A few items from this morning’s news:
- Adrian Fenty loses the Democratic mayoral primary in D.C., spelling likely doom for schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee.
- Hundreds of angry L.A. teachers stage a protest outside the Los Angeles Times building, decrying release of a “value-added” database of teacher performance.
- Bill Perkins, a strongly anti-charter school New York state senator, cruises to a landslide primary victory in his Harlem district.
A friend who works full-time on education reform issues told me last week, his voice full of confidence, that the strong push-back against Obama-Duncan reforms is nothing more than the desperate flailing of a mortally wounded beast. “They know they’re losing,” he said.
I’m not so sure. This is starting to look more like the pendulum swinging back in what I view as the wrong direction. My biggest issue with these latest developments is that while it is good to see unions and “reform” critics full of passion and energy, most of it is negatively charged. I’m still waiting to hear specific, affirmative plans for what they would put in place instead of the proposed reforms we’ve been debating and pushing over the last several years.
I have heard a lot about what is wrong with our current direction. Some of the criticism strikes me as legitimate. Now let’s hear some specifics suggestions about what to do instead. And by specific suggestions I do not mean vague platitudes couched in angry rhetoric.
Popularity: 2% [?]
Many political scientists have noted that, given America’s complicated political system, there are too many elected positions up for grabs for any side of a long-term fight to maintain control indefinitely. For example, even if you can keep a majority on a city countil, a mayor’s office will fall to the opponents; or, at the state level, if you keep control of the legislature or a key committee, eventually the governor’s seat will fall.
So, no matter where you are in this country, the “opponents” of reform will eventually win some powerful seat. So what should those who pursue reform do? First, realize that eventually your opponents will have more political influence and power than they do today. You might be able to extend the time it takes for them to have power; but the harder you push your agenda, the more quickly their power is likely to grow. Second, because of this first point, include in your agenda work to institutionalize practices that are effective, less subject to political influence, support good outcomes for kids, and that will inform and influence the future political leaders in constructive ways.
Examples:
1. In terms of data, create a culture of transparency around student performance data and a supporting infrastructure that generates and communicates that data clearly;
2. In the world of charters, establish professional procedures for reviewing charter applications and evaluating the performance of schools that are based on the needs of the community, the substantive merits of proposals, and the results of schools; rather than on political connections and influence.
There are plenty of others that you could imagine or that are underway. The common theme of these “politically resilient education reform strategies” is that later, no one in particular has to be in power for them to still help kids. And once you have them in place, arguing to eliminate these practices is awkward. They are, at their core, reasonable things to institutionalize.
The alternative, of trying to design and implement reforms that require permanent political protection, is primarily helpful for those working to motivate political action and to secure political power, but it will be disappointing in the long-run on the ground.
Alex Medler
Specific suggestions will and should be different in different places. As for broader things that I think should happen:
-Restore schools to democratic control, to ensure a system of checks and balances. (Public school parents should have a real say in decisions that affect their children’s schools.)
-Restore educators to their rightful place as leaders in reforming schools. We shouldn’t be the only ones involved, but as people who know the schools AND education, our judgment should carry far more weight than it does at present.
-Stop competitive ranking practices that necessarily create the appearance of failure. Evaluate schools based on what they’re doing, not how they compare with other schools.
-Embrace multiple methods of assessing student learning, to end the mis-labeling of children who are simply different, not inferior.
-Have an inclusive, honest (read: not ideologically-driven or hysterical) discussion, community by community, about what is actually going on in the schools, and what needs to improve.
First, Sabrina, define community.
I think, then, our only salvation (at least in Denver) will be to ensure the district moves forward with thoughtful, evidence-driven reform plans that bring community along for the ride. We can find the win-win situations with all stakeholders at the table, and without trying to sanitize the community engagement process.
They pay the bills, after all…
I’m open to discussing win-wins with any and all those that want the same thing. You know how to reach me.
I have no problem with using data to rank students and chart growth over time. I DO HOWEVER TAKE ISSUE WITH THE TESTS THEMSELVES! The questions on the CSAP were never norm referenced. We conduct educational research using an assessment which was never research based! This is a joke, and a sad one at that.
Create a quality normed assessments using a large sample population to account for socio-economic and geographic factors. Compare student scores against those earned by other real human beings…not against arbitrary lines drawn by politicians based upon what THEY feel is good enough for our children at any given point.
Here Mr. Gottlieb is my very specific suggestion for serious reform. Now please do something with it.
True reform will not happen until parents are actively engaged and I was pleased to see that noted in previous comments. Education reform is primarily based on science and math as the dominant theme because of the fear that we are falling behind the rest of the world in these areas.
So in regards to parental involvement let’s get a bit tougher in this area and make it a misdemeanor offense for a parent to refuse to attend a parent-teacher conference when their presence is requested by the local school. Safeguards could be provided that will allow for home visits, multiple opportunities to schedule conferences that fit the parents schedule. I believe the state of Texas does something similar. Not a politically correct suggestion but I’ve never worried about being PC in the past and don’t intend to start now. You’re not going to make progress in some of the urban areas until you change a culture that accepts dropping out and thus not graduating from high school.
In the second area of math and science I’d say cut the U.S. Dept of Education buedget dramatically and instead offer math and science college tuition rebates to those who choose to enter that field. Send out the recruiters to the junior high and high schools of this country and let them inform the public that Washington is willing to put their money where their mouth is and offer rebates upon graduation from college. Washington could for example offer larger rebates to those who entered the teaching field if they feel that this is the greatest area of need.
I guess one more suggestion would be for this state to expand school choice by passing a ballot initiative or referendum that makes vouchers constitutional. Vouchers offer hope and empower parents in the decision making arena. This new found responsibility for the education of their children will make the need for interference from Washington less prevalant because those very students are what gives the U. S. Dept of Ed the “green light” to get involved in what should be local decisions.