Over the past five years, education reform has gained enormous traction. A new generation of reform-minded policy makers has taken up the cause of transforming state school systems to prepare students for a dramatically changing economy, urged on by state-level advocacy groups who are playing a crucial role in advancing reform state by state. But while urgency has increased and many fresh faces have taken up the cause, the core ideas guiding education reform have remained remarkably stable, defying the ideological or partisan claims that can often stifle political change.
Ironically, that stability is essential to achieving fundamental change in the policies governing our nation's schools. It's therefore especially encouraging that most of the leaders of this reform renaissance are eschewing silver bullets and quick fixes in favor of working systematically to reorient the guiding policies that shape schooling. The groups who work together through the Policy Innovators in Education (PIE) Network cross the ideological spectrum and their members agree to disagree on many things, but they share a commitment to fundamental reform goals and to a systematic approach to achieving them.
Five leading national organizations serve as the PIE Network's policy partners. Like our 25 state-based members, they recognize that some issues are too important to be left to ideological gamesmanship. In a new collection of essays, "Schools in High Gear: Reforms That Work When They Work Together", our partners explain why certain core ideas are crucial to the formula for education reform and how those policies continue to be sharpened through the interplay with other policy commitments.
Which policies matter in this effort? Chester E. Finn Jr., president of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, asserts that change begins with a system of clear, rigorous goals for learning, followed by regular measuring and reporting on progress. He cautions that standards are not self-implementing. He writes, "It's far better to have good standards than shoddy ones -- without a worthy destination in mind, the journey is pointless -- and better tests will bring many benefits. Yet without quality curricula, top-notch software, knowledgeable teachers, equitable resources, effective pedagogy, well-led schools (and good alternatives to those that aren't), a demanding accountability system and other sound policies in place, standards won't amount to much more than aspirations and assessments will continue to reveal unsatisfactory performance."
Ulrich Boser and Cynthia Brown from the Center for American Progress illustrate how the pursuit of basic fairness in public schooling has evolved as other policy goals came into view. For instance, with the advent of standards and measures, the focus on equity shifted from counting inputs to assessing the adequacy of resources and closing achievement gaps. They tell us that "a fair education system is necessary for our nation to remain successful," and conclude, "The question then becomes when -- and how -- our nation's policy makers will devote the political will to ensure a fair education system for all."
In the section on teacher effectiveness, Kate Walsh, president of the National Council on Teacher Quality (NCTQ), demonstrates that the shift occurring from "teacher quality" to "teacher effectiveness" is only made possible with respected systems for measuring student learning. "Improved student assessments, objective education data collection and reporting efforts, and stronger accountability policies have made it possible to consider an individual teacher's impact on student learning," she writes.
Michael J. Petrilli, vice-president for Thomas B. Fordham Institute, parses the fundamental goals that shape parent choice and charter school polices, and then acknowledges that charters do not always measure up. Ideally, charters are prodded toward excellence by the same policies designed to improve performance of traditional public schools, such as systematic approaches to accountability that define quality and create urgency for change. Where public systems fail the most vulnerable students, charters fill the void by providing options. Petrilli states, "The debate is not whether parents should have choices but how broad those choices should be."
Taking promising education reforms to scale will require innovation and reinvention, argues Robin Lake, associate director of the Center on Reinventing Public Education (CRPE). But she writes that those two goals will remain elusive unless addressed directly through policy. She notes that strategies to increase innovation must, like charter schools, embrace the rigors of evaluation, and require fiscal flexibility. "Without strong state accountability systems, school districts and schools have very little incentive to experiment to find better approaches to instruction," she states.
Accountability may be the most ubiquitous of all reform aims, promised as a dividend once other goals are achieved. The theory goes that once we pass standards, create charters, etc., the pressure from these strategies will create basic accountability. But as those policies are implemented, we see again and again that the habits shaping performance are stubborn. Accountability, therefore, must also be a policy focus in its own right. Bill Tucker, managing director of Education Sector, demonstrates this by taking us right to the doorsteps of a struggling school. He writes that states fail the accountability test by "keeping chronically low-performing schools -- including charters -- open without improvement. The public is shown a veneer of accountability; there's no real change."
In the final essay, CRPE Director Paul Hill argues that none of the policy aims discussed by the network's policy partners can be achieved "until fiscal systems are redesigned to provide the transparency and flexibility needed for continuous improvement." He writes, "Our current system of financing schools was built around controlling inputs, at a time when the system lacked clear goals and meaningful measures of school and teacher performance. There is no excuse for an inputs-based system now, when goals are clear and performance can be measured."
Together, these essays by some of the leading minds in education reform illustrate a common theme: that while policy goals are often promoted in the abstract as stand-alone issues, they work best when implemented in conjunction with other change strategies. They reminds us that improving education will not be achieved through a three point plan in a single legislative cycle. It's a constant effort that requires dedicated advocates who work relentlessly to improve state policies in favor of school improvement. That's why in any given year, PIE Network advocacy groups work to advance reform on multiple fronts in their states. They are the closers of the reform movement, working to see these good ideas get implemented.
Follow Suzanne Tacheny Kubach on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@PIENetwork
Center for Education Reform - Home
The Progress of Education Reform
Obama Makes Case for Education Reform, Defends Private School for ...
Excellence for some, poor for others.
OR
Mediocrity for all
With limited funding, you either need to invest your resources in those areas where the highest potential can be reached, and less in those with low potential.
OR
You invest a lot of money with those with low potential, and less in those with high potential.
Obviously, here, the goal for "potential" is quality education for our children. So long as we chase our tails thinking it's possible for every student to get into Harvard, we're going to be seeing Mediocrity for all. Which is the system we have right now.
What if we based everything on "What does this child need to succeed, need to accomplish their full potential, need to acquire quality of life; what strengths can we build on and what other things require intense focus". What if we considered home environment, nutrition and sleep, exercise or a holistic health approach embedded within education? What if we LOOKED at the child?
Basics like class size and funding are ignored while policy makers continue to chant "rigor", "measurement" and "accountability".
They just want more efficient school factories where all the cogs and wheels are precisely configured and the end products come out looking all alike. Boy am I grumpy now.
I had 2 kids because that's what I could afford. Until people stop having kids that they can't afford, and the government can't do everything for, I think we are going to continue to have problems with our educational system.
1980:
First Grade you Learned Topic "A"
Second Grade you Learned Topic "B"
Third:"C"
Fourth:"D"
Fifth:"E"
Sixth:"F"
At the end of 6th grade, it was assumed all students learned A, B, C, D, E, and F. Let's say 80% of students succeeded in learning all 6 of these topics.
2011:
1st:"A" & "B"
2nd:"C"
3rd:"D" & "E"
4th:"F" & "G"
5th:"H"
6th:"I" & "J"
At the end of 6th grade, it assumed that students learned Topics "A"-"J" however, only 60% of students succeeded in this.
Did performance increase or decrease in these 2 examples? When looking at it in terms of graduation rates, it appears that performance has decreased, given that only 60% passed Vs 80%. However, we were basing the 60% off the students learning A-J, and not A-F... which is nearly double the cirriculum. Had we tested in 2011 A-F, it's likely that it would be much greater than 80%.
The problem is, as parents, everyone wants their child to succeed, but what is success? If we use raw numbers such as graduation rates, or standardization, effectively success would be inverse the amount of material taught. In other words: Less subjects, higher grades, higher performance.
We are seeing a decrease in "success" due to higher standards. The higher the bar, the less people who are apt to hit that bar. So is the solution to lower the bar so it's easy to "succeed"?
sometimes those who took their time to fully explore A-C developed the thinking skills to make D-J easier, while those who covered A-J went through it too fast to really understand any of it. it's not just the content you teach, it's skills you develop.
what is wrong on wall street is wrong in our schools.
we are a results oriented society. life is about process, therefore education is about being process oriented.
visit a pre school then a forth grade class then see and feel the difference as you observe. it aint pretty, ok it is not pretty.
the system is disfunctional it creates all kinds of problems like teacher centered classes, teachers working around the system to make their disfunctional educational system work, etc.
it cannot be turned around it is a societal problem not just an educational problem.
but the teachers will be blamed and measured by results only standards. it will fail like it has been failing just more of the same with different names and labels.
When public schools failed, sanctions were imposed on them. After failing three times, public schools have to provide tutoring services. After failing four straights years, the state was forced to restructure the public school. Increasing accountability is a challenge when it compromises the education system.
The eduction system is in dire need of funding. In any case, there is a lot of work to be done to reform education. Homeless children and special needs also deserve quality education. Urban city children need teachers who are willing to go the extra mile. We have the answers, but need a good plan to reduce the burden of the NCLB policy.
http://CollegeDegreeDiploma.com
http://PublicAdministrationProgram.com
You're right. It is a travesty.
Where are the SEVEN essentials for school reform? That's what the title of this article is. I expected them to be named and discussed in an organized fashion.
I certainly hope you're not a major player in school reform since you seem unable to identify and discuss the seven items you deem essential.
There are only 5 essentials that have been proven (y'know, with actual academic research) to positively impact education. unlike the author, I can actually list them clearly:
1. Community/family support
2. Health care & nutrition
3. Effective leadership
4. Early childhood education
5. Smaller classes
6. Safety
and the most important of all:
7. Teachers.
7. I might put #7 under #5. Nothing should happen in a school without teachers knowing it or having a say in it and they should be allowed to question ANYTHING!
But look, the three of us may have agreed on something about this article; we really didn't learn much.
See you around,
You also forgot: Effective education for teachers. Most teachers don't know their head from their rear when it comes to Adolescent Psychology- and yet they claim themselves to be experts at implanting a cognitive process into adolescents. Do you see the problem there?
They know so little that they don't even understand WHY it's important to know these things. Which just further proves my point.
The problem is that teachers are so busy being parents that they're not even teachers anymore- let alone effective teachers.
by community support, i mean that parents don't always have the skills they need to help their children learn, and teachers don't always have the available time and energy to do the parents' jobs for them. thus, if there are programs to assist the parents and community do their part in educating their children, the results improve.
the responsibility and motivation of the student. Failure has become an acceptable option. Having attended school in the 60's I knew no one who didn't routinely graduate from high school. All of the hand wringing over the quality of the teachers is somewhat misplaced as it would be impossible for there to be
that many incompetent teachers. Political correctness is preventing targeted
solutions. Minorities have grown from 5% to almost 50% of public school
students. Ignoring that glaring fact, the recent policy of social promotions and the tendency to teach to the lowest common denominator as major factors in the decline prevents real solutions. Equal is not sufficient when a large percentage
actually needs more intensive instruction to meet basic proficiency. It is not
"just" to force the more qualified to be held back to bring the lowest up. Those
who complain that too much time is spent "teaching to the test" ignore the fact
that unless basic reading, comprehension and math are conquered, all progress in other areas is compromised. There must be intensive special instruction given to those behind before integrating them into "equal" or all the reevaluating of teachers will be meaningless. The administration is doing minorities no
favor by avoiding instead of correcting the most obvious problem. If blacks and
latinos are soon to be the majority, the country better figure out a way to get
them through high school! "Equal" isn't
I think she meant to say, "the leading corporate minds that wish to destroy public education, privatize, and then reap windfall profits while indoctrinating a compliant, low skilled workforce that loves to consume, but doesn't like to think too much."
If Af-Americans and Latinos don't improve their graduation rates, this country
will be a global also-ran. Actually I find it frightening that the left has been able
to convince so many that business is the enemy or that stupidity is the goal.
What absolute garbage!!!
In fact, I'd go further to say America is in dire need of more educators in places of authority in the political and business sectors as well. If thought and intelligence ran this country instead of money, our nation would be in far better shape than it is today.
Obtaining a Master's in Education is by far the easiest Masters to obtain. I say that with conviction as I have been through (most of) it. I left because I was disgusted, and had a job offer.
Anyway, point being... I don't feel like most teachers know the first thing about teaching. If they did, overheads wouldn't exist. Scantrons wouldn't exist. Desks would not be lined up in rows with the teacher speaking 100% of the class. Notebook checks would not exist.
Unfortunately, all of these things exist, and it's by no means the minority either. And they exist because teachers do what they were taught to do, and they do what they have always done. They've been doing it wrong and will continue to do it wrong.
There are those who are up-to-date on methods, psychology, and what I like to call "Education Theory." These people, I agree, should be put in places of authority. However, how do you pick these people out when those who are deciding authority have no clue either?
For example. Let's say you're horrible at math. Your neighbor walks up to you and says 6x6=46. You think "Wow. He's good at math." Would you hire this man as your accountant? You might, because you think he's good at math. When you don't know the answer, how could you tell?
1. Respect experience. In the current narrative, the young, inexperienced teachers are the good ones and the experienced ones are bad. This is driven mostly by what they're paid. In reality, those with experience are usually the best.
2. Listen to those who know what they're talking about. In the current narrative, Bill Gates is an education expert. Michelle Rhee, with three years of teaching experience, is an education expert. The man in charge of our national education system, Arne Duncan, has not only never taught; he never attended public school. But two national unions comprised entirely of teachers who actually know how to teach are ignored. Listen to them. They're the group most likely to lead positive change that would actually work.
3. Don't measure one thing to evaluate another. Student test score might tell you that the students don't know something, but not WHY. Could be bad teaching. Could be another factor. If they're really bad, it's almost certainly because of another factor, since the school has less effect than the out-of-school environment. Using student test scores to evaluate teachers is like measuring your offspring to figure out how tall you are. You're not measuring the thing you're trying to evaluate.
Continued...
Foolish? You bet.
But it's not about reform.
It's about privatizing education and getting access to those public education tax dollars.
Then they'll turn back to privatizing Social Security to get their hands on THAT money.
It's all about the money, moving it into the hands of the two percenters.
4. If you want to fix a problem, try to fix that problem's cause, not its symptoms. Low test scores are closely correlated with poverty. That seems to be the cause. If you focus all the reform on in-school factors, which are mostly symptoms, you'll never fix anything. You've got to go after the cause.
5. Equitable funding. While schools can't make up for poverty entirely, they can mitigate some of its worst effects if they're fully funded. The schools in affluent areas, the ones that don't need to make up for those effects, tend to be funded pretty well. The ones in poor areas, where extra help is needed, are chronically underfunded. This needs to change. Changing it won't solve everything that's wrong with education; you've got to work on #4 for that. But it would provide at least SOME help to a lot of kids that need it.
Poverty isn't the problem. It's the home environment that is the problem. When a child isn't read to as a child, when the child's parent isn't interested in their schoolwork you get kids who begin school unprepared (even if they have attended some preschool program it can't make up for all the other hours of the day) and who don't do their homework once they have started school.
And if you think poverty isn't the problem but the home environment is, that sounds like a heck of a hair to split. If you think that poverty doesn't generally cause the deficits in home life that you cite, I have several million examples to the contrary.
START LISTENING TO TEACHERS AND STUDENTS!
MORE TEACHER LEAD ACTION, AND LESS REFORMER TALK!
Food for thought, students that struggle with learning lose hope and dignity. We forget that resiliency has an expiration date for most children. I am a teacher that refuse to let my students lose hope and dignity by teaching them ALL! Crash through the expectation of low student performance and student failure.
ESSENTIAL EDUCATIONAL REFORM NUMBERS TWO-SEVEN!
SEE ESSENTIAL EDUCATION REFORM NUMBER ONE!
http://reading-sage.blogspot.com/