Dr. Marge Mott, the Field manager for the KnowledgeWorks Early College program puts a unique twist on the old saying “I’ll believe it when I see it.” She believes that just the opposite is true. Rather than waiting for evidence, proof, or other confirmation of the value of an idea, she believes that we tend to see what we expect to see. I agree.

With the expectation that Special Education students, economically disadvantaged students, English Language Learners, and the various racial and ethnic subgroups will achieve at the same rate as other school populations, we tend to adopt an “I’ll believe it when I see it” stance. I do not think this has much to do with believing that these subgroups cannot achieve (although some might argue that it might.) I think this has much more to do with the lack of a visible model of what instruction, intervention, and assessment geared toward creating gains in the achievement of the mentioned subgroups might look like.

Think about it, if the main argument against the ability of these subgroups to perform on par with other school populations is that they have not in the past; the logic seems a bit shaky.

When we look for things that we believe ought to be there, we tend to see them. Is it possible, then, that we don’t “see” success for the subgroups becasue we really do not believe that they can be sucessful? Without question, this is a difficult proposition. When we venture into territory that is not clearly defined, it is easy to lose our way. If there has not been a serious, systemic effort to close the various achievement gaps, are we on solid ground in claiming that the outcome is impossible?

If we do not believe that every student can achieve at high levels, what do we believe? It could be argued that the beliefs currently held in our schools work against the notion of closing the achievement gaps that currently exist. Some examples might be the belief that inclusive classrooms “lower the bar” for all students, that outcomes achieved with supports are somehow less than outcomes achieved without supports, and that achievement is a fixed notion that can be measured only one way. Once again, the arguments in favor of these beliefs are usually based upon the notion that CURRENT inclusive practices “lower the bar,” supports are measured as “EITHER/OR,” and we do not YET have a feasible way to measure achievement differently.

I do not for a minute claim that all of the beliefs mentioned in the preceding paragraph are untrue. They may all be factual. My point is that we ought to examine them in a more scholarly way. Is there evidence to support the beliefs. If not they are just that, beliefs. As such, they can be changed or replaced with other beliefs.

Simply put, since we do not believe it, we don’t see it. If we can think of instruction, intervention, and assessment differently, we can develop the expectations (beliefs) that will allow us to see the possibilities in our classrooms and our schools.