Too many cooks, too many kitchens

Chester E. Finn, Jr. , Michael J. Petrilli / December 1, 2011

Despite America’s romantic attachment to “local control of public education,” the reality is that the way it works today offers a worst-of-both-worlds scenario. On the one hand, district-level power constrains individual schools; its standardizing, bureaucratic, and political force ties the hands of principals, stopping them from doing what’s best for their pupils with regard to budget, staffing, and curriculum. On the other, local control isn’t strong enough to clear the obstacles that state and federal governments place before reform-minded board members and superintendents in the relatively few locales where these can even be observed.

Sure, remarkable individuals can sometimes make it work, at least for a while: Michelle Rhee (backed by Adrian Fenty) in the District of Columbia; Joel Klein (backed by Michael Bloomberg) in New York City; Arne Duncan (backed by Richard Daley) in Chicago; Jerry Weast (abetted by a rising budget) in Montgomery County, Maryland. Readers can surely cite additional examples. But these are the exceptions that prove the rule.

The rule is that education-policy decisions are made in so many places—each with some capacity to initiate change but with even greater capacity to block it—that there’s really nobody “in charge.” Some will say that’s a tribute to our traditions of democratic control, checks and balances, pluralism, and federalism. Others will say it’s just a mighty wasteful and ineffectual way to run a system that is widely believed to need a thorough makeover.

Some have described education governance in the United States as

» Continued

Too many cooks, too many kitchens

Two steps forward, one step back

Kathryn Mullen Upton , Terry Ryan / December 1, 2011

Since Ohio’s first charter schools opened in 1997, they have been at the center of some of the state’s hottest and most politically contentious debates about education. The past year brought still more examples of charter-linked controversy.

The 2010 elections were very good for Buckeye Republicans, with John Kasich winning the governor’s race (replacing Ted Strickland who had been a charter adversary throughout his four-year term). Republicans also took control of the House while expanding their Senate majority.

Almost immediately, GOP lawmakers set out to make the Buckeye State more inviting to charter schools. Governor Kasich’s budget proposals offered a solid plan for not only increasing the number of charters in Ohio but also boosting their quality. Crucial elements included:

• Encouraging successful operators to clone good schools and channeling fairer funding into them;
• Leaning hard on authorizers to fix or close failing schools and banning their replication; and
• Placing schools’ ostensibly independent governing boards clearly in charge of any outside organizations that they engaged to run their education programs.

This vision for quality along with quantity excited us and many others in Ohio and beyond. The Buckeye State was finally positioning itself to become a true leader in the charter sector rather than a troubled sector plagued by too many mediocre schools.

Then the House issued its version of the budget in April and with it came an enormous risk that charter advocates in Ohio would again shoot themselves in the foot—and their pupils in the heart. The House proposal, pushed by friends of

» Continued

Two steps forward, one step back

How dollars flow down Santa Monica Boulevard

December 1, 2011

It's my money; I'll do what I want.
Photo by sushi♥ina

Do well-heeled parents have the right to heap donations on their students’ public schools to pay for teacher aids, extra library hours, or a media lab? Of course—though, as the Los Angeles Times explains, expect a fight. This week’s example comes from the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District, where the PTA at one Malibu elementary school adds over $2,100 per pupil to the school’s coffers compared with a mere $96 raised at another district elementary twenty miles down the road. The school board is mulling a plan to centralize all PTA donations, allowing for more equitable student funding. Our position on school financing is clear: Funding formulas should include weights that ensure that more public resources be allotted to higher-need students. But, when it comes to private dollars, districts and states should tread carefully. If parents want to donate more, so be it. Barring wealthy parents from education-related giving will only push them to invest instead in private extracurriculars—or even private schools—thus completely undermining the equity-based intentions of the embargo. Instead of this tack, here’s another solution for the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District: Ride the current wave of “philanthropy philosophy.” (Think: TOMS Shoes, in which you purchase one item for yourself at a higher cost, so that the second can be donated.) Or go one further, adopt a “sister

» Continued

How dollars flow down Santa Monica Boulevard

Not “truly stupid”

December 1, 2011

If I had a hammer...
Photo by TheFixer

Newt Gingrich has issued some crazy statements since he first took public office in 1979. Yet his latest claim—that we shouldn’t be “entrapping kids in…child labor laws, which are truly stupid”—isn’t one of them. In a speech at Harvard’s Kennedy School, Gingrich suggested a “work study” program for K-12 education: Students could provide low-cost alternatives to unionized janitors, giving these youngsters work experience, money, and pride in their schools. This proposal to slacken child-labor laws has drawn plenty of headlines, and even more scorn. But there’s something to his logic. Nonprofits like YouthBuild and the ISUS charters in Dayton, OH, in which students work to complete high school while learning construction skills, already offer successful models of dual academic/job-training programs. The Cristo Rey network of Catholic schools allows their low-income students to offset tuition costs—and gain practical job skills—through once-a-week corporate internships. These models provide more than a paycheck and some on-the-job carpentry or accounting skills: They give students a better sense of the working world than any personal-finance or economics course ever could. Gadfly isn’t advocating for eight-year-olds to don hard hats on Alaska’s oil pipeline—and he doubts that’s what Newt had in mind, either. But there’s value in skills training and career preparation. Be careful not to blithely dismiss creative ideas like this.

» Continued

Not “truly stupid”

» Continued

Romancing the stone

Rockin' the suburbs

December 1, 2011

Check the original charter-school blueprint.
Specs say "choice for all."
Photo by Will Scullin

As originally conceived twenty years ago, charter schools were to offer alternatives to the traditional public-school model—maybe Betsy wants a school that focuses more on drama than the football team or Davey wants one that prioritizes STEM learning. Somewhere along the way, however, many states restricted charters to “high need” communities awash in disadvantaged kids and failing schools. As a result, 70 percent of charter students are on free or reduced-price lunch, and most charters are urban. But that’s starting to change. Greater numbers of suburban students are venturing into the halls of charter schools—central Ohio alone had more than 10,000 suburban and rural students attend charter schools last year—sparking what Fordham’s Terry Ryan dubbed a “second generation” of charters. And it couldn’t come fast enough. Like their urban counterparts, kiddos in suburbia deserve the ability to choose schools that are right for them. Just ask any of the original architects of the charter theory.

» Continued

Rockin' the suburbs

Does School Autonomy Make Sense Everywhere? Panel Estimates from PISA

Tyson Eberhardt / December 1, 2011

As education governance rises on the policy agenda, should American reformers be looking toward greater decentralization or centralization—or a judicious mix of both? Eric Hanushek, Susanne Link, and Ludger Woessmann argue that, in a country like the U.S., greater school-level autonomy offers the best shot at boosting student achievement. Using the four available rounds of PISA data (2000-09), the trio compared achievement in forty-two countries with their levels of school-based autonomy, as reported by principals. (Specifically, they analyzed autonomy of academic content, personnel decisions, and budget allocations.) Dividing the countries up by GDP per capita, the authors find that developed nations tend to see spikes in student achievement when school autonomy increases, while scores in developing countries drop with greater decentralization. Autonomy works when local leaders have both an interest in making decisions that benefit students and the capacity to do so. The stronger governmental institutions and the rule of law, the logic goes, the more likely leaders are to align their interests to those of their students. Thus, in richer countries, pairing greater autonomy with test-based accountability magnified the bump in scores. In short, how education is governed matters for students. But we told you that already.

Eric A. Hanushek, Susanne Link, Ludgar Woessmann, “Does School Autonomy » Continued Governance / Standards, Testing, & Accountability / Teachers Does School Autonomy Make Sense Everywhere? Panel Estimates from PISA Schooling in the Workplace: How Six of the World’s Best Vocational Education Systems Prepare Young People for Jobs and Life Laura Johnson / December 1, 2011 In February, the “college-for-all” movement was dealt a mighty blow with the publication of Harvard GSE’s Pathways to Prosperity report. This new book from Nancy Hoffman, VP of Jobs for the Future, offers yet another forceful whack. (Insider power-couple scoop: Ms. Hoffman is married to a lead author of Pathways.) Though a seemingly admirable crusade, she contends, “college for all” is ill-advised for a country interested in having an “appropriately skilled and employed workforce.” (It’s also an anomalous goal, not shared by other countries.) As Hoffman explains, unemployment rates currently soar, even as employers complain of difficulty finding candidates with the right skill set. Americans have often shied away from promoting Vocational Education and Training (VET) programming, viewing it as classist, even elitist—a system that perpetuates social and fiscal disparities. However, strong VET initiatives in other nations are redefining post-secondary options for students. These programs are thoughtful, rigorous pathways to careers—no longer the “throwaway” tracks for the least effective students. And they seem to be effective: In Switzerland, 42 percent of students attaining the highest scores on the PISA exam chose VET enrollment. High-performing Australia enrolls about 60 percent of its eleventh- and twelfth-year students in VET programs. Through six case studies, Hoffman articulates lessons for America as we think through expanding our own work-based learning programs. The biggest: Ensure constant employer participation in curricula and certification development and in apprenticeship placements. For those ready to revisit the “college-for-all” mandate, this book provides a useful starting point. » Continued Curriculum & Instruction Schooling in the Workplace: How Six of the World’s Best Vocational Education Systems Prepare Young People for Jobs and Life Testimony on the Federal Role in Education Research: Providing Relevant Information to Students, Parents, and Educators Chester E. Finn, Jr. / December 1, 2011 Most of the time, Congressional hearings on federal education research are just an opportunity for various interested parties to plead for more money. A couple of weeks back, however, Rep. Duncan Hunter and the House Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education held an unusually candid and (I hope) fruitful review of this crucial but not-very-sexy policy domain. Terrific witness list—ISUSand an outstanding testimony by former IES director Russ Whitehurst, now of Brookings, who did more than defend his own solid track record in that role. He pulled no punches regarding research quality (needs to be raised, not lowered), the American Educational Research Association (another self-interested and greedy lobby), the (complex but crucial) relationship between IES and the rest of the Education Department, and the hopelessness of the regional education laboratories. He also urged Congress not to “try to dictate how states and LEAs should use findings from research,” about which he’s mostly right. What he might not be right about are the late, lamented Reading First program and the future relationship between IES and the National Center for Education Statistics. Have a look for yourself. Grover J. “Russ” Whitehurst, Testimony on the Federal Role in Education Research: Providing Relevant Information to Students, Parents, and Educators (Washington, D.C.: Brookings, November 16, 2011). » Continued Additional Topics / Standards, Testing, & Accountability Testimony on the Federal Role in Education Research: Providing Relevant Information to Students, Parents, and Educators Announcements March 25: AEI Common Core Event March 21, 2013 While 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. Read more announcements Archives Month January February March April May June July August September October November December 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 Sign Up for updates from the Thomas B. Fordham Institute    Please leave this field empty Gadfly Podcast The World is Phat play pause stop mute unmute National         About Us Our Mission Board of Trustees Staff Fellows EEPS Funding and Financing Partners Careers Contact Us Subscribe to the Education Gadfly Online Policy Priorities Standards-Based Reforms Quality Choices A Reform-Driven System Commentary Education Gadfly Weekly Education Gadfly Daily Flypaper Ohio Gadfly Daily Common Core Watch Choice Words Videos Podcasts Publications Standards, Testing & Accountability Talented Tenth Charters & Choice NCLB School Finance Governance Ohio Policy Curriculum & Instruction Digital Learning Teachers Additional Topics Events Upcoming Events Past Events Ohio Policy Ohio Education Gadfly Ohio Publications   Ohio Charters Fordham-Sponsored Schools Applying for Sponsorship Resources for Schools © The Thomas B. Fordham Institute Privacy Policy Usage Agreements 1016 16th St NW, 8th Floor Washington, DC 20036 (202) 223-5452 thegadfly@edexcellence.net nonprofit software