The Peter principal

April 20, 2006

Soon enough, New York City's youngsters won't be the only ones receiving report cards. Starting September 2007, the Big Apple will track test scores of individual students year-by-year, and give schools A-F grades mainly based on their students' academic progress. The grades will count, too; schools that outperform others in their "peer groups" will receive extra money. On the flip side, administrators in low-performing schools will be held accountable for their performance and, according to Chancellor Joel Klein, "principals whose schools persistently fail could be removed." Of course, principals' unions have already cried foul and called the new proposal "a sword of Damocles" that will alienate current and potential school leaders. One wonders, though, why Klein's ideas would alienate principals rather than empower them. By tracking individual student progress, even the worst-performing schools have a fair chance to turn the tide. And by increasing funds for those schools that do right by their students, Klein has offered principals an opportunity to prove their leadership acumen and see their schools rewarded for it. But school leaders ought to point out that accountability must go hand-in-hand with principal autonomy (currently lacking in New York's schools). One can't well survive without the other.     

"Like Students, City Schools Will Be Graded," by Deborah Kolben, New York Sun, April 12, 2006 (subscription required)

"Principals' Jobs On Line as City Grades Schools," by Elissa Gootman,

» Continued

The Peter principal

A San Francisco feat

April 20, 2006

Weighted student funding isn't just a topic for wonkish debate anymore-regular citizens are starting to get interested, too. Reason's Lisa Snell profiles parents and students who have benefited from San Francisco's school funding program, which allocates public education dollars based on individual student needs. Those dollars then follow each child to the public school of his or her choice. Some successful variations of the formula are currently in place in other cities as well, including Seattle, Cincinnati, and Houston. It's notable that this school finance system, which decentralizes power and instills greater parental choice among city public schools, is so staunchly supported in San Francisco. Frisco parents typically "don't support education tax credits or school vouchers" and are generally opposed to charter schools. Yet this initiative has the (worthwhile) potential to make the regular public schools more charter-like. And as a forthcoming Fordham Institute manifesto will demonstrate, weighted student funding is starting to win favor with policy thinkers of all stripes. You might even call it a seismic shift in education policy, San Fran style.

"The Agony of American Education: How per student funding can revolutionize public schools," Lisa Snell, Reason Magazine, April 2006

» Continued

A San Francisco feat

Garden slate

April 20, 2006

Astute observers of urban political campaigns know better than to be surprised when candidates "play the race card"; but how often does this happen when both opponents are black? Cory Booker is the frontrunner to take the reins of Newark, New Jersey from longtime Mayor Sharpe James, but Booker's catching flack from his closest competitor, Deputy Mayor Ronald Rice. Rice has charged that Booker's support of school vouchers makes him the "New Jersey point-person of the far-right Christian wing of the Republican Party," and he called Booker a proxy for "ultra-white, ultra-conservative" power. Never mind that Booker is a black Democrat. Thankfully, those demagogic tactics don't seem to be working. The Rev. Reginald T. Jackson, executive director of the Black Ministers' Council of New Jersey, says, "I think a majority of citizens in Newark want school change by any means necessary." Surely that goes double for impoverished parents fed up with shoddy public schools. So Booker can count on the support of Newark's families; Rice can keep spewing venom and count on the local teachers union.

"Voucher Issue a Touchy Topic in Newark Race," by Damien Cave and Josh Benson, New York Times, April 17, 2006

» Continued

Garden slate

Idle minds build Maginot Lines

April 20, 2006

It seems that the cultivated Old Europe ennui of countries such as France and Italy has migrated from the continent, hitched a Chunnel ride, and taken a foothold in the land of Thatcher, Disraeli, and Burke. The Independent reports that British teachers are embracing boring lessons as "preparation for life" and have called for more of them. At a recent conference of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers, supply maths instructor Zoe Fail garnered loud cheers when she said, "Children are not bored enough.... Being bored encourages thinking skills and imaginative play." Barry Williams, a lecturer from Cambridgeshire, agreed, and he told a reporter that those who find his teaching dull simply miss its many "nuances and subtleties." Brits, beware this trend. The French and Italians can embrace stasis because their countries and cultures are rife with things to do when bored (painting water lilies, say, or making love) and relaxing locales. But Bournemouth Pier is not Cote d'Azur, Newcastle is not Bordeaux, and fish and chips is not gnocchi alla Romana. The UK's students need to be entertained in class, if only to keep them from gazing out the schoolhouse windows at acres of fog-shrouded peat bogs. Come on, England! You started the Industrial Revolution-now don't go wobbly.   

"Boring lessons 'are preparation for life'," by Oliver Duff, The Independent, April 14, 2006

» Continued

Idle minds build Maginot Lines

National Assessment of Title I: Interim Report: Volume I: Implementation

April 20, 2006

Institute of Education Sciences
U.S. Department of Education
February 2006

When Congress passed the No Child Left Behind Act, it also required production of a National Assessment of Title I that would evaluate both the implementation and results of the program's major provisions. This is the first volume of the interim report (a final report is due out in 2007), and it focuses on implementation. Within it, key Title I components-such as those related to state assessments, school choice and supplemental educational services, achievement scores, and teacher quality-are closely examined. Some results are shameful. For example, a whopping 49 percent of districts notified parents about their children's supplemental services and school choice options after the school year had already begun. On average, notification occurred five weeks following the first day of classes. This is unacceptable, and it helps explain why only 38,000 students (out of an eligible 3.9 million) took advantage of school transfers in 2003-2004. Some in Congress noticed this massive failure, and they've sounded the alarm. The new chairman of the House Education & the Workforce Committee, Howard "Buck" McKeon (R-CA), said, "I'm particularly concerned that parents are not being informed quickly enough if their child's school is not making adequate yearly progress. In fact, this late notification seems to be impacting a parent's ability to take advantage of school choice and supplemental educational services options under the law." Indeed it is. Another disturbing item showed that, when parents

» Continued

National Assessment of Title I: Interim Report: Volume I: Implementation

Cutting Through the Hype: A Taxpayer's Guide to School Reforms

April 20, 2006

Jane L. David and Larry Cuban
Education Week Press
2006

Cutting Through the Hype is true to its title. This book is for those befuddled by edu-jargon, or simply unfamiliar with the latest in education policy. It's a primer that gives good background information and, for the most part, smartly evaluates recent education reforms such as standards-and-accountability and school choice. The authors explore three key questions: What are the realistic expectations of these highly touted reforms? What trade-offs do they involve? and, What can be done to increase their successes? Each of the three major sections-system of schooling, school organization, and teaching/learning in the classroom-provides an easy, readable walk through some of education's major reform movements. Curriculum reform, professional teacher development, and declining academic achievement in middle schools (among many other topics) are given a fair, brisk treatment. The authors acknowledge that standards-based reform, test-based accountability, and school choice (all hallmarks of No Child Left Behind) have brought about some successes, but they believe the right blend of reforms has yet to be achieved. For them, successful reform is about balance-coupling high standards with strong curricula and teaching, holding schools accountable while providing adequate funding and support, and giving school choice options to low-income families. At times, the recommended solutions state the obvious without providing concrete suggestions. For example, the authors conclude that the achievement gap is best closed by "providing funds and keeping pressure on schools...without setting unrealistic expectations and

» Continued

Cutting Through the Hype: A Taxpayer's Guide to School Reforms