Ready for some revisionist history? You’d better be.
Popularity: 5% [?]
College Summit, is a non-profit with strong Colorado ties. Its founder, JB. Schramm, is a graduate of Denver’s East High School. The 17-year-old program, which address the under-enrollment of capable low-income youth in college, works in several Colorado districts, most notably Mapleton, where college-going rates have gone up and dropout rates down since College Summit appeared on the scene.
Today, College Summit learned that it is one of 10 non-profits across the country that will receive a share — $125,000 –of President Obama’s $1.4 million Nobel Peace Prize award. Susan Bross, executive director of College Summit’s Colorado chapter, says a portion of the money will go to the organization’s Colorado work.
Here is a list of all the charities getting a slice of Obama’s Nobel money.
Popularity: 5% [?]
Let’s say a group of parents at a neighborhood school banded together and proposed to a high-performing charter school that the two schools combine efforts to create a PreK-12 school that would help send all kids from the struggling neighborhood to college.
What’s not to like, right? Parental involvement at its best. Community engagement. A tacit recognition that ideological food fights over charter versus traditional public schools are meaningless; all that matters is how to serve kids well.
Who might object, and on what grounds?
Stay tuned for some possible answers.
Last Friday, Denver’s Cole Arts and Science Academy (CASA) parents, along with Principal Julie Murgel, held a news conference to announce they had asked the Denver School of Science and Technology to open its third campus at Cole in the fall of 20l1. See video). The idea, hatched by a group of parents, had been presented to DSST leadership some weeks earlier, and DSST had responded with interest.
Every member of DSST’s first two graduating classes has been accepted into a four-year college. Forty-five percent of the school’s students qualify for federally subsidized lunches. Measured by the Denver Public Schools School Performance Framework, DSST is the top-rated high school in Denver, by a wide margin.
Much remains to be negotiated. CASA is currently PreK-8th grade, and DSST offers grades 6-12. Presumably, DSST would take over the middle grades, but that isn’t set in stone.
Attendance boundaries would be another delicate negotiating point. How might a new, high-performing high school in the area affect Manual High School? Manual is still rebuilding, under strong leadership, after being closed down for a year in the wake of an ill-fated dalliance with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
One of DSST’s cornerstones is a socio-economically mixed student body. How would the school achieve integration in a neighborhood that, while gentrifying, remains predominantly low-income? That will be an issue requiring careful, sensitive handling.
These are real challenges, but they are surmountable with open, inclusive planning, transparency and good intent. In this regard, the potential partnership is off to a good start.
But signs have already appeared that, on the Denver school board at least, there will be opposition to this plan. Probably not enough to sink it, but enough to cause some anxious moments.
I asked board member Andrea Merida, who regards charter schools with a skeptical eye, for her initial reaction to the idea. It wasn’t warm and fuzzy.
“We need to step back and take a look at the range of needs for the entire near-northeast sector before we can jump into such an arrangement,” she said in an e-mail. She then listed some specific concerns:
Merida concluded by saying that she looked forward to receiving the proposal. “I hope that it will have recommendations for addressing these issues.”
From what I’m hearing, there’s also some skepticism among dissenters on the board that this idea came from parents. It must have been driven by DSST, or Superintendent Tom Boasberg, this line of thinking goes.
DSST CEO Bill Kurtz told me last week that near-northeast Denver “wasn’t even on our radar screen” until Cole parents approached DSST leaders. (The charter network is in the early stages of an ambitious expansion plan. Four new DSST campuses will open in Denver in the next four years, the first of those this fall in Green Valley Ranch.)
And Boasberg spokesman Mike Vaughn had this to say about the origin of the idea:
“The leadership and parent teams at Cole and DSST have proposed a partnership. We look forward to discussing the proposal with the entire community and with the Board of Education as part of our process for identifying locations for new schools.”
Board members might want to be careful about opposing this idea. If the new partners answer the pending questions, as I’m confident they will, it is hard to see how this isn’t good for kids in northeast Denver.
At that point, you’d have to wonder whose interests those in opposition would be promoting.
Popularity: 55% [?]
Those of you who missed the detailed, probing article about what makes a good teacher in yesterday’s New York Times Magazine should invest the time to read it. Often lost amid all the policy and political debate is detailed examination of what goes on inside the nation’s classrooms. The author of this piece, Elizabeth Green, helps run the excellent Gotham Schools education blog.
Popularity: 32% [?]
Parents at the Cole Arts and Sciences Academy, a neighborhood school in northeast Denver, have dropped to a collective knee and proposed marriage to the high-performing Denver School of Science and Technology. Parents Friday formally asked DSST to open its third campus, grades 6-12, in the imposing Cole building in the fall of 2011. This would allow students in the under-served neighborhood to enroll in pre-kindergarten and stay in the same school through high school.
Although others — most recently Montbello High School — have discussed the idea of an in-school feeder pattern, this may be the first time in Denver that such a marriage has been formally put forward. And marrying a chatter school to a neighborhood public school would be the best kind of mixed marriage.
Parents and school officials say that this move is an organic one, growing out of parental desire to see better options for their children. Bill Kurtz, the CEO of DSST public schools, told me that “near northeast Denver wasn’t on our radar” until Cole parents approached him recently.
If this is, as it appears, an authentic parent initiative, it will be interesting to see how the anti-charter forces on the Denver school board will frame their opposition. Or might they decide that this represents the community involvement they’ve been advocating for, and vote in favor of this plan?
Something tells me there will be opposition on the board — but not enough to stop this intriguing partnership.
Popularity: 38% [?]
As I wrote earlier this week, Diane Ravitch’s new book will become a new flashpoint for the education reform debate. For those of you disinclined to buy a hardback book, try this 3-plus minute interview instead:
In New Book, Diane Ravitch Recants Long-Held Beliefs from Education Week on Vimeo.
Popularity: 6% [?]
College students from across Colorado converged on the State Capitol Wednesday to protest steep budget cuts to higher education. Here is a brief video of the event:
Popularity: 6% [?]
To outsiders like me, Texas politics are incomprehensible. But last night, voters turned out a prominent conservative member of the state Board of Education — Don McLeroy — who had been profiled in a recent New York Times Magazine piece as the architect of a plan to make textbooks portray the U.S. as an overtly Christian nation. I wrote about this issue a couple of weeks ago.
McLeroy came across as an extremist and ideologue in the Times piece. So kudos to Texans for giving him the cowboy boot.
Popularity: 9% [?]
I spent part of the last two weekends reading Diane Ravitch’s new book, “The Death and Life of the Great American School System.” It’s part polemic and part confessional.
Ravitch, once an ardent supporter of charter schools, accountability and other market-based reforms, has done a dramatic, highly public 180-degree turn. She now says these approaches will destroy public education if allowed to continue unfettered.
A former federal education official (under Bush I and Clinton) and an influential writer and thinker on education, Ravitch’s change of heart is attracting national notice, and with good reason.
Her book, while exhibiting some of the new convert’s zeal and bombast, contains thought-provoking stuff. Even though I don’t agree with some of her conclusions, and though she paints some people as villains who don’t deserve the abuse, she also makes some compelling arguments that those of us pushing some of the reforms she now abhors would be wise to ponder.
In a nutshell, Ravitch believes that U.S. education went seriously off the rails in the early 1990s and has been heading down an increasingly destructive path ever since.
It was in the early ‘90s, she says, when a concerted effort to write national content standards fell victim to ideological bickering over history standards and their allegedly liberal/progressive bias. An interesting footnote: The person who led the charge against the standards was none other than Lynne Cheney, wife of our former vice president.
Once the standards movement stalled, and standards writing was turned over to states, Ravitch says, states responded by writing vague, meaningless standards that remain in effect to this day.
“The states seemed to understand that avoiding specifics was the best policy; that standards were best if they were completely non-controversial; and that standards would survive scrutiny only if they said nothing and changed nothing,” she writes.
Into this vacuum rode George W. Bush and No Child Left Behind. The revamped federal education law, Ravitch says, made test scores in reading and math the Holy Grail and left everything else in ruins. She contrasts NCLB to the seminal “A Nation at Risk” and finds NCLB wanting:
“A Nation at Risk envisioned a public school system that offered a rich, well-balanced and coherent curriculum, similar to what was available to students on the academic track in successful school districts. No Child Left Behind, by contrast, was bereft of any educational ideas.”
Once test-based accountability became the nation’s obsession, a new generation of market-based reformers arrived on the scene to further the agenda, Ravitch says. She heaps particular scorn on Alan Bersin, a former federal prosecutor (and now the nation’s border czar), a non-traditional superintendent who ran the San Diego schools from 1998 to 2005, and Joel Klein, New York City schools chancellor, and his boss Mayor Michael Bloomberg. She also takes some swipes at Arne Duncan for his stewardship of Chicago schools.
Ravitch raises red flags about charter schools and the foundations that promote them. While it might not be these foundations’ intentional agenda to destroy American public education, she says, their pushing of charters, choice and accountability are doing just that.
Echoing many of the arguments of teachers’ unions across the country, Ravitch says that charters drain the best, most motivated students from regular public schools, leaving those schools in a death spiral, for which they are then blamed.
“As currently configured, charter schools are havens for the motivated,” Ravitch writes. “As more charter schools open, the dilemma of educating all students will grow sharper. The resolution of this dilemma will determine the fate of public education.”
The problem with this argument, of course, is that it implies that ‘motivated’ students from low-income families should be denied the opportunity for a better education so that the institution of public education, which has served them badly, survives to fail another day.
Here I side with Howard Fuller, who on a recent Denver visit proclaimed: “I am from the Harriet Tubman school of education reform.” Every kid who escapes a bad educational environment is one more kid with a better chance at a fulfilling life.
Ravitch excoriates the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Walton Family Foundation and the Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation for being unelected policy-making monoliths, utterly unaccountable, that are shaping the direction (or as she would argue, dismantling) of public education.
“There is something fundamentally antidemocratic about relinquishing control of the public education policy agenda to private foundations run by society’s wealthiest people,” she writes. “…The foundations demand that public schools and teachers be held accountable for performance, but they themselves are accountable to no one. If their plans fail, no sanctions are levied against them. They are bastions of unaccountable power.”
I ask Ravitch: To whom, then, should we cede control over public education? An answer as banal as “the people” won’t cut it. Elected school boards? Their failures, especially in big cities, are the stuff of legends.
Ravitch argues, in compelling if vague fashion, that the way to “fix” public schooling is not to look for a single answer, but rather to unite in common purpose, to eschew test-driven stripped-down education, to develop a broad and deep national curriculum (she favors something along the lines of Core Knowledge, with top-notch art and music education added to the mix), to find great teachers and support them with training and good pay, to get more parents to read to their kids, and to expect kids to behave in a civil manner when in school.
It’s hard to disagree with any of Ravitch’s suggested cures, even if her description of the disease is off base. But it’s almost impossible to see how we get there from here. While she lays out some of the problems forcefully, in blunt, plain English, she goes fuzzy on us just when we need her most.
Still, this book is a must read for anyone who cares about public education reform. In Ravitch’s arguments you will hear echoes of some of the ideological battles taking place right here, right now.
The fact that her book’s release coincides almost perfectly with announcements about first-round Race to the Top winners suggests that the battle over public education’s future has been joined on a grand scale. Its outcome will not be decided anytime soon.
Popularity: 69% [?]