Education Gadfly Weekly
Volume 3, Number 11
March 27, 2003
Opinion + Analysis
Opinion
The Law People Love to Hate--and Pretend to Love
By
Chester E. Finn, Jr.
News Analysis
IDEA reauthorization is set in motion
By
Kathleen Porter-Magee
News Analysis
Are small schools really better?
News Analysis
Big city districts gaining on state tests
News Analysis
New guidance on how NCLB applies to charter schools
News Analysis
Teach for America asks districts to pay for teachers
News Analysis
Teachers complain that principals won't back them up on discipline
News Analysis
Urban Catholic schools innovate to survive
News Analysis
Voucher program in Florida has long waiting list
Reviews
Book
Change Forces with a Vengeance
By
Terry Ryan
Research
Ending Social Promotion: Results from Summer Bridge
By
Eric Osberg
Book
The $100,000 Teacher: A Teacher's Solution to America's Declining Public School System
By
Kathleen Porter-Magee
Research
The Organization of Primary and Secondary School Systems
By
Eric Osberg
Gadfly Studios
The Law People Love to Hate--and Pretend to Love
Chester E. Finn, Jr. / March 27, 2003
Bring back Richard Rothstein! The space his education column formerly occupied in the Wednesday New York Times is often filled nowadays by the grumpy Michael Winerip, who seems bent on proving that everybody in America hates the No Child Left Behind act. His latest contribution was last week's column reporting "pervasive dismay" with NCLB across the land. "As I travel the country," Winerip writes with evident relish, "I find nearly universal contempt for this noble-sounding law."
To be sure, the Gadfly has itself fussed on occasion about NCLB, but commentaries such as Winerip's come close to letting people off the hook by condoning a public-education system that isn't doing a satisfactory job today and resists doing anything differently tomorrow. If the view settles over educator-land that NCLB sets hopeless goals, needn't be taken seriously and can be dismissed on grounds that Uncle Sam isn't covering the full costs of compliance, then much of America should resign itself to twenty more years of flat scores, wide gaps and semi-educated kids. Whereas A Nation at Risk was greeted by a chorus of Pollyannas who asserted that its basic analysis was wrong and that everything was really copacetic in American education, NCLB seems to be attracting a choir of defeatists, especially state officials who say, in essence, "You just can't expect us to do all those things. They're too hard, too disruptive and you're not giving us enough money." Too bad the lead
The Law People Love to Hate--and Pretend to Love
IDEA reauthorization is set in motion
Kathleen Porter-Magee / March 27, 2003
With the reauthorization process finally creaking into motion for the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), lawmakers of both parties--and both houses of Congress--say this is now a top priority for 2003. In the first of what will doubtless prove to be many rounds, House Republicans last week introduced a bill calling for reforms that focus on accountability and results for students rather than on bureaucratic compliance. Proponents assert that there is wide agreement about what aspects of special education are in greatest need of reform, such as over-identification of minorities and the classification of many illiterate students as "learning disabled," although it seems certain that specific reform proposals will stir much debate.
The new GOP bill contains accountability provisions that mirror those found in the No Child Left Behind Act, including requirements that all special ed teachers be "highly qualified," and that states align their accountability systems for disabled students with the guidelines laid out in NCLB. Two years ago, in the NCLB context, there was much talk of bipartisan support for such requirements, but consensus for similar provisions in IDEA may prove hard to come by. Democrats have already faulted the Bush team for not providing adequate funding for states to comply with NCLB, and now some complain that, despite unprecedented increases in special education funding, the Administration is dooming reform prospects by not boosting the federal share to the "fully funded" (if arbitrary) forty percent level. Democrats will
IDEA reauthorization is set in motion
Are small schools really better?
March 27, 2003
In his online Class Struggle column, Jay Mathews praises a new book by Tom Toch called High Schools on a Human Scale: How Small Schools Can Transform American Education. While small schools are in vogue today, boosted in part by many dollars from the Gates Foundation, skeptics wonder whether size alone can determine school effectiveness. Toch's book contends that small schools may not have an edge if they don't have a coherent educational vision but that it's easier to attain such unity of purpose in a small school than in a large one.
"Smaller High Schools Proving to be Educationally More Effective," by Jay Mathews, Washingtonpost.com, March 25, 2003.
High Schools on a Human Scale: How Small Schools Can Transform American Education, by Thomas Toch, is due to be released by Beacon Press in April 2003. Its ISBN is 080703245X.
Are small schools really better?
Big city districts gaining on state tests
March 27, 2003
A new report from the Council of the Great City Schools (CGCS) finds that the nation's largest school districts are making significant gains on state tests, often improving faster than rural and suburban districts. Eighty-seven percent of grades in big-city districts posted gains in math between 1997 and 2002, and 44 percent improved faster than the state average. In reading, 72 percent of grades improved, with 47 percent bettering the state average. "Relentless and sustained focus...on improving achievement" is responsible for the gains, according to Michael Casserly, the executive director of CGCS.
"City Districts Show Gains in Series of School Tests," by Greg Winter, The New York Times, March 25, 2003.
The report, Beating the Odds: A City-by-City Analysis of Student Performance and Achievement Gaps on State Assessments is available at http://www.cgcs.org/pdfs/bto3.pdf.
Big city districts gaining on state tests
New guidance on how NCLB applies to charter schools
March 27, 2003
The U.S. Department of Education has issued guidance on how the requirements of the No Child Left Behind act should be interpreted as affecting charter schools. It includes specifics on how the highly-qualified-teacher requirement applies to charters, whether such schools must to make adequate yearly progress like other public schools, and how the public school choice and supplemental services provisions impact charter schools. While several of these "clarifications" are exceedingly complex and may prove clumsy to implement, it appears that the Department has done a conscientious job of trying to reconcile the dictates of NCLB with the singularities of charter schools. Still, one wonders if there may be a basic mismatch between an idea (charters) that wants schools to do things differently and a massive federal law that essentially wants them all to do the same things. The guidelines can be found at www.ed.gov/offices/OII/choice/charterguidance03.doc.
New guidance on how NCLB applies to charter schools
Teach for America asks districts to pay for teachers
March 27, 2003
Teach for America (TFA) has begun asking school districts to contribute $1500 for each teacher they hire from the program. The national program--which recruits top college graduates, trains them over the summer to teach in high-need schools, places them in classrooms, and supports them while they teach--spends about $8,000 to develop each TFA corps member. Donors who support Teach for America want receiving districts to help offset this cost, according to a TFA spokesperson.
"Teach for America wants districts to pay per teacher," by Sarah Anchors, The Arizona Republic, March 20, 2003.
(NB: This Arizona Republic article gets some facts wrong. The dollar figures in our blurb are correct; those in the Republic article are not.)
Teach for America asks districts to pay for teachers
Teachers complain that principals won't back them up on discipline
March 27, 2003
Former teachers often say they left the classroom because of a lack of "administrative support." Often what they mean is that school administrators failed to back them up when they tried to enforce classroom discipline or punish students for cheating or plagiarism. An article in the Baltimore Sun illuminates both sides of this struggle. Teachers grumble about the time and paperwork required to impose penalties like suspension, expulsion, or failing grades, and note that their efforts are often thwarted by administrators who cave in to the threat of litigation and to well-connected parents who call the school board. They also complain that, when they send disruptive students to the principal's office, the kids are often sent back to class, which signals to other students that misbehaving is not taken seriously. Administrators point to court decisions that, they say, tie their hands by expanding the due-process rights of students. They also blame teachers for not resolving discipline problems themselves, noting that most office referrals come from a small number of teachers.
"Teachers say the law adds to disorder in classroom," by Jonathan Rockoff, Baltimore Sun, March 23, 2003.
Teachers complain that principals won't back them up on discipline
Urban Catholic schools innovate to survive
March 27, 2003
While many inner-city Catholic schools struggle to survive, and more than a few shut down, three innovative models of Catholic middle and high schools are spreading across the country. In Cristo Rey high schools, which now exist in four cities and will soon expand to six more sites, students earn much of their tuition by working in banks, law firms, and other businesses needing clerical help. At Nativity and San Miguel middle schools, now found in several dozen cities, the school day has been lengthened and instruction has been intensified. While all Catholic schools face shortages of priests and nuns and others willing to teach for very low salaries, these new models often raise support from outside benefactors to make ends meet.
"Lifting Hope, One Job at a Time," by Jay Mathews, The Washington Post, March 25, 2003.
"Finding a way out," by Mary Ann Zehr, Education Week, March 19, 2003.
Urban Catholic schools innovate to survive
Voucher program in Florida has long waiting list
March 27, 2003
The largest but perhaps least well known of Florida's three voucher programs is providing scholarships to private schools for more than 15,000 children this year and has exhausted the $50 million that policymakers allowed for it. The Florida Corporate Income Tax Credit Scholarship program lets businesses divert a portion of their taxes to organizations that provide poor children with up to $3,500 in private school tuition. Though there was little advertising for the program, about 55,000 parents applied for the scholarships for their children; many are now on waiting lists. The bill's sponsor hopes to expand the program to as much as $150 million, which would save Florida nearly $1 billion in education costs over the next eight years, since the state would otherwise pay public schools an average of $5600 to educate each child.
"Tax vouchers trigger rush," by Denise-Marie Balona, Orlando Sentinel, March 21, 2003.
Voucher program in Florida has long waiting list
Change Forces with a Vengeance
Terry Ryan / March 27, 2003
Michael Fullan, London: RoutledgeFalmer
2003
There has been much research on reforming schools but less on fixing the systems in which they're embedded. Michael Fullan, a Canadian educator who has worked extensively in his home country, the US and the UK, jumps into this opening with an investigation of what it takes to produce "sustainable system change." His book is informed by efforts at large-scale reform in the United Kingdom and in large American urban districts, such as San Diego and District 2 in New York City. Fullan says it can be done, that "over the last five or so years we have learned how to improve literacy and numeracy in large systems." But this is just the threshold to greater progress. To improve student performance more broadly, make it sustainable, and get teachers to buy into it requires, says Fullan, a shared moral purpose, the effective coordination of bottom-up and top-down reforms, and quality leadership at all levels. He also asserts that such change is too rapid and dynamic for any one person to control and manage; needed instead is "distributed leadership," which "requires people to operate in networks of shared and complementary expertise rather than in hierarchies." In short, if a system seeks sustainable reform, it must create an environment that identifies, nurtures and rewards leaders at every level from the classroom to the superintendency or ministry. This book offers some big ideas and is a worthy read for
Change Forces with a Vengeance
Ending Social Promotion: Results from Summer Bridge
Eric Osberg / March 27, 2003
Consortium on Chicago School Research
Melissa Roderick, Mimi Engel and Jenny Nagaoka
February 2003
This report takes a comprehensive look at the Chicago Public Schools' Summer Bridge program, which provides summer instruction to third, sixth and eighth graders who fail to achieve the test scores necessary to advance to the next grade. The program is mandatory for such students and current serves about 21,000 of them annually. It's become a key component of the district's effort to end social promotion. This study concludes that the program basically works: students' test scores do improve, helping many to pass to the next grade. And gains aren't confined to those closest to the test cutoff; in some cases, the lowest scoring students posted large gains. Further, students claim to enjoy the program more than the regular school year, and attendance--typically quite low in summer schools--often exceeds 90 percent. However, the authors also find that Summer Bridge "does not change students' experiences during the school year." Instead, students generally return to their previous learning rates, with some modest improvements. And unfortunately, this report makes only a half-hearted attempt to measure the program's cost, so whether it's a better investment than other interventions remains an open question. Still, the report provides great detail about Summer Bridge's distinguishing features (notably small classes and a centralized curriculum) and cites much other research on summer schools. You can find your own copy on-line at http://www.consortium-chicago.org/publications/p59.html.
Ending Social Promotion: Results from Summer Bridge
The $100,000 Teacher: A Teacher's Solution to America's Declining Public School System
Kathleen Porter-Magee / March 27, 2003
Brian Crosby, Capital Books, Inc.
2002
Though the title implies that the author will argue for whopping teacher salaries as a way to improve education, Brian Crosby's proposals are actually far more nuanced, though no less controversial. He thinks we've wasted billions on education reform that has been misdirected toward curriculum and standards development, small schools, smaller classes, and--worst of all--state testing. Instead, he says, the only way to improve education is to refocus our resources on improving the teacher workforce. This, in turn, requires establishment of a pay scale that rewards quality and hard work, providing administrators more flexibility to dismiss ineffective teachers, and granting teachers the same perks granted to other kinds of professionals. (Unfortunately, Crosby tends to treat state certification and recognition by the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards as proxies for teacher quality.) While conceding that his proposals will be expensive, the author says such an increase would be marginal if we eliminated other--in his view fruitless--reform schemes (including programs such as Title 1) and redirected those resources into teacher salaries and benefits. For information about obtaining this book, go to http://www.100000teacher.com/.
The $100,000 Teacher: A Teacher's Solution to America's Declining Public School System
The Organization of Primary and Secondary School Systems
Eric Osberg / March 27, 2003
William G. Ouchi, Bruce S. Cooper, Lydia G. Segal, Tim DeRoche, Carolyn Brown, and Elizabeth Galvin
The Anderson School of Management, UCLA
Working paper, July 25, 2002 (revised September, 2002)
Long an important topic in business schools, the question of how organizations should be structured has rarely been asked of schools, mainly because they are notoriously difficult to analyze. This interesting new report tries to determine whether school systems are best organized using a centralized or decentralized approach. The authors sort nine systems into three categories. Most centralized are large urban districts (New York, L.A. and Chicago), which follow a hierarchical, bureaucratic structure. Least centralized are three diocesan Catholic systems (again in New York, L.A., and Chicago), which cede almost total control to individual schools. In the middle are those few public school districts (here Houston, Seattle and Edmonton) that allow individual schools to make important decisions (such as hiring teachers and choosing curricula) and centralize only those decisions that bring economies of scale (such as insurance and payroll management). The differences in the extreme are striking. With 1211 public schools, New York City has 8,000 people working in central offices (and another 17,000 who work in schools but are effectively part of the central office structure); the New York archdiocese, by contrast, has 286 schools and just 22 people working in its central office. In the end, the authors find that sizable variations in school performance are associated with such differences. Decentralized
The Organization of Primary and Secondary School Systems
Announcements
March 25: AEI Common Core Event
March 21, 2013While most discussion about the Common Core State Standards Initiative has focused on its technical merits, its ability to facilitate innovation, or the challenges facing its practical implementation, there has been little talk of how the standards fit in the larger reform ecosystem. At this AEI conference, a set of distinguished panelists will present the results of their research and thoughts on this topic and provide actionable responses to the questions that will mark the next phase of Common Core implementation efforts. The event will take place at the American Enterprise Institute in D.C. on March 25, 2013, from 9:00AM to 5:00PM. It will also be live-streamed online. For more information and to register, click here.





