Reader feedback: two cheers for the grassroots

Chester E. Finn, Jr. / October 31, 2003

In the October 16 Gadfly, I cited a "sage observer" of the school choice scene who suggested that grassroots activism and the large sums being spent thereon are not actually influencing votes in the halls of Congress or state legislatures and that all this money and energy might better be deployed to elect different candidates rather than struggling to change minds of those already elected. (See http://www.edexcellence.net/gadfly/index.cfm#1494). I invited comments and dissents, and many flooded in. Here is a representative sampling, with names omitted to protect the cautious:

D.C. Organization Head:
One problem (and our major complaint throughout) - there has been absolutely NO GRASSROOTS EFFORT WHATSOEVER, save a few parents here and there in D.C. going to the Hill. The big money has been spent on ads, not personal grassroots attention. Throughout this effort, the people spending other people's money have focused on big heavy top roots, not grassroots. Sad. That's our continual problem. No one seems to understand the value of the little people anymore.

D.C. Observer:
I can think of one [vote that was influenced]: Harold Ford voted for the DC program after being anti-school choice. He was lobbied by X and Y and parents. Ford went to private schools as a child and was willing to admit it was helpful. His union backers are no doubt very displeased.

D.C. Parent Activist:
Today someone told me that we put up a good grassroots fight here in D.C. Yes, we did. For me

» Continued

Reader feedback: two cheers for the grassroots

A way out for D.C. schools?

October 31, 2003

Earlier this month, D.C. mayor Anthony Williams began to lobby for mayoral control over District schools - a move that has been tried in other big cities with mixed results. This week, in a closed-door session with the city council, Williams outlined the details of his plan, which includes extending the school year by six weeks and the school day by several hours, merit pay for teachers, and giving principals of successful schools greater autonomy. "A Mayor's Vision" has met with criticism from all the usual places: school board president Peggy Cooper Cafritz claims that the proposals are ones she's already made herself, and that Hizzoner's approach "is about power, not about the kids," while board member William Lockridge accused the mayor of "intentionally withholding money that he plans to provide if he gets control of the school system." If that wasn't enough, he called the mayor "selfish and immature" because "[Williams] doesn't want the school system to improve under the current structure . . . [rather], he wants it to improve under his structure." We'll gladly settle for the decrepit D.C. school system improving under any structure. And we agree with Paul Ruiz of the Education Trust, who notes that Williams's plan to lengthen school days and years won't boost achievement unless coupled with curricular and instructional reforms. Watch this space.

"D.C. school proposals coolly received," by Craig Timberg and Justin Blum, Washington Post, October 30, 2003

» Continued

A way out for D.C. schools?

Big apple's big charter plans

October 31, 2003

We are heartened by news that New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg plans to dramatically expand the number of Gotham's charter schools from two dozen to more than 50. And we're pleased that he and schools chancellor Joel Klein are including private funders in the plan - an admirable public-private venture for the benefit of kids, and one that, if used as a nationwide model, could go a long way toward easing the daunting start-up costs of charter schools. The funders, which include the Robertson Foundation, the Robin Hood Foundation, and philanthropists Joe and Carol Reich, will provide up to $70 million to a new nonprofit that will manage the new schools - many of which will be failing public schools that have been reconstituted. Of course, the devil is in the details, and we'll watch to see whether the new schools have the right amount of autonomy and flexibility in such key areas as budget, staffing, and curriculum. But Klein and Bloomberg are definitely talking the talk, and making steps toward walking the walk.

"Failed city schools may go private," by Carl Campanile, New York Post, October 31, 2003

"Charter school push," by Carl Campanile, New York Post, October 28, 2003

» Continued

Big apple's big charter plans

Chipping away at CA's content requirements

October 31, 2003

In 1970, on the reasonable assumption that teachers need to know something before they can teach it, California legislators passed the Ryan Act, mandating that people training to become teachers in the Golden State must earn a bachelor's degree before taking classes in pedagogy and suchlike. In the decades since, however, California's education establishment has turned undermining the Ryan Act's effectiveness into an art form. The first effort involved the creation of "liberal studies" - an ostensible major that includes classes in English, math, science, history, social studies, physical education and the arts. This let would-be teachers avoid the burden of picking a true disciplinary major. In the late 1990s, when the teacher shortage was at its worst, critics of the Ryan Act worked to roll back its content requirements, arguing that content classes, even the nebulous liberal studies, "needlessly prolong[ed] teacher training" and that these requirements "should be dropped or shortened." The teacher shortage has largely abated, but the assault on the Ryan Act continues. The latest erosion is SB 81, recently signed by lame duck governor Gray Davis, that reduces the total number of credits necessary to graduate with CA state certification, thus supposedly accelerating the production of teachers. But what will get cut? We fantasize that ed school pedagogy classes will make way for rigorous, content-specific courses. Not.

"Can little Mary learn if teacher's in the dark?" by Jerry Griswold, Los Angeles Times, October 27,

» Continued

Chipping away at CA's content requirements

New standards, old complaints

October 31, 2003

As reported earlier, Minnesota's swell new social studies standards are out for public comment [see http://www.edexcellence.net/gadfly/issue.cfm?issue=114#1433]. Now you can read some of these comments and, alas, many are both harsh and moronic. ("Roe v. Wade will be gone if these standards are passed.") Others are nasty and ad hominem. ("The Commissioner should be removed from office.") A few are constructive. But the vast majority break down into three old and tiresome complaints. We can't do this; it's too hard. We can't do this; there's not enough money. And we can't do this; it's too eurocentric/intolerant/undiverse/jingoistic. The issues change; the whining continues.

Minnesota academic standards, history and social studies (with public comments),

"Proposed school history standards draw criticism," by Norman Draper, Minneapolis Star Tribune, October 30, 2003,

» Continued

New standards, old complaints

Partly right on NCLB

October 31, 2003

The GOP is responding to allegations that No Child Left Behind is an "unfunded mandate" and that not enough federal dollars are being appropriated for it. This week, House education committee chairman John Boehner issued a letter to Republican colleagues (not available online) that charged Democrats with demagoguery on this issue, while Education Secretary Rod Paige echoed that in a Wall Street Journal column. Both made a technical argument about the difference between "authorization" and "appropriation" and a more philosophical argument about how America's education woes are not caused by too little money. But old habits die hard. Both Paige and Boehner began their defense by recounting just how much money the Bush administration HAS thrown at Title I education - $11.7 billion in fiscal year 2003 - which rather seems to give away the argument before it's even begun. When will Republicans learn that they never win these "bidding wars" and it's folly to engage in them?

"It's not about the money," by Rod Paige, Wall Street Journal, October 30, 2003  (subscription required)

» Continued

Partly right on NCLB

Walking on eggshells at P.C.U.

October 31, 2003

The lack of intellectual diversity on college campuses today is not just an issue for conservatives. On Wednesday, four witnesses, three of them self-proclaimed liberals, talked with the Senate HELP Committee about the dangers of the one-sided education being provided at America's colleges and universities. (This was the second such hearing organized by Chairman Judd Gregg.) Students are being taught by homogeneous professors who are busy propagating their political ideas, or else teaching monotonous courses that seek to avoid all words and actions deemed politically incorrect. Either way, at a time when young adults should be encouraged to debate contentious issues freely, they are being driven to silence by an academic culture that gets vaporous at the prospect of being thought "offensive." Regardless of the ideology of individual professors, students deserve an education that exposes them to multiple views and perspectives. As Anne Neal of the American Council of Trustees and Alumni stated, "Even this ideological imbalance would not be fatal if students were given the knowledge and background that empowers them to think for themselves."

"Is intellectual diversity an endangered species on America's college campuses?," Senate HELP Committee Hearing, October 29, 2003

» Continued

Walking on eggshells at P.C.U.

A Qualified Teacher in Every Classroom: Appraising Old Answers and New Ideas

Chester E. Finn, Jr. / October 31, 2003

The American Enterprise Institute, the Progressive Policy Institute, and the National Council on Teacher Quality October 2003

The American Enterprise Institute, in conjunction with the Progressive Policy Institute and the National Council on Teacher Quality, held an uncommonly interesting conference last week. While you needed to be there to get the full flavor of what discussants and audience had to say, and while many revisions doubtless lie between drafting and publishing, drafts of the ten papers worked over at the conference are available on line and at least a few repay attention. In two longish overview papers, Stanford's Heidi Ramirez and PPI's Andy Rotherham and Sara Mead chronicle the evolution of the federal and state roles vis-??-vis teacher quality. Four papers (by Bryan Hassel, Michael Podgursky, Kate Walsh, and Gary Sykes) propound new (well, more or less new) models of teacher preparation and licensure. And in a path breaking analysis of actual content of teacher-prep courses in elite ed schools (based on course syllabi in foundations, psychology, reading and math), Boston University's David Steiner finds that "The schools of education we reviewed are neither preparing teachers adequately to use the concrete findings of the best research in education, nor are they providing their students with a thoughtful and academically rich background in the fundamentals of what it means to be an outstanding educator." You can find the papers - remember, they're drafts, to be revised based on conference discussion and authors'

» Continued

A Qualified Teacher in Every Classroom: Appraising Old Answers and New Ideas

Baselines for Assessment of Choice Programs

Eric Osberg / October 31, 2003

Paul T. Hill and Kacey Guin, University of Washington
Education Policy Analysis Archives
October 2003

This short but useful paper makes an undeniable point: that any school choice program, to be judged fairly, should be compared to the existing public school system, not to its "idealized aspirations." In other words, those who argue that choice programs - be they charters, vouchers, or otherwise - are flawed often overlook the fact that our public schools themselves are imperfect. School choice reforms come under attack for potentially "skimming" the best students, leaving poor and minority students in the worst schools; yet our public schools are already divided along these lines. Choice critics fear that resources might be distributed unfairly; yet public schools often spend far more on their best students than on their neediest. Such critiques and more come under fire in this paper, which neatly summarizes the aspects of today's public schools against which any choice proposal should be measured. All school systems contain mechanisms for choice - families can move and parents can pester administrators for favored treatment - but usually these are bureaucratic and thus hard to monitor and manage. With open forms of choice, winners and losers are visible, and programs can be designed to benefit those most in need. Why then does the burden of proof lie with choice proponents, to show that their proposals will do no harm, rather than with opponents, to prove that today's public

» Continued

Baselines for Assessment of Choice Programs

Exodus: A Study of Teacher Retention in America

Carolyn Conner / October 31, 2003

AARP Knowledge Management, NRTA: AARP's Educator Community, and HarrisInteractive Inc.2003

This report from the American Association of Retired Persons uses survey data from teachers to determine what makes fine instructors leave the classroom and what policymakers can do to try to get them to stay. The report looks at the problem through the eyes of teachers - those that have remained and those who opted to leave. Some of the reasons former teachers cited for leaving were lack of support from administration, low pay, and feeling undervalued and under-appreciated by society and the community. "Everyone knows it is one of the most important fields of society, but actions do not follow suit with this knowledge," cites one former teacher. Based on the teachers' responses, rewarding and recognizing performance and improving communication and flexibility between teachers and administration can help schools recruit and retain motivated teachers. Yes, this report is marred by familiar teacher gripes about how tough a row they've picked to hoe. And it's not exactly ground-breaking. But worth a look. Check it out at http://research.aarp.org/general/exodus.pdf.

» Continued

Exodus: A Study of Teacher Retention in America

Violence in U.S. Public Schools: 2000 School Survey on Crime and Safety

Chester E. Finn, Jr. / October 31, 2003

Amanda K. Miller and Kathryn Chandler, National Center for Education StatisticsOctober 2003

Recall the recent flap about states (with rare exceptions) reporting that few or none of their public schools are "persistently dangerous"? (See, for example, http://www.edweek.org/ew/ewstory.cfm?slug=04Dangerous.h23&keywords=%22persistently%20dangerous%22.) Remember the sarcastic comments that followed, as in, "Try telling the parents of the south Bronx and eastern Brooklyn that there are only two persistently dangerous schools in all of New York State"? And the obvious conclusion: that leaving it to states to devise their own definitions of dangerous schools and their own methods of tabulating such data is a formula for uneven underreporting? If you need more convincing, look at this valuable new NCES report on school violence in 1999-2000. (Another source of danger to the Republic is that it takes NCES three years to produce such studies, but that's a different issue.) In this case, principals did the reporting, Westat conducted the survey (a sample of 2270 elementary, middle and high schools), and the definitions were clear and uniform. What we learn could justly be termed chilling: 71 percent of public schools had at least one "violent incident" during that school year, 20 percent had a least one SERIOUS incident (rape, attacks with weapons, robbery, etc.), and 7 percent of the schools accounted for half of the total (1,466,000) violent incidents that occurred. It seems reasonable to conclude that at least seven percent of U.S. public schools might fairly be described

» Continued

Violence in U.S. Public Schools: 2000 School Survey on Crime and Safety