The Education Gadfly
A Weekly Bulletin of News and Analysis from the Thomas B. Fordham Institute
January 21, 2010, Volume 10, Number 3
This week on The Education Gadfly Show Podcast: The New Normal and Tiger’s sex addiction
Contents
From Mike's Desk
Recommended Reading
- New Jersey's "Biggest Loser"
- The Race's slow pokes
- Formulaic literature
- Hot cakes for Haiti
- You Da Bomb
Short Reviews
- Head Start Impact Study: Final Report
- State and Local Implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act Volume IX: Accountability Under NCLB: Final Report
- Bringing School Reform to Scale: Five Award-Winning Urban Districts
The Education Gadfly Show Podcast
Flypaper's Finest (The best from Flypaper, Fordham's blog)
Announcements
From Mike's Desk
Party like it's 1994
Scott Brown’s remarkable victory in Tuesday’s special election has turned American politics upside-down, and is already reshaping debates around health care, energy, and spending. But might it also foreshadow a major shift on federal education reform?
Up until Monday night, it seemed likely that Uncle Sam’s role in education would continue to grow larger ad infinitum. With states desperate for cash, the feds capable of borrowing it from China, and the apparent success of the Race to the Top in pushing a broad reform agenda, a new era of federal dominance in education appeared to be upon us. It seemed quite possible that within a few years the federal share of education spending could go up to 20 or even 30 percent, and lots of strings would come along with it.
This was the “new normal” in education policy, though it followed the very old Golden Rule. (“He who has the gold makes the rules.”)
And there’s still a good chance that the federal role in education will continue to grow unabated. States and districts are going to remain broke for the foreseeable future (especially as the full impact of lower housing values is felt in our property-tax reliant school system), and the public isn’t keen on seeing class sizes rise or their favorite teachers laid-off. That leaves the feds as the funder of last resort.
But the odds of an ever-expanding federal role are a whole lot lower today than they were last week. That’s because Brown’s election could be the leading edge of a widespread backlash to big government, and in particular big, costly federal government. And federal education spending--and the prescriptive, top-down Washington-knows-best rules that tend to come along with it--could become a big fat target for wanna-be Representatives and Senators looking to ride taxpayer anger into office.
Remember that in the aftermath of the 1994 Republican take-over of Congress, there was a lot of talk about abolishing the U.S. Department of Education and reining in federal spending. And sure enough, spending increases during the Clinton years were anemic compared to those during the Bush 43 era, and miniscule compared to the stimulus largesse. If 2010 is 1994 all over again, and the GOP takes over Congress again this fall, a similar dynamic could play out, with Republicans attacking a heavy-handed federal role and an ambitious Democratic administration placed on the defensive. This could also spell trouble for the nascent “common standards” effort, if it runs up against anti-Washington headwinds. (Remember the “voluntary national testing” fracas of the 90s?)
To be sure, education could be immune from the larger revolt against big government. Even Newt Gingrich, architect of the Contract with America, lauds the Administration’s forceful actions on education--supportive, as they are, after all, of longtime Republican ideas, like school choice and merit pay. And Brown himself is an unlikely candidate to lead the charge against federal education spending and activism; his campaign platform on schools was smack in the middle of the centrist mainstream, with support for charter schools, testing, and even Boston’s voluntary school desegregation program.
But smart money would say that the new New Normal will lead the Obama Administration to clip its wings across all policy areas, including education. Look for its ESEA reauthorization proposal, in particular, to take pains to demonstrate a renewed faith in states and local communities to fix their own schools and to reduce Washington micromanagement.
Which would be an extremely positive development. The next phase of education reform doesn’t need a federal law that’s even more prescriptive, more punitive, and more far-reaching than the current one. It needs three things instead. First: some humility that Washington isn’t great at making change happen, especially via sticks. Second: transparency--data about school performance that we can trust. And third: incentives (i.e., competitive grants) for schools/districts/innovators to continue experimenting and to scale up successes.
Let the states take the wheel again when it comes to deciding when interventions in failing schools are necessary and how to do them. Let schools take the wheel again when it comes to deciding how they should be staffed, what instructional practices to use, etc. And let Uncle Sam stay focused on offering incentive grants for promising innovations--and for producing and disseminating solid research and evaluation reports.
Editorial boards and sundry reformers will scream that this amounts to a “rollback” of NCLB. Let them scream--and remind them that the same old-same old won’t work in the new New Normal.
Email to a friend | Comments (0)
Recommended Reading
New Jersey's "Biggest Loser"
Aside from ex-governor Jon Corzine, no one lost bigger in November’s Garden State gubernatorial election than the New Jersey Education Association. That, at least, is the sense in Trenton, where newly-elected Governor Chris Christie has declared war with the teachers’ union. Besides appointing former Jersey City Mayor (and veteran voucher booster) Bret Schundler to run the state’s education department, the Governor and his allies have so far engaged mostly in a verbal sparring match. NJEA’s thinking is “back in the 19th century,” says Christie, while the head of the Black Ministers’ Council, Reverend Reginald Jackson, likened the union to Rip Van Winkle. NJEA Prez Barbara Keshishian still hopes to establish a “working relationship” with the new guv. But voters “didn’t pick me because they were looking for a subtle approach,” declares Christie. “So, here it comes.” Despite all this smack-talking, NJEA is still a force to be reckoned with. It has dollars, manpower, and pet elected officials aplenty upon which to call as Christie takes his charter school-voucher-teacher evaluation agenda to the mat. And the union’s refusal to back the Garden State’s Race to the Top application, announced the same day as Schundler’s appointment, cannot help Jersey’s chances. But notwithstanding the NJEA’s $3 million effort to defeat him, Christie rode a positive wave into Trenton, and that’s sure to count for something. Here's hoping that this brawl doesn’t end up as part of a reality series plot line.
"Gov.-elect Christie targets teachers' union with Schundler appointment," by Tom Moran, The Star-Ledger, January 13, 2010
Email to a friend | Comments (0)
The Race's slow pokes
The Chariots of Fire theme song echoed across the plains on Tuesday as states submitted their Race to the Top applications. But not everyone is drawn to the bait of federal dollars when it contains reform hooks. Several states have opted out all together, at least in round one. Texas Governor Rick Perry barred the Lone Star State from participating, saying the competition was a violation of states’ rights. Other states applied despite obstinate interest groups. Teachers’ union affiliates in many places (like New Jersey) opposed their state’s applications while many districts preemptively declined to take proffered funds if their host states win. In its scoring system, however, RTT counts buy-in from the various affected parties, but it remains to be seen how states with otherwise-strong applications but recalcitrant unions or districts will fare in the competition. The opposition is largely ideological, though some states like Montana worry that Secretary Duncan’s push towards charter schools is inappropriate for their rural demographics. Still, with 40 states plus the District of Columbia willing to jump through RTT’s hoops, Nevada’s schools superintendent is probably right when he told the Times, “When you’re starving and somebody puts food in your mouth, it’s amazing what states will do.”
" Education Grant Effort Faces Late Opposition, " by Sam Dillon, New York Times,January 18, 2010
Email to a friend | Comments (0)
Formulaic literature
Should computer algorithms determine our national English curriculum? That’s what E.D. Hirsch wants to know when he raises this shockingly relevant--if absurd--question in his evaluation of the draft “Common Core” college-ready standards. The standards, in his view, have several pluses. They explicitly associate literacy with having a broad base of knowledge, and they correctly divide the amorphous “language arts” into its core skills of reading, writing, listening, and speaking. But reminiscent of our own evaluation of the same standards, Hirsch cautions that schools can’t teach these skills directly without a knowledge-rich curriculum. The primary error, explains Hirsch, is that the standards-drafters treat language proficiency as a how-to skill. Similar to many state ELA standards, they use a technical definition that is based on finding the main idea and “inferencing.” In reality, inference cannot be taught in the abstract. Studies have shown that a poor reader with extensive baseball knowledge will score higher on a passage about baseball than a good reader with little knowledge of the sport. Thus, to impart the necessary language competencies, we must focus on increasing a student’s knowledge of content, not attempt to teach them “reading skills” as such. This is an important distinction that the standards fail to point out.
“First, do no harm,” E.D. Hirsch, Jr., Education Week, January 14, 2010 (subscription required)
Email to a friend | Comments (1)
Hot cakes for Haiti
While the devastating effects of Haiti’s January 12 earthquake remain agonizing, there has been an upwelling of compassion and generosity across America, albeit with a couple of odd twists. Donations through text messages are an incredibly popular route, with contributions currently topping $27 million. Clinton and Bush 43 have teamed up to create the Clinton-Bush Haiti Fund for emergency and long-term relief. And New York City Chancellor Joel Klein has temporarily suspended the city-wide ban on bake sales. In an attempt to curb obesity in city schools, NYC DOE placed a number of restrictions on where, when, and how student clubs and parent associations can raise money during school hours and on school property. For the moment, however, Big Apple students are now free to buy their cake, and eat it, too, so long as the proceeds go to Haitian relief efforts. One notes that the trans-fats, processed sugar, and refined carbs they will consume as a result, even if bad for their waistlines, is in the interest of a most worthy cause.
“School Bake Sales are Back On, But Only for Haiti,” by Jennifer Medina, New York Times, January 15, 2010
Email to a friend | Comments (0)
You Da Bomb
The vice principal at a San Diego tech-themed magnet middle school must not have been very hip, rad, phat, or da bomb diggity in the 90s. The slang-challenged fellow recently confused a student’s science project that was da bomb for being…a bomb. An 11-year-old brought the home-made device, intended as a motion detector, to school to share with friends--and wound up with quite a commotion on his hands. In fact, it took a school-wide evacuation, x-rays, and a bomb sniffing robot for the school to determine that the child’s project was harmless. After searching the boy’s home for further threatening-looking paraphernalia, school officials let the boy go home. But don’t worry, they say, for they won’t be prosecuting him. We’d have liked to see that legal argument. Prosecuting for what? His interest in science? His self-directed initiative to work on a science project on his own time at home?
“California Middle School Evacuated After Science Project Mistaken for Bomb,” Associated Press, January 18, 2010
“Science project prompts SD school evacuation,” by Susan Shroder, San Diego Union-Tribune, January 15, 2010
Email to a friend | Comments (0)
Short Reviews
Head Start Impact Study: Final Report
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
January 2010
Taking its cue from Obama’s campaign platform, the current administration has adamantly supported sizable boosts in “Zero to Five” programs meant to improve the school readiness of low-income children. But how effective are these programs, beginning with the iconic Head Start? This major study, commissioned by the Health and Human Services Department (and released 10 months late), raises serious doubts. It looked at a representative sample of 5,000 3- and 4-year-old Head Start applicants and randomly assigned each to one of two groups--those that were accepted (controlling for those who didn’t enroll) and those that qualified but were not (but were allowed to participate in other non-Head Start early childhood or day care programs). Analysts then investigated outcomes for each cohort across four key domains: cognitive development, social-emotional development, health status and services, and parenting practices. The results revealed that, while enrollment in Head Start had an immediate positive impact on student outcomes, these advantages largely vanished by the end of first grade. In fact, in only one measure of cognitive development did the 3- and 4-year-old Head Start cohorts show significantly better results at that point (out of 19 and 22 total measures, respectively). Will this study--just the latest one over forty-five years to find that Head Start benefits fade away--finally reroute the universal preschool juggernaut? We’re not optimistic. You can read it here.
Email to a friend | Comments (0)
State and Local Implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act Volume IX: Accountability Under NCLB: Final Report
James Taylor, Brian Stecher, Jennifer O’Day, Scott Naftel, Kerstin Carlson le Floch
RAND and American Institutes for Research
U.S. Department of Education Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development
January 2010
This is the Education Department’s series finale on NCLB implementation. Utilizing data from two separate studies, it supplies broad descriptions of NCLB accountability efforts. At first blush, it highlights a lot of things we already knew. For example, states with lower standards don’t have to work as hard to get students up to the proficient level, while schools with more minority and low-income students tend to make adequate yearly progress less frequently. However, neatly tucked on page 139, the authors casually add in a sentence actually worth noting. While time-in-learning for reading and math increased during study years, “the time devoted to other subjects was virtually unchanged.” If true, this would throw a monkey wrench into the standard NCLB criticism that the legislation has unduly narrowed curriculum and open up the debate for more systemic issues with NCLB accountability. But other federal data, such as the Schools and Staffing Survey, have found the exact opposite, in elementary school at least. (See here, here, and here, too.) In the very least, this report won’t make us less vigilant about curriculum narrowing. You can download the report here.
Email to a friend | Comments (0)
Bringing School Reform to Scale: Five Award-Winning Urban Districts
Heather Zavadsky
Harvard Education Press
2009
In these lively and readable case studies, the author spells out--with the appropriate degree of detail--the changes that five urban school districts (Long Beach and Garden Grove, CA, Norfolk and Boston, MA, and Aldine, TX) made on the path to winning the Broad Prize. Several themes weave throughout: These districts implemented a clear, direct, and rigorous curriculum, aligned with high standards and supported at various layers throughout the system. Indeed, revamping the district’s curriculum was the single most important contributor to success. But that’s not all. They were also staffed with highly-capable leaders and teachers. Though superintendent turnover is rife in urban education, the leaders of these districts lasted 6 to 11 years. Data and multiple accountability systems were also critical. The author is clear in linking such reforms to NCLB and to district leaders’ enthusiasm for the law’s provisions. Despite allegations that it’s a “tainted brand,” it’s worth highlighting these examples of this statute working as intended. Buy it here.
Email to a friend | Comments (0)
The Education Gadfly Show Podcast
The New Normal and Tiger's sex addiction
How could those two things be related? The priceless combination of Mike’s baby-caused sleep-deprived state and Rick’s witty plug for his forthcoming tome, of course. All while they chew over whether the Race to the Top has been a success and the implications of Brownie’s election as U.S. Senator. Then Amber gives us the scoop on a new evaluation of Head Start and Rate that Reform guards its private property. 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).
Email to a friend | Comments (0)
Flypaper's Finest (The best from Flypaper, Fordham's blog)
Open source education
Stafford Palmieri
You can find whatever your heart desires on the internet, and that’s in part thanks to something called open source. It’s a bit of an amorphous term, but that hasn’t stopped this Utah virtual charter school from diving in to this potentially revolutionizing movement. Open source is just as its name implies--open. In terms of general internet material, that means that the source code (i.e., the program code behind the information) is available alongside the content to be used and modified as the consumer desires. At an open source virtual charter, that means being able to personalize learning materials to a new level...So what does this mean for Open High School?...Read it here.
Email to a friend | Comments (0)
Adults biggest hurdle to reforms that Cleveland's students deserve
Emmy Partin
Last week, Cleveland Metropolitan School District CEO Eugene Sanders unveiled a major plan to transform the district, Ohio’s second-largest and one in dire need of fixing. The plan (see Eric’s analysis here) aims to improve academic achievement by, among other things, right-sizing the district by closing 18 schools and laying off teachers, allowing high-quality charter operators to take over some buildings, increasing intra-district choice options, and reassigning teachers to schools based on their teaching interests and abilities....Read it here.
Email to a friend | Comments (0)
Announcements
Fordham turns around
To discuss turnarounds, of course. It’s not too late to RSVP for our January 28 powwow on “School Turnarounds: Exciting and Felicitous or Expensive and Futile?” Bryan Hassel and Andy Smarick will discuss the pros and cons, while Andrés Alonso, CEO of Baltimore City Public Schools, and Emily Lawson of the DC Prep charter network, will put them into context. Do your homework by reading Hassel and Smarick’s opposing Education Next articles here and here. Find out more about the event here and RSVP to Amy Fagan at rsvp@edexcellence.net.
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.