When No Child Left Behind was enacted, its supporters argued that it would address "the soft bigotry of low expectations." Is it possible that NCLB has actually solidified the inequity that results from wide variations in how excellence is defined? And, if that is the case, what role can effective professional learning play in ensuring that schools have high expectations for all students?

Consider three schools:

School A has a large percentage of students who are not succeeding on state accountability exams. Facing severe penalties, school leaders narrow their focus to getting enough students over the line on relatively low-level literacy and math standards in order to avoid sanctions. As a result, teachers are pressured to narrow their focus as well, with the resulting message being that high expectations for their students are simply not valued or measured.

School B has a number of students who are not succeeding on state accountability exams, but there is reason to believe that the school can address that fairly easily. Nevertheless, the school accepts the premise that once it has "made AYP," success will be achieved, so it also narrows its focus to those students and those tests.

School C also has a number of students who are not succeeding on accountability exams, and the school is committed to doing what's necessary for them to succeed. But the school and the community do not accept the premise that avoiding state sanctions constitutes excellence. Instead, they work together to set high standards in all subject areas, focusing on the knowledge, skills, and attributes their students will need to be successful in the world. Professional learning in this school stimulates collaboration on standards, instructional best practices, and meaningful assessments. Instruction is effective, challenging, and engaging. Students experience success in a variety of ways and develop a love for learning and the ability to learn independently of teacher direction.

Suppose now that all three schools are successful in reaching AYP and avoiding sanctions. Have the students in these three schools been provided an equitable education? Of course not. So I ask: In your state and in your school system, has excellence become a local option that is available in some schools and not others?

Has the quality of professional learning available in these schools helped determine which schools have high expectations and which do not?

NSDC is committed to its purpose of creating schools "where every educator engages in effective professional learning every day so every student achieves." How are your school and school system defining student achievement? Right now, the school and system levels are where these critical decisions are being made. I hope that discussion is under way in your world. If not, I encourage you to start it. And while you're at it, take advantage of this opportunity to lead others to an understanding that there is no road to school improvement that does not require effective professional learning. If we are truly determined to fight the soft bigotry of low expectations, we must create schools where professionals collaborate to set and reach high expectations for all students.

Charles Mason is president of the National Staff Development Council. This piece first appeared in the Fall 2009 issue of JSD.