Have we flattened the "bell curve"?

Every class I had in undergraduate and graduate school made reference to the use of the "bell curve" to determine assessment in all facets of life but especially in relationship to the educational assessment of child and adult learners.

You remember....at the "top" of the bell shaped curve was "50%". Everyone scored above or below the top of the curve. The brightest were in the top 20%. The underachievers were in the bottom 50%.

If a teacher had too many "top" students, the instruction and skills were probably too easy for the class. Too many failing students indicated the work was too difficult for the class or not presented effectively. Teachers tempered their instruction based on the bell curve, the natural distribution of high, medium and low students.

Has the federal government "flattened the bell"? Are all students to achieve at the same standard? That is not truthful, natural or normal. As many cities in our country grapple with low test scores, take a minute to think about the unrealistic expectations that we are placing on teachers and their students.

AYP (adequate yearly progress) has served its purpose. The test scores have made all of us much more aware of the value of data and analysis. AYP now serves to divide students against students, teachers against teachers and school districts against other school districts. What is the positive outcome of all of this wasted energy? What have we really accomplished with the slander and arguing in the past few weeks since the AYP scores were released to parents and the local papers?

AYP has served it's purpose but now has lost the honest truth behind thinking cheerfully that "all children can learn". All children CAN learn but some learn more than others, some forget more than others and some care more than others.