The Education Gadfly
A Weekly Bulletin of News and Analysis from the Thomas B. Fordham Institute
June 28, 2007, Volume 7, Number 25
Discouraged by the latest NAEP Civics results, Gadfly will spend this Fourth of July rereading The Federalist Papers. He'll return to your inboxes on July 12th.
This week on The Education Gadfly Show Podcast: A lovely engagement
Contents
From Checker's Desk
News and Analysis
Recommended Reading
Short Reviews
- State Teacher Policy Yearbook: Progress on Teacher Quality
- Information Underload: Florida's Flawed Special-Ed Voucher Program
- Evaluation of the DC Opportunity Scholarship Program: Impacts After One Year
From Our Readers
The Education Gadfly Show Podcast
Announcements
From Checker's Desk
Reflections on the year now ending
With so many schools in session well into June and others starting early in August, it sometimes feels like July is all that remains of yesteryear's three-month "summer vacation." Heading into the 7th month, therefore, and with Gadfly looking forward to an Independence Day break, some reflections on the 2006-7 school year seem fitting. Here are ten such:
Test scores rise (and fall) more slowly than the Dow or the temperature, but they can and sometimes do rise. This year, the Center on Education Policy confirmed state reports of promising early-grade gains in math and reading. Unfortunately, the year also brought mounting evidence (most recently from NCES) that, when it comes to "proficiency," many states have low expectations--and these may be getting lower. (Fordham is in the midst of our own examination of this and we'll have more to say on the topic presently.)
- It's not smart to monitor oneself, however, especially in a high-stakes era, and if the U.S. doesn't come up with better forms of independent education auditors--better, that is, than having local and state education agencies devise their own tests and spin their own results--we are going to lose faith in the measurement system itself. It was not so long ago, after all, that Dr. John Cannell's "Lake Wobegon" study found just about every state reporting that just about all of its pupils were "above average."
- While test scores are undeniably the coin of the realm in today's standards-based education regime, the more so when placed under NCLB pressure, and while there's little doubt that "what gets tested gets taught," it's increasingly clear that making schools and teachers focus narrowly on test results, especially in basic skills, squeezes a lot of the juice out of the curriculum and out of the educational experience itself. That's why one ought not blithely join in today's mania for "STEM" subjects (science, technology, engineering, math) or lobby for new federal and state programs that focus on them. Here's an Independence Day thought for you: America's true competitive edge doesn't come from producing more engineers than India. It arises from the creativity, rebelliousness, and drive that result from a broad liberal education and the values and convictions that accompany such teaching and learning.
- Besides STEM, pre-school is the Next Big Thing in education policy. Governors are pushing it. Teacher unions love it. Scads of experts are for it, as are any number of advocacy groups and deep-pocketed funders. Parents are delighted with the prospect that taxpayers will underwrite their day care needs. It does seem beneficial for disadvantaged kids--provided, of course, that it's real pre-school, not just child care. It may or may not be a good thing for middle-class kids. We'll never know, of course, unless the kindergarten readiness of participants and nonparticipants is carefully assessed. But as Wade Horn and his fellow Head Start reformers learned the hard way, "testing" four and five year olds is like poking a hornets' nest of interest groups and ideologues. What's most likely, therefore, is that a new educational entitlement will be created--and we'll never know whether it was necessary or what good it's doing or when it works and when it doesn't.
- School choice continues to spread, unstoppable now, despite the best efforts of its foes to contain it. More vouchers, more charters, more e-learning, yes indeed, but also more families voting with their feet by moving to places with schools (and jobs) that suit them better. Any number of rustbelt cities, for example, are simply being depopulated--and their school systems are shrinking as others grow.
- Americans are cautiously open to a host of reforms, and none too pleased with the education status quo, particularly if they live in those rusty cities, but they're slow to grasp new concepts such as "performance-based pay" and "charter schools." They're willing to spend more on schooling, yet doubt that it'll do much good. Survey after survey indicates that they stubbornly cling to a few beliefs that ain't necessarily so (e.g. the virtues of smaller classes). Mostly, though, they bring common sense and traditional American values--merit, fairness, effort, etc.--to bear on all manner of expert-devised education nostrums.
- That's one reason that variations on the theme of merit pay for teachers are creeping from city to city and state to state. There's much fumbling here and some setbacks, but the mounting trove of NCLB-generated student achievement (and value-added) data means that the effectiveness of individual teachers is getting easier to gauge--and to defend in "objective" terms.
- "Brand name" schools are beginning to establish themselves around the land, as CMO's, EMO's, chains, franchises and networks get traction. Some, like Edison and KIPP, are far-flung and famous. (This is becoming true, as well, of at least two skeins of "virtual" schools, Connections Academy and K12.) Others, such as Achievement First, National Heritage Academies, and the Big Picture Company are more limited in celebrity and geography. Still others, such as the Coalition of Essential Schools and Core Knowledge schools, are less formal and cookie-cutterish. But with serious philanthropic and investment dollars backing the creation and replication of more such models and their replication, one can glimpse a future in which name-brand schools are as familiar--and ubiquitously available--as name-brand restaurants, hotels and gas stations. And not just for Americans. The irrepressible Chris Whittle, this time teamed up with a Dubai-based education entrepreneur, recently announced plans to build a worldwide network of pricey U.S.-style private schools to cater to the educational tastes of global elites (see more below).
- You can forget NCLB reauthorization until after the 2008 election. No, nobody important is confiding secrets and we don't have an astrologer. But our reading of the political entrails says this is nowhere near ready to happen. Which may not be a bad thing, considering how little consensus there is regarding the changes that need to be made in this humongous set of federal programs--and how much is still being learned about them.
- It's clearer than ever that any serious change for the better in education, whether at the building, district, state or national level, hinges on effective, courageous and sustained leadership--and it's clearer than ever that the system does its utmost to discourage, deter and deflect the sorts of people who might provide such leadership. The exceptions--Michelle Rhee being the latest--deserve applause, as well as money, political backing, and prayers. But why do we persevere with a set of arrangements that depend on mavericks for success?
Enjoy your break!
Email to a friend | Comments (1)
News and Analysis
A ten-point plan to eradicate white guilt (oh, and actually help minority students)
Today's Supreme Court decision striking down Louisville's and Seattle's race-based student assignment plans will surely lead to much gnashing of teeth, recriminations, and accusations that America is slipping back to the era of Jim Crow. Politically-correct experts, educators and advocacy types will express outrage and declare their intent to find a way--any way--to ensure that the remaining handful of white students in urban districts attends schools otherwise populated by African-American and Hispanic children.
They're wrong. Not because we shouldn't feel guilty that so many of our urban schools are racially isolated. Of course we should. And not because Martin Luther King, Jr.'s vision of an integrated society isn't compelling. Of course it is. But the surest route to such a society is to help all children achieve academically, prepare for higher education as well as jobs with futures, and enter the great American middle class. Because here's the good news: middle class black children living in suburbs are much more likely to attend racially diverse schools than poor urban black children are. The way forward is through social and economic progress--which starts with academic progress. That means shaking up the urban school systems that produce such abysmal results.
So urban education--and community--leaders: If you really care about the future of black and brown students, here's your to-do list.
- Stop hiring poorly-educated individuals for teaching positions. Insist that teacher candidates score above the 50th percentile on a national exam such as Praxis or pass the American Board for Certification of Teacher Excellence.
- Open your classroom doors to instructors coming through bona fide non-traditional routes, such as Teach for America.
- Take control of the assignment system. Send your best teachers to your neediest schools.
- Pay those teachers extra if they are willing to take tough assignments and if they get great results.
- Remove ineffective administrators, principals, teachers, and aides from the payroll. (Everyone knows who they are.) Use the savings for higher teacher pay and a longer school day and year.
- Give principals real control over their school budgets and staff.
- Put in place a research-based reading program, even if teachers don't like it at first. Provide intensive training and support.
- Adopt the Core Knowledge curriculum for your elementary and middle schools. Immerse kids in the cultures of the world, with a heavy emphasis on Western culture and American history.
- Shut down your worst schools and turn those buildings over to charter school networks (such as KIPP) with a track record of success.
- Adopt a strict discipline policy and transfer chronically misbehaving children to alternative schools.
Gird yourselves. If you fight this fight, lots of people won't thank you. The teacher unions and some civil rights groups will come after you (representing, as they do, some of these incompetent individuals you will dismiss from the rolls). Academia will disparage you both because you're attacking their ed-school cash cows and because you're destroying the temple of cultural relativism. Many liberals will call you a sell-out (arguing, as they do, that "public" schools must be run by government and staffed by union members). You're in for a tough time.
But if you're truly outraged about the plight of disadvantaged minority students, if injustice really makes your blood boil, you'll be willing to wage this war anyway. It'll make more difference to those kids than the skin color of those in the adjoining desks.
Email to a friend | Comments (3)
Recommended Reading
Bad news 4 school leaders
It's amusing to find phrases such as "BONG HITS 4 JESUS" amidst the stiff legalese of a U.S. Supreme Court opinion. But unfortunately, the recent ruling in Morse v. Frederick has turned Gadfly's laughter to disappointment. First the good news: in a 6-3 decision, the Court held that Principal Deborah Morse did not violate student Joseph Frederick's First Amendment rights when she suspended him for holding up at a school parade a banner with the aforementioned phrase. It was a clear victory for Principal Morse, who could have faced crippling financial penalties. But it was a giant setback for educators overall, because the court decided the case on such narrow grounds. Justice Alito wrote that a school may only restrict speech that "a reasonable observer would interpret as advocating illegal drug use." If in the future students opt to disrupt school in other ways--advocating the joys of vodka, say, or the right to bear arms in tenth grade--it seems such cases must be litigated on a one-by-one basis. The lone voice of reason belonged to Justice Thomas, who wrote that "it cannot be seriously suggested that the First Amendment... encompasses a student's right to speak in public schools." Most are, after all, minors. Do six-year-olds have a Constitutional right to free speech? Twelve-year-olds? School leaders need to maintain order and discipline over their charges. They shouldn't need to employ on-site lawyers to do so.
"Vote Against Banner Shows Divide on Speech in Schools," by Linda Greenhouse, New York Times, June 26, 2007
"Bong Hits 4 Jesus--Final Episode," by Daniel Henninger, Wall Street Journal, June 28, 2007
Email to a friend | Comments (0)
Memphis jazz, Boston blues
Incoming Boston school chief Carol Johnson boasts an impressive track record. But will she be able to translate her Memphis victories into a Beantown success story? Not if the local teachers union has anything to say about it. The Boston Globe features a savvy story about Johnson's efforts to clean up chronically failing Memphis schools by tossing out poorly-performing principals and classroom teachers. About bringing such tactics to the Bay State, Boston Teachers Union President Richard Stutman told the Globe, "That can't be on the table. It doesn't do anything but engender fear and hostility." Well, it also seems to engender academic success. Johnson's approach helped test scores rise in Memphis, notably the scores of minority students. Boston teachers and their leaders would do well to give themselves an education--about what works in schools and about whom schools exist to serve (i.e., students, not teachers). Then, they should get out of Johnson's way.
"New superintendent faces far different hurdles in Boston," by Tracy Jan and Maria Sacchetti, Boston Globe, June 24, 2007
Email to a friend | Comments (0)
Exasperated
Yale computer scientist David Gelernter is, like many parents, tired of public schools declaring war on deeply held moral and religious values, not to mention common sense. So he wants to abolish them. Gelernter is one of the smartest people alive and what he writes deserves to be read. (The essay noted here is drawn from his new book, Americanism: The Fourth Great Western Religion, which you can get from Doubleday, Amazon or your local bookstore.) On its face, Gelernter's argument parallels that of libertarians who argue that vouchers are the only solution to the country's deeply polarized population, since public schools can't possibly be all things to all people (see here, for example). But his argument is more nuanced and more interesting, because this state of affairs strikes him as historically preventable. Once upon a time, Gelernter explains, a consensus could be found as to what public schools should teach; you could find it in, for example, McGuffey's Readers, whose purpose was, among other things, "to exert a decided and healthful moral influence." But events of the intervening years--especially the radicalization of American universities in general and education schools in particular--undid this consensus. Now, he writes, we have no option but to exit from the institution of public schooling. We share Gelernter's frustrations, but public schools ain't going anywhere anytime soon--though fascinating new forms of them are coming on line. In the meanwhile, concerned parents should get involved in the fight to improve state academic standards. When they've done so (in California and elsewhere), the results have been positive. So David, don't opt out of public schooling; opt in to the battle to regain the McGuffey consensus.
"A World Without Public Schools," by David Gelernter, Weekly Standard, June 4, 2007
Email to a friend | Comments (0)
Going upscale
In the introduction to his book Crash Course, Chris Whittle calls himself "a renovation man." He's done a lot of renovating, too: "a Depression-era two-room log cabin," a "rambling apartment in one of New York's oldest apartment buildings." Now, it seems, he has moved on to mansions. The Financial Times reports that Whittle, who started Edison Schools (which enroll lots of low-income kids), is building Nations Academy--a network of 60 multi-million dollar private schools that will cater to mobile, international elites. If an investment banker in London needs to move the family to Hong Kong, no worries. The kids can simply transfer between cities from one Nations school to the next, without having to adjust to a new system or curriculum (they can even keep the same polo handicap!). A man instituting international education standards. A man after Gadfly's heart.
"Global network of schools planned," by Jon Boone, Financial Times, June 23, 2007
Email to a friend | Comments (1)
Short Reviews
State Teacher Policy Yearbook: Progress on Teacher Quality
National Council on Teacher Quality
June 2007
This report is the first in a series of "yearbooks" to be produced by NCTQ that rank the efforts of state governments to improve teacher quality. Actually, this is 51 reports, each of which analyzes a state's data, policies and practices. The results are mostly grim: The top of almost every state analysis is graced by such phrases as "unsatisfactory," "languishing," or "needs significant improvement." For example, 42 states do not require elementary teachers to have studied American history, 44 lack a genuine alternate route to certification, and 48 grant teachers tenure after four years or less (North Dakota gives tenure after only one year). But NCTQ isn't all doom and gloom. It energetically praises states with sound practices in key areas, lauding Florida's teacher-pay reforms, for example, and Pennsylvania's tough evaluation policies. Overall, the report is best read as a battle-plan for state governments, a call-to-arms that delineates clearly and succinctly the next steps for improving teacher quality. Find it here.
Email to a friend | Comments (0)
Information Underload: Florida's Flawed Special-Ed Voucher Program
Sara Mead
Education Sector
June 2007
Florida's McKay Scholarships for Students with Disabilities (which allow students with special needs to enroll in private schools with government money) are indisputably popular. They now assist about 18,000 special-needs students and rank as the nation's second-largest voucher initiative, behind only Milwaukee. But Sara Mead (formerly at Education Sector, now at the New America Foundation) isn't convinced that McKay is as good as its numbers suggest. Her beef, though, isn't really with McKay--it's with vouchers overall. This report's biggest complaint is that McKay students "do not have to take the annual state tests." Thus, nobody really knows how much they're actually learning or if they're receiving quality services. The report also points to the limitations of parent-satisfaction surveys. One such survey--done in 2003 by Jay Greene--showed that parents who used McKay vouchers were much more satisfied with their private school experience. Duh, says Mead. If they were satisfied in the public schools, they wouldn't have left. And she points out that parents often defend low-performing schools (public or private) for sentimental reasons. Then again, McKay allows those parents to exercise a choice and, if their local public school isn't meeting their children's needs, enables them to shop for better options. That's a good thing, right? But now look at us: we're just rehashing the old voucher debate. As with this report, which gives a good overview of McKay and its history, but offers shopworn criticisms and recommendations. Read it here, if you like.
Email to a friend | Comments (1)
Evaluation of the DC Opportunity Scholarship Program: Impacts After One Year
Institute of Education Sciences
June 2007
When Congress approved a five-year pilot for the DC Opportunity Scholarship Program (OSP), it required an independent evaluation with "the strongest possible research design for determining the effectiveness" of the program. This is the first installment of said evaluation. The Institute of Education Sciences performed a randomized controlled trial and found that, after one year, there were "no statistically significant impacts, positive or negative, on student reading or math achievement for the entire impact sample." Glum-sounding, sure. But seasoned observers of school reforms were unsurprised at the results since it's rare to see gains after just one year. (Students had attended their new schools for only seven months before taking the evaluation's assessment, and it's well known that kids often temporarily slip backward after enrolling in a new school.) Moreover, "an additional 19 percent of the parents of students in the treatment group graded their child's schools 'A' or 'B' compared with the parents of control group students." (More on parents' views on OSP here.) The report also found that a couple of subgroups of higher-performing students performed better in math than their control group counterparts. Still, with the future of the program in jeopardy, here's hoping for stronger results in years two and three. Read the report here.
Email to a friend | Comments (0)
From Our Readers
Tarek's no Martin Luther
As a fairly regular Gadfly reader, I often find myself nodding in agreement at the wisdom and insight that it delivers. But I also feel obliged to point out the occasional blind spot, as in your coverage of the Islamocentric charter school in Minnesota that Larry Weinberg and Bruce Cooper, writing in Education Week, cite as a promising example of "religious charter schools."
Yes, I'm a long-time booster of that basic concept. Indeed, I wrote favorably about it on Education Week's back page in 2003. I continue to believe that it has great promise both to furnish charter pupils with some of what parents value most in private schools while affording cash-starved parochial schools a new lease on life and new ways to underwrite the education of children for whom they can do a great deal of good.
Okay so far. The sticky issue, not to be mentioned in polite society (hence, I suppose, not by Gadfly), is that the prototype school depicted by Messrs. Weinberg and Cooper happens to be associated with the Islamic faith. I've nothing against that faith per se, nor do many Americans, even in these anxious post-9/11 days. But one of the strongest arguments of school-choice opponents is that public funding of non-public schools will lead both to the erosion of our common culture and to the development--at taxpayers' expense--of "Klan schools," "witchcraft schools," and fundamentalist madrassas.
I assume the Tarek ibn Ziyad Academy is no such thing. But I can't help thinking that the cause of religious charter schools would be more successfully advanced if the prototypes carried names like Martin Luther (or Martin Luther King), John Wesley, Notre Dame, and Brandeis.
As for Tarek ibn Ziyad (said to be a "peacemaker" as well as an "activist"), one trusts that the charter school named for him is also obliged to subject its pupils to Minnesota's statewide tests, aligned (one hopes) with Minnesota's mixed bag of academic standards. Thus does standards-based reform contain the promise that choice-based education reform won't lead to total curricular balkanization.
Chester E. Finn, Jr.
President
Thomas B. Fordham Foundation
Email to a friend | Comments (1)
The Education Gadfly Show Podcast
A lovely engagement
This week, Mike and Rick chat about MBAs, fidgety 20-somethings, and making money off poor kids. Our own Liam Julian tells us why he was suspended in high school, and Education News of the Weird is marvelously spun. Click here to listen through our website and peruse past editions. To download the show as an mp3 to your computer, click here (no iPod required--this link will play through any music software on your computer, including Windows Media Player or RealPlayer). To subscribe to this podcast, or to get more information about how podcasts work, click here.
Email to a friend | Comments (0)
Announcements
Autonomy talk
On Wednesday, July 11th, from 2 to 3 p.m., join Education Week for an online conversation about principals and The Autonomy Gap. A few days before the chat, you can go here to submit your questions. Should be a lively discussion!
Email to a friend | Comments (0)
Smarick = White House Fellow
Gadfly's good friend Andy Smarick, chief of staff at the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools, will be one of fifteen 2007-2008 White House Fellows. We're thrilled for him. See more here.
Email to a friend | Comments (0)
About Us
The Education Gadfly is published weekly (ordinarily on Thursdays), with occasional breaks, by the Thomas B. Fordham Institute. Regular contributors include Amy Fagan, Chester E. Finn, Jr., Kyle Kennedy, Mickey Muldoon, Jamie Davies O’Leary, Eric Osberg, Stafford Palmieri, Emmy Partin, Michael J. Petrilli, Laura Elizabeth Pohl, Terry Ryan, Janie Scull, Saul Spady, and Amber Winkler. Have something to say? Email us at thegadfly@edexcellence.net. Would you like to be spared from the Gadfly? Email thegadfly@edexcellence.net with “unsubscribe gadfly” in the text of your message. You are welcome to forward Gadfly to others, and from our website you can also email individual articles. If you have been forwarded a copy of Gadfly and would like to subscribe, you may either email thegadfly@edexcellence.net with “subscribe gadfly” in the text of the message or sign up online here.
The Thomas B. Fordham Institute is a nonprofit organization that conducts research, issues publications, and directs action projects in elementary and secondary education reform at the national level and in Ohio, with a special emphasis on our hometown of Dayton. (For Ohio news, check out our Ohio Education Gadfly, published bi-weekly, ordinarily on Wednesdays.) The Institute is neither connected with nor sponsored by Fordham University.