Pupil Evaluation Program) scores, and below county average on Regents Exams (New York State's graduation exams). In Regents exams Johnson City was in the lower half of Broome County in English, U.S. History, Global Studies, Math I, Math II, and Spanish. Overall the district averaged only 6th to 7th place out of 12 districts. In no subject was Johnson City higher than 4th. Furthermore, only 55% of students enrolled in English took the Regents exam, 50% of those taking global studies, 56% of those taking U.S. History, 20% of those taking Spanish.

The percentages in Math were better but not by much: 72% for Math I, 67% for Math II, and 43% for Math 3. Nor does the situation improve if one examines the statistics of the last 5 years. In Regents scores combined for the school years 89/90 through 92/93, Johnson City ranked in 7th place of the 12 Broome County schools in Chemistry, 7th in Physics, 4th in Earth Science, 6th in Biology, 7th in Spanish, 8th in Math I, 8th in Math II, 8th in Math III, 11th in English, 8th in Global Studies, 10th in History, 7th in French.

It is interesting to note that whereas in 1988 62% of graduating seniors received Regents diplomas, in l994 only 48% did. In 1988 45 students of a class of 228, or almost 20%, were admitted to the National Honor Society. In 1995 only 25 students, including both juniors and seniors, are members of the Society. State mandated PEP (Pupil Evaluation Program) scores for 1992-3 in reading, writing, science, and social studies in the lower grades showed Johnson City's average ranking as 8th out of the 12 districts. It ranked 11th in 6th grade reading, and dead last in 3rd grade reading. The 1993-94 scores were not much better. Grade 3 Reading: 12th; Grade 3 Math: tie for 9th; Grade 5 Writing: last; Grade 6 Reading: last; Grade 6 Math: 5th; Grade 4 Science: 11th; Grade 6 Social Studies: 11th; Grade 8 Social Studies: last.

It perhaps should not come as a surprise that the report also shows teacher turnover rate and student drop-out rate as the worst in the county. Results for 94-95 are not much better. Another interesting statistic found in the Report has to do with the district's socioeconomic level. Officials love to point out that "We're the lowest socioeconomic school district in this area. ["A Conversation with Al Mamary," Quality Outcomes-Driven Education, Vol. 4, No. 2, December, 1994, p.35] A glance at the "Poverty Index" appearing in the New York State statistical report shows that among the 12 local districts Johnson City ranks fourth or fifth, being tied with another district. So at least 4 other districts in our area are lower on the socioeconomic ladder than ours.

Similarly, in a category showing the percentage of free or reduced lunches supplied by the district, Johnson City again ranks fourth. What is more, the 1993-94 median salary for teachers ($36,500) as well as the cost-per-pupil ($7577) fall at or above the county average. The same held for the 1992-93 school year. Considering the fact that the national per-pupil average for 93-94 was $53l3, such figures hardly reflect a low socioeconomic level.

An official announcement made to a student assembly on February 28, 1995, the end of the second marking period, shows the extent to which the Johnson City program seems to be collapsing under its own weight. According to the announcement, over 1000 Incompletes were given to a student body of about 1000 in our high school. Five hundred students were failing more than 2 subjects. Of the 78 seniors receiving Incompletes, 12 had 4 or more. In the past, 2 or 3 serious disciplinary hearings were held by the superintendent by the end of the second marking period. This year 11 students have already been expelled and 8 have been confined to home teaching because of uncontrollable behavior. There have also been 12 dismissals for academic reasons, 20 dropouts. In the eighth grade 28 students have multiple Incompletes while 20 have been put on probation. At the same time half the class is on the honor roll. In June of 1994, 2000 Incompletes were given to a student body of 1200. Of the 164 students in the June, 1995 graduating class, 78 had received Incompletes by mid-year. Interestingly, almost all of these had been taught reading using the whole language system.

PARENTS' PERSPECTIVE
As in so many other districts throughout the country, most Johnson City parents are not truly aware of what is taking place in their schools. Since it is rather clear that any OBE system represents a "dumbing down" of programs, many parents who see their children receive good report cards and/or portfolios with very few or no failures, simply assume that their children are doing quite well, and that the schools are doing a good job.

While Johnson City parents are no different, we do have at least 25 families who have recently removed their children from the public schools in protest. In each case the decision was made after parents received very little satisfaction from officials who felt that what parents considered problems were not really problems. In many cases parents felt that their children were being encouraged by their teachers to disagree with parents on issues of concern. One parent told of how he and his wife had come almost to hate their son because they could not believe his accounts of why he never had homework, of how teachers would lie to students about their progress, etc. They would inevitably side with the teachers against their son. Only when the father got involved and went to the school to hold conferences with the boy's teachers did the parents realize that the son was the one to be believed and supported. Since transferring him to a private school, they have noticed great gains in his academic progress and in his general interest in school and learning. As of the winter of 1994, 318 students were being transported to alternative schools.

Issues of particular concern to parents included the following: inadequate spelling and reading levels, lack of skills to take standardized tests, no homework, failure to address the needs of average to above-average children, lack of cursive writing programs, minimal use of workbooks and textbooks, parents uninformed of their child's true grade level, avoidance of numerical grades and failing grades, overemphasis on self-esteem, site-based committees loaded with supporters of administration positions. Some parents with 2 or more children 3 or 4 years apart could not believe the differences between the older and younger ones in ability to read, write, or compute.

At a meeting of a representative group of 6 such families it became clear that the failure of officials seriously to address parents' concerns caused parents to decide to remove most if not all of their children from public schools. Some turned to parochial schools, some to home schooling, and some to other private schools. They all agreed that from that point on their children's progress became satisfactory. One parent pointed out that her elementary school child was thrilled not only to have her own books, but to be allowed to take them home! The father who had had a falling out with his son reported that relations had returned to normal.

A STUDENT'S PERSPECTIVE
A 1991 graduate of Johnson City wrote of her experience in the program in a student publication of SUNY-Binghamton. The article is entitled "Outcome-Based Idiocy," and opens with the student's declaration that as a theory Outcome-Based Education "is an undeniable failure, for it is completely detrimental to a student's cognitive process." Defining OBE as a process that "disregards traditional methods of teaching by instead emphasizing self-esteem in students," she turns to the principle of Mastery Learning to which she was subjected in Johnson City schools and which is part and parcel of OBE.

She analyzes the many weaknesses that characterize Mastery Learning, especially the retesting that it allows which enables many students eventually to achieve a high grade in a test even though he/she may have failed it several times. As a result, "Grades become meaningless, which results in a mockery of our educational system."

Students who cannot pass a test are given the grade of Incomplete which must be made up by year's end or receive no credit for the course. "In this system, nobody ever fails anything." As a result, the system "encourages laziness and apathy....resulting in a uniform level of mediocrity." She also recalls how her 12th grade government class was involved in the OBE agenda. "The class was forced to sit in groups of four every day in order to learn in a 'cooperative' manner. We were not only responsible for our own work, but the other three people as well....In this class we were bombarded with issues of multiculturalism, recycling, and other environmental causes. We learned very little about the structure of the United States government....grades were based on projects like collages. It is not surprising that incoming freshmen in colleges cannot write. This 12th grade class was taught on a junior high level."

CONCLUSION
Some information on the founder of the program might be helpful at this point. In an article significantly entitled "Leadership: A Change Agent's View," [Quality Outcomes-Driven Education, February, 1994, 7-17] John Champlin describes how he imposed ODDM on the Johnson City school district starting in 1971. "I began a crusade as a 'born again educator' dedicated to the idea that schools should be organized according to how we know young people learn....That sense of mission became one of the main driving forces in my life." He thereupon set out "to alter and perhaps even revolutionize the status quo." Starting 3 months before his official appointment "with a commitment to renewal that disallows compromising," he began working on plans to involve the community and to develop effective leadership throughout the system.

Having delivered his central message to the entire staff to the effect that the "current program...is substantially ineffective," he started his mission as a "change agent." All staff roles simply had to change to accommodate the Champlin "vision." Divide and conquer became the rule in working with the community. Meeting with parents were limited to "small groups ...with 8 to 10 parents." Large groups were avoided because they "serve as a forum for dissidents." He boasts that "One of our most successful strategies was to identify and isolate possible irritants in a small group." This would insure that "their contamination of others like themselves would not hurt us at all." Ultimately, "we kept rescheduling appointments until we captured over 90% of a school's parent group." Champlin boasts that, like in Frank Sinatra's song, "I Did It My Way," he was able to impose on Johnson City "a vision carefully conceived, thoughtfully managed, and doggedly sustained."

It was not until January of 1994 that most Johnson City parents discovered how far John Champlin's original "vision" had come in 23 years. Students were performing no better than average, and were having trouble entering and remaining in 4-year colleges, teachers were having increasing difficulty maintaining reasonable discipline, a growing number of families were placing children in private schools, not one of the other local districts had adopted the Johnson City model, and selected administrators and teachers were receiving handsome fees for traveling around the country helping over 150 school districts in 25 states and Canada adopt ODDM. Of these, almost a dozen have dropped the Model, and many others are desperately seeking relief if not release from it.

Adding to this is Johnson City's complete adoption of the radical views of the well-know psychiatrist, William Glasser. In his book, The Quality School, [Harper Perennial, 1992] Glasser hails Johnson City as the American model district. He then proceeds to enunciate his "control theory," which releases students from any form of coercion while in school, renounces homework and failing grades as evils, advocates the dropping of grades, the adoption of cooperative learning, thematic teaching, and total quality management, and ultimately preaches that the true quality school is one that allows students to determine what school should mean.

It is no wonder that so many Johnson City parents are concluding that their school district's program is based more on fiction than on fact. Nor is it any wonder that OBE's leading guru, William Spady, this past spring called the Johnson City program a good example of BAD implementation of OBE because of its overemphasis on self-esteem and insufficient emphasis on high standards.

[Aldo S. Bernardo is Distinguished Service Professor Emeritus from State University of New York at Binghamton and chairman of the citizens group, ESTEEM, a state-wide grass-roots movement that has been monitoring educational reform in New York state since April, 1994.]