As always, remember that John's book The Influence of Teachers is for sale at Amazon.
Last week in this space, I speculated about the most influential educator in America. Although I put forth more than a half dozen names, most respondents 'voted' for Diane Ravitch, the historian/policymaker/apostate whose book, The Death and Life of the Great American Public School, is a best-seller.
Her landslide victory is not particularly surprising, because she is a Five Star General in the ongoing education wars; her badly outgunned army includes the two teachers unions, Linda Darling-Hammond and a lot of teachers.
The opposing side includes Brian Williams and NBC's Education Nation, Oprah Winfrey, Teach for America, Joel Klein, Michelle Rhee, charter school supporters, Waiting for Superman and a lot of powerful business and financial leaders.
Add to that list David Brooks, the influential columnist for the New York Times. That's particularly disappointing, because the normally perceptive Brooks seems to have swallowed a questionable argument hook, line and sinker.
At stake in this struggle is nothing less than the direction of public education. (I write about this war extensively in The Influence of Teachers and won't rehash the arguments here.)
Just a few days after Ravitch clinched the election on this blog, Brooks took her to task in harsh terms on the op-ed pages of the Times.
Here's a sample:
She picks and chooses what studies to cite, even beyond the normal standards of people who are trying to make a point. She has come to adopt the party-line view of the most change-averse elements of the teachers' unions: There is no education crisis. Poverty is the real issue, not bad schools. We don't need fundamental reform; we mainly need to give teachers more money and job security.
Brooks acknowledges that Ravitch highlights a fundamental tension in education -- teaching is humane, while testing is mechanistic -- but then accuses her of simply wanting to eliminate testing and accountability.
Having accused Ravitch of intellectual dishonesty, Brooks seems to walk down that same path, with the help of a foil, Whitney Tilson, whom he identifies for his readers as 'the education blogger.' That's the same Whitney Tilson who was a founding member of Teach for America and who now serves on the Board of KIPP New York; the same Whitney Tilson who supports Democrats for Education Reform and who was a major player in the campaign of rumor and innuendo to discredit Linda Darling-Hammond when she was being considered for Secretary of Education. That Whitney Tilson! Even he must have been surprised to be labeled merely as 'the education blogger.'
Brooks approvingly passes along Tilson's observations about test-obsessed schools like KIPP (!) and the Harlem Success Schools, places where students are far more likely to participate in chess, dance and drama than do their counterparts in regular public schools.
Brooks' money line follows:
The places where the corrosive testing incentives have had their worst effect are not in the schools associated with the reformers. They are in the schools the reformers haven't touched. These are the mediocre schools without strong leaders and without vibrant missions.
In Brooks' view, Ravitch is simply wrong: "Ravitch thinks the solution is to get rid of the tests," he writes. "But that way just leads to lethargy and perpetual mediocrity. The real answer is to keep the tests and the accountability but make sure every school has a clear sense of mission, an outstanding principal and an invigorating moral culture that hits you when you walk in the door."
Brooks' conclusion -- if a school teaches to the test, it's the fault of the leaders, not of the test -- may follow logically from his premises, but it's a house of cards, and not just because Ravitch is being painted unfairly. The flaw lies in Brooks (or Tilson's) failure to examine the dominant default model of public education today, which is precisely Ravitch's point: test scores rule. Yes, inspired leaders can trump that thinking, and kids lucky enough to attend one of those schools may well emerge as more than a score.
It's true, as Wendy Kopp of Teach for America asserts, that more winning schools are opening every year, and a body of evidence proves that strong leaders, talented teachers, a powerful sense of mission and coherent curricula like Core Knowledge make a difference. However, the evidence suggests that their success also requires superhuman effort that produces a high burnout rate among teachers and school leaders.
Is this a model for genuine and widespread reform? Let's look at the numbers. We have about 100,000 public schools. Perhaps 5,000 or maybe even 10,000 are defying the odds. At that rate, how long will it take? Where will the thousands and thousands of inspired leaders and teachers come from?
Why do Brooks and others defend a system in which success seems to require superhuman effort? To be blunt, our 'answer factory' approach to education is outmoded and counter-productive in a world that technology has transformed, and continues to transform at an unimaginable rate. What is needed is a major rethinking of the structure of school -- a recasting of the basic operating model.
Pitting Ravitch against Tilson makes for a readable column in the hands of a gifted writer like David Brooks. While I regret his unfair treatment of Ravitch, she has proven time and time again that she can take care of herself. What bothers me more is that Brooks and most observers are missing the larger point.
Which is this: Our public schools are the equivalent of yesterday's pony express. Just as a faster pony express would not be sufficient to deliver the mail today, the "faster horses" that reforms like KIPP, Teach for America and charter schools represent are not in themselves adequate for our 50 million school-age children, nor will they ever be.
I have some thoughts about what truly transformed schools would look like, and I imagine you do as well. Some of these schools already exist, others perhaps only in your imagination. Please share your thoughts on what to do next, not just on how to end this counterproductive 'education war' but also on how to proceed positively.
I look forward to your responses.
Follow John Merrow on Twitter: www.twitter.com/john_merrow
2. Provide better training and oversight to principals, expect accountability
3. reduce class size
4. provide addtional resources, particularly to high-poverty schools, meaning not just funding and support services but also ensure highly skilled teachers are hired and that safety is a fundamental requirement
5. provide one-on-one skilled tutoring in reading for high risk early elementary students
6. encourage collaboration among teachers; any merit pay should be school-wide to encourage best practices and team work
7. include life skills education among middle school kids
8. improve working conditions for teachers
9. use tests for diagnostic purposes to enhance learning, not punish poor performance
deny tenuer based on appropriate assessments that are data informed rather than data-driven
10. Ensure science, arts, physical education, recess and foreign language are available in every grade in school. Promote bilingual education particularly in elementary school.
11. Teach students to be active citizens; inculcate empathy. Develop collaborative learning and a hands-on curriculum. Only assign appropriate homework.
12. Make schools a center of community life.
13. Make education schools more selective. Provide significant support for first and second year teachers (probably less in-class time, more time to assess what's working, put together lesson plans, and develop class management skills). Only require a masters if it is actually shown to improve results (in terms of student learning).
Dallas also has 10 chronically failing high schools.
It might be entirely possible that the difference between failing schools and nationally recognized schools within the same school district...might be something as simple as student readiness and the student's desire to learn and excel. Most of the latter is something that begins at home.
You can lead a horse to water...
Magnet schools also tend to get more money so that's more resources.
Because of the hoops required to jump to get in, the home life of these students tends to be much more supportive of schools and students are more motivated.
Behavior at magnets is better so you have less disciplinary problems. If there is, you risk being dropped from the magnet and having to transfer to another school.
So there are some significant differences right there.
If classrooms had one teacher for every five students, they'd outdo home schooled children on every front.
BTW, since most parents aren't trained educators they buy canned lesson plans from a company. Not exactly innovative or creative.
I think we need to test children. Just as you cannot lose weight unless you have a scale and measure your progress--and adjust your diet accordingly---you cannot teach without measuring progress and making adjustments.
The problem comes with the one test is how your school is judged mentality. A lot of the activities that made learning exciting have now been forbidden in order to pass the NECAPs (or MEAPs etc). Schools should foster a love of and excitment for learning. Schools should be community resources that help parents and children. Schools should measure progress, but in an ongoing way, not on one day.
Nationwide mandatory No Adult Left Behind. Every adult will have to change their diet and exercise in order to maintain the perfect weight AND BMI, whether under, over or on target. They have five years. 100% of adults in the U.S. will be at perfect weight and BMI by 2016. We'll start with yearly weigh-ins and measurements this year and publish them in newspapers and online. Let's tie it to taxes. If you are not meeting adequate yearly loss (or growth) then your taxes will go UP and you'll get hours of community service. Thus you'll have less money to buy healthy food and less time for exercise. That will certainly punish those lazy overeaters into losing weight, huh?
With the technology we have today, there is no reason why we just need to throw more money and more bureaucracy at the system. Education should be more private/individualized, and cheaper than ever before. But now it is the contrary. It is more expensive and still public, with growing bureaucracies.
Technology is wonderful. Today if you want to learn calculus, you just need to buy the book, the study guide, and watch free youtube tutor videos. Perhaps in addition you can also hire a few sessions of tutoring as well. I know this because I have tried it (even people who do enroll in these classes say that is how they learn the material!). Even in the geology class I took at the university, there was a very interactive computer software program included with the book that made up most of my learning. The notes were only good for doing well on the exam.
The way to improve education is to make it individualized, not public. We have a fantastic opportunity to achieve this with the technology that we have at our finger tips and what is being produced outside of the school system (i.e. textbooks with interactive software, youtube, etc.). The classroom would still be important; but mainly for improving skills of public speaking, writing, critical thinking, and working on science labs.
1. Motivation is key.
2. Mentors and Guidance is critical (I'd say not just in schools but everywhere).
Technology is helpful for the learning part. But motivation and mentors are critical (the saying, you can lead a horse to water but you cannot make it drink it, fits well here and in many places). Great athletes need good coaches and a strong motivation. Educated people need good coaches and motivation too. These things require individual/private investment, not just money but work, and often hard work. Having a coach and some guidance can go a long way to lead students to take on these investments because the student sees their investments leading to their dream.
The sad part is that a lot of high school dropouts have big dreams, like you did, but they just feel like they are wasting their time because they cannot see any connection between what they are doing in school with what their dreams are. Before they know it so much time and opportunities were skipped that mountains and continents build between where they are and their dreams. They do not have the mentor, not even a compass.
I was watching a documentary with Dan Rather on Detroit public schools and some of the teachers did not even come to class at the beginning of the semester. They could not even get a replacement. Talk about wasting students' time, killing motivation, and providing no guidance.
Put a 5 year old in front of a computer for 6 hours and see what educational and social skills he masters compared to a child that actually attend school.
Schools don't have one computer for each child, not even at the middle and high school level. Not only can they not afford to provide them, they also can't afford to pay the for profit educorps for software, programs and access to all those "creative" learning tools. (But I'm sure Jeb Bush is for your plan too.) Businesses upgrade their technology approximately every 18 months. Schools can't afford to do so for 6-10 years. So you want a technology based school system with outdated and limited equipment. Peachy.
We spend on average over $10,000/student/year for students in the K-12 system according to the Census. That is over $120,000 over the student's school career if he/she gets through high school. I am sure there are enough funds to provide each student with a laptop or tablet these days. Now if you are from Utah and you spend much less than that per student, then maybe there is some concern there.
How much is math updated? Math, that is learned in schools, hasn't changed for many years. History has not changed that much. I am not sure how much basic sciences adjust either. Perhaps standards change more frequently. But I doubt content changes very rapidly. Heck even math programs that have been around for a long time, even when I was in elementary school, like Math Blasters and Number Munchers could make for excellent learning software.
We can incorporate technology to make education cheaper and more accessible to more people at very significant rates. But I doubt it will happen anytime soon.
My daughter has been homeschooled for her entire life, up to age 13. She is a great kid and does very well on standardized tests. She is a top musician and does well at all subjects.
She is going to attend a top college prep school in the fall though.
Anyway, look at the research on homeschooling. Those kids are doing great on all measures, including test scores. Schools need to try to become more like homeschools. The homeschools are the true education innovators now.
Unfortunately, this isn't possible for single parent households, households were both parents must work or households where the parent didn't graduate from high school or doesn't speak enough English. Or they can't afford to buy those packaged lesson plans and all of the textbooks, etc. from the for profit home schooling industry.
Then again with grade inflation, where as long as you put in the effort you get an A or B, perhaps some are important for universities to see who is actually skilled enough to succeed at the school and who may not be as well skilled. But those should be done just at one period, at the end of high school. I do not understand about teaching to tests every year though. It sounds like it is out of hand. It is also a part of too much government intervention.
His "solution" for education is the same "solution" he has for the economy and foreign policy. Throw more money at it, have a vibrant mission, provide more security and have stronger leadership. That is Brook's magic formula for everything.
In other words, they find that the original staff was doing just about as well as could be done.
I have a hammer - everything looks like a nail.
By the way, teaching to the assessment test goes back to the beginning. My sister remembers it from 40 years ago, and I have no doubt that it goes back to the origin of the tests.
Get rid of the archaic grading system too. A rubric that lets students know what is expected and how well they achieved that standard will do.
Standardized tests are to help politicians get elected, not help students learn or improve teaching.
I see "teach to the test" BS...sorry standardiz¬ed test have been around for 50 years...I took them and I am 57. Teachers did not cheat then becasue they had morals and believed in a sense of right and wrong.
Saying because they will get paid more for higher scores caused them to do it is more BS...in all other lines of work outside of Government or public union jobs people are paid based on performanc¬e yet there is not widespread cheating (one reason is you get fired, which doesn't happen to union or government folks).
The reason this is happening is teachers can get away with it without penalty coupled with no sense of right and wrong (thank you Progressiv¬e philosophy¬).
The fact is most teachers (not all) are dumber than rocks. The majority starting majoring in a difficult area of study then flunked out and switched to Education, because all you need is a pulse to get the degree. I went to college in the 1970s and again in late 1980s I witness the same thing both times...
If you want to fix this you fire all the Education majors and hire people who worked in the real world in the field of study. There is vast number of people willing to give back, but they are not going back for a silly Education degree.
Now, the notion that teachers have no sense of right and wrong is complete nonsense. I've taught for 30 years. The best people I know are teachers and I'm proud to be one of them. I've seen a number of people come in on their white horses only to slink off with their tails tucked between their legs. Try it and see if it so easy.
Genius there should be a comma between "stupidity and you"...see I can play avoid the subject too.
Taught for 30 years in a system that went from the best schools in the world to third world status in those 30 years...I would not be proud of that or the people responsible for it.
I did some teaching in graduate school and it was pretty easy work...do a lesson plan...present the materia, and l test the students. The difference was I picked the material and agenda, not a DoE bureaucrat.
I will add I was married to a teacher...she quit after one year...she taught high school and one day she came home saying, "They are a bunch of dumbest people on the planet!" I came to the students defense and said something along the lines of, "Well, you know high school has a lot distractions, give the kids a break." Her response, "I am not talking about the students. I am talking about the other teachers and school administrators." She went on be a physician.
And as for ethics and morals...again no comparison. Teachers back then were well educated and intelligent. They were and deserved to be proud of their profession and they were honorable people.
All you need to be a teacher today is a pulse and you can be a crook too, and not get fired.
As for the tests we took them 3rd, 5th, 7th, 9th, and 12th grades. If a teacher's students continually do poorly, the teacher got fired...never happens today.
Bull.
Our public schools are still the middle class thinker / worker factories they've always been. Even among the poor minorities, plenty of kids come out of public schools ready to succeed in life. For a majority of those that don't, no amount of school reform can help them.
You're barking up the wrong tree, John. We already know what a good school looks like. Look to families and communities for why kids rich and poor, in good schools and bad, are so poorly educated at the time they become adults.
Now explain what to do about multi-generational educational apathy and it's effect on today and tomorrow's students, please. Shall we punish today's children for their parents and grandparents lack of emphasis on education? Do those parents know HOW to foster a supportive environment for learning?
The best thinking I'm aware of on 'what to do about' the problem revolves around the idea of the 'family school partnership' (you get a few good hits if you google it). It boils down to aggressive intervention policies aimed at promoting parental involvement, creating environments conducive to learning, and alleviating the effects of poverty.