Tag Archive for 'education reform'

“The Most Important Education Reformer of the Last Century”

Published by Robert Pondiscio on October 22, 2009 in Core Knowledge, Curriculum and Educational Policy. 9 Comments

[Update:  In the comments to this post, Paul Hoss questions Sol Stern giving credit to Hirsch for Massachusetts's Education Reform Act.  Stern responds below.]

In the new City Journal, Sol Stern files a comprehensive dispatch on the career of E.D. Hirsch, Jr. and judges the Core Knowledge founder to be “the most important education reformer of the last century.”   Stern writes that “Hirsch’s theories, long merely persuasive, now have solid empirical backing in Massachusetts’s miraculous educational reforms.”  So why, he wonders, isn’t Washington paying attention? 

At his Senate confirmation hearing in February, Arne Duncan succinctly summarized the Obama administration’s approach to education reform: “We must build upon what works. We must stop doing what doesn’t work.” Since becoming education secretary, Duncan has launched a $4.3 billion federal “Race to the Top” initiative that encourages states to experiment with various accountability reforms. Yet he has ignored one state reform that has proven to work, as well as the education thinker whose ideas inspired it. The state is Massachusetts, and the education thinker is E. D. Hirsch, Jr.

“Hirsch’s theories, long merely persuasive, now have solid empirical backing in Massachusetts’s miraculous educational reforms,” Stern writes.  One element of the state’s 1993 Education Reform Act was a “Hirschean knowledge-based curricula for each grade.”

In the new millennium, Massachusetts students have surged upward on the biennial National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)—“the nation’s report card,” as education scholars call it. On the 2005 NAEP tests, Massachusetts ranked first in the nation in fourth- and eighth-grade reading and fourth- and eighth-grade math. It then repeated the feat in 2007. No state had ever scored first in both grades and both subjects in a single year—let alone for two consecutive test cycles.

Hirsch spoke at a luncheon event at the Manhattan Institute Wednesday, which was recorded for future broadcast by C-SPAN.  In the meantime, a podcast of a lively conversation between Stern and Hirsch is on the City Journal website here.

Curriculum: More Reform for Less Money

Published by Robert Pondiscio on October 15, 2009 in Curriculum and Research and Reports. 22 Comments

From Day One, among this blog’s raisons d’être has been to say to ed reformers of  every stripe “don’t forget curriculum.”  So it’s great to hear Brookings’ Russ Whitehurst say the same thing–and with cold, hard data to back it up.   In his latest Letter on Education, Whitehurst lays out an argument that should catch the eye of everyone who is focused on charter schools, teacher quality, early childhood ed and standards as the means of boosting student achievement.  He looks at the effect sizes of those reforms and reports curriculum effects have a much greater impact than all of them:

Further, in many cases they are a free good. That is, there are minimal differences between the costs of purchase and implementation of more vs. less effective curricula. In contrast, the other policy levers reviewed here range from very to extremely expensive and often carry with them significant political challenges, e.g., union opposition to merit pay for teachers. This is not to say that curriculum reforms should be pursued instead of efforts to create more choice and competition through charters, or to reconstitute the teacher workforce towards higher levels of effectiveness, or to establish high quality, intensive, and targeted preschool programs, all of which have evidence of effectiveness. It is to say that leaving curriculum reform off the table or giving it a very small place makes no sense. Let’s do what works for the kids, and let’s give particular attention to efficient and practical ways of doing so.

“We conclude that the effect sizes for curriculum are larger, more certain, and less expensive than for the Obama-favored policy levers,” writes Whitehurst, the former director of the Institute of Education Sciences.  He recommends the Administration “integrate curriculum innovation and reform into its policy framework.”

The Department of Education, through the Institute of Education Sciences, should fund many more comparative effectiveness trials of curricula and other interventions, both through its National Center for Education Evaluation and through competitive grants to university-based researchers. The Obama administration has clearly recognized the importance of comparative effectiveness research in health care reform. It is no less important in education reform.”

Can I get an amen?

The End of Education Reform

Published by Robert Pondiscio on September 21, 2009 in No category. 11 Comments

A remarkable speech by Chester Finn of the Fordham Institute is all the more remarkable for the lack of chatter it has generated in the edusphere.  Titled “Is It Time to Throw in the Towel on Education Reform?” the September 9 speech at Rice University notes a broad consensus on education reform that has existed for better than two decades is coming apart at the seams.  “The overriding goal of that consensus was to boost America’s academic achievement at the K-12 level,” Finn notes, and it gave rise to “a tsunami of standards-based reform.”

He cites several major developments contributing to the fraying of that consensus.  Among them: unhappiness with NCLB and a palpable backlash against testing that “goes to the heart of standards-based reform.”  On school choice, he points out, far too many charters and schools of choice have been “disappointingly mediocre.”  Then there are the results of the reform era:

Despite all the reforming, U.S. scores have remained essentially flat, graduation rates have remained essentially flat, and our international rankings have remained essentially flat. You can find some upward blips but you can also find downward blips. Big picture, over 25 years, is flat, flat, flat. In other words, all the reforming has yielded little or nothing by way of stronger outcomes.

Finn also cites “principled critiques by serious people” as another crack in the ed reform wall:

E.D. Hirsch’s new book may be its most cogent example, at least until Diane Ravitch’s next book emerges—of both standards-based reform and school choice on grounds that these structural changes neglect crucial issues of content and pedagogy—neglect what actually goes on in classrooms between teacher and learner—while narrowing the curriculum and weakening the common culture. 

 Has the reform consensus “outlived its usefulness?”  Finn compares American education to the situation the nation found itself in when the Articles of Confederation proved insufficient to the needs of the new nation.  “We may be at a similar stage with regard to our public-education system,” he notes. “Further tugging and kicking at it from the banks of the Potomac is not going to modernize it.”

I’m suggesting to you that American education today resembles America itself in 1785. The old arrangement isn’t working well enough and probably cannot be made to. A new constitution is needed. It’s in that sense that we should throw in the towel on education reform and think instead about reinvention.

 Checker briefly lists his ideas for “essential ingredients” of this new constitution including national standards and measures; portable statewide “weighted-student” financing; and the replacement of traditional school districts “with an array of virtual systems and regional or national operators (some of them technology-based).”

One, Two, Three All Eyes on Rhee

Published by Robert Pondiscio on June 15, 2009 in Education News. 2 Comments

Fame can backfire.  Money doesn’t always talk.  Politics matter.  Beware of unintended consequences.  The Washington Post’s Bill Turque sums up the lessons learned by Washington, DC’s lightning rod Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee.   “Two years into the job, Rhee has lost none of her zeal,” Turque reports.  “But those who know her well say she’s found that converting conviction into sustainable change requires more patience, indulgence and attentiveness to politics than may come naturally to her.”

Turque’s piece opens with Rhee being called on the carpet by D.C. Council Chairman Vincent C. Gray over her decision to pose for the cover of TIME Magazine holding a broom.  “What does it get you, to constantly bash those you’re trying to get to help you? he asked her (a question also asked by this blog).  Turque’s piece describes how Rhee’s “rising celebrity alienated key constituencies at home” including teachers and parents.   He also reports that Rhee “expected to be hailed as a hero last summer by the Washington Teachers’ Union” for her proposal to raise pay into the stratosphere for those willing to forego tenure.  And although he notes Rhee has earned points for more tactful recent management of her relationship with the City Council and other constituencies, she still sounds unrepentant:

If I go down at the end of the day because I didn’t play the political game right, that’s okay with me,” she tells the Post. “At least when you’re making decisions that you believe are in the best interests of kids, you may not win in the end, but at least you can operate with a good conscience.”

“By major measures of progress, the jury on Rhee remains out,” Turque concludes.  “It will take at least three sets of annual standardized test scores to assess whether her changes are making a difference in classrooms, experts say. The second set is due this summer.”

At Teacher Beat, guest blogger Liana Heitin focuses on Rhee’s status as an outsider to DC and education politics, concluding “it’s possible she will continue to remain ‘outside’ as long as she stays pinned to a self-imposed agenda, resists collaborating with stakeholders, refuses to sugarcoat the dismal realities of the system, and aims recruitment efforts at a ‘new breed’ of idealists who are willing to sacrifice their personal lives to make a splash themselves.”  Finally, the Post’s Jay Mathews says Turque nails the list of Rhee’s “lessons learned” and invites readers to add on their own.  The comments predictably fall into two categories:  “You go, girl!”  or simply ”You, go.”

Update:  Eduflack, engaging in expectation management, predicts a downturn in DC test scores this summer.

Horses and Carts

Published by Robert Pondiscio on April 15, 2009 in Education News. 0 Comments

Over at Public School Insights, Claus von Zastrow wonders why Eli Broad, in a Detroit Free Press op-ed piece, lists Washington, DC among urban school districts that “have successfully turned around after producing abysmal student outcomes.”  Broad is “confusing the implementation of his favored reforms with their success,” Claus writes.   Perhaps we should chalk it up to the power of advertising. 

“Rhee herself argued quite reasonably that it would take a few years for her reforms to show results,” Claus notes.   Indeed.  How is claiming victory prematurely different than being happy with the status quo?

Ed Reform Agonistes

Published by Robert Pondiscio on April 14, 2009 in Educational Policy. 14 Comments

“Maybe it’s just as well; school vouchers aren’t that “innovative” anyway. In D.C. at least, they merely help poor kids get access to good schools that have been around for a long time. In today’s education reform world, that’s not enough of a “game-changer.” Never mind the difference it makes for several thousand children.”  — Mike Petrilli,  “Voucher Program Dies” at Flypaper.

“Rather than using symbolism, the modern education reform movement has instead often allowed itself to be defined as a cloistered group of white dilettantes from Ivy League schools-counterproductive symbolism and off the mark.” — Andy Rotherham, “Education Reform Requires Symbols for the Movement to Embrace,” in U.S. News.

“Compare our top-performing schools and our weakest performing schools by looking at test scores, graduation rates, whatever measure you want.  Do you find that most top-performing schools are running many more hours per day, or more days per year? Do you find that the top-performing schools have that much more, or better data?  Do you find that they are more likely to have linked student data to teachers? Do you find that the top-performing schools have a maniacal focus on test preparation?  No, no, no, no.”  — David Cohen, a Palo Alto, CA English Teacher via Teacher in a Strange Land.

“I’m a reformist, not a revolutionary, because revolutions in human habits don’t work. Humans resist discontinuity and unpredictability. We may be “wired” that way? In any case, I’m sympathetic, not hostile, to caution. So I’m betting on exploring what “works” within the context of both shared ends and different ends—honoring both continuity and change at the same time.  They needn’t be poised as enemies.”  — Deborah Meier, “Seeing ‘Reform’ as More Than a Horse Race or Marketplace” at Bridging Differences.

“Myths About Education Reform”

Published by Robert Pondiscio on February 24, 2009 in Educational Policy. 1 Comment

Even with the billions of dollars in economic stimulus aid headed their way, public schools stand no chance of getting better “until we dispel some empty theories about how to help them,” writes Kalman R. Hettleman, a former commissioner on the Baltimore City school board.

His list of 5 myths about education reform in the Washington Post has something guaranteed to irritate virtually everyone.  He rejects the idea that teachers know best and should be left alone by policymakers, noting the profession is resistant to using research to improve instruction.  On the other hand Hettleman has no patience for the “blame the unions” line.  He also doesn’t buy the idea that the federal government meddles too much in the affairs of local schools.

“Actually, the feds don’t go far enough. Even NCLB, attacked as an effort to wrest power from local government, allows all 50 states to set their own standards. But really, why should a passing math score vary from one school district to another?  The United States is one of only a few developed nations clinging to the idea of local control over education. Most European countries, as well as Japan, have national standards and curriculums. Their schools also rely mainly on national funding, while ours receive less than 10 percent of their revenue from the federal government….U.S. education officials need to use federal funding to reward districts that raise standards and help put American schools on a par with their international competitors.

Most tellingly – and dispiritingly –Hettleman rejects the idea that we know how to fix public schools but lack the political will to finish the job.  “Conservatives generally advocate breaking up teacher unions and privatization, while liberals call for more money, less testing and greater teacher autonomy.” But nothing has succeeded in creating even a single high-functioning urban district, Hettleman notes.

A Call for Direct Instruction

Published by Robert Pondiscio on January 16, 2009 in Education News, Opinion and Research and Reports. 22 Comments

A solution for the achievement gap was discovered four decades ago, writes John McWhorter in The New Republic, and it has nothing to do with raising low expectations, improving parental involvement, or demanding accountability.  Starting in the late 1960s, he writes, Project Follow Through compared nine teaching methods and tracked their results in more than 75,000 children from kindergarten through third grade:

It found that the Direct Instruction (DI) method of teaching reading was vastly more effective than any of the others for (drum roll, please) poor kids, including black ones. DI isn’t exactly complicated: Students are taught to sound out words rather than told to get the hang of recognizing words whole, and they are taught according to scripted drills that emphasize repetition and frequent student participation.

Subsequent studies found similar results, says McWhorter, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute. Indeed, he notes, ”a search for an occasion where DI was instituted and failed to improve students’ reading performance would be distinctly frustrating.”  So why no discussion of Direct Instruction as a means of addressing the achievement gap?

Schools of education have long been caught up in an idea that teaching poor kids to read requires something more than, well, teaching them how to sound out words. The poor child, the good-thinking wisdom tells us, needs tutti-frutti approaches bringing in music, rhythm, narrative, Ebonics, and so on. Distracted by the hardships in their home lives, surely they cannot be reached by just laying out the facts. That can only work for coddled children of doctors and lawyers. But the simple fact of how well DI has worked shows that “creativity” is not what poor kids need.

Matthew Yglesias describes McWhorter’s piece as “somewhat overblown but essentially correct” and nails an even larger issue:

It’s both strange and unfortunate that the education system is so unresponsive to this research and also strange and unfortunate that “education reform” efforts have so much focus on administrative structure of school systems and so little on these kinds of curriculum issues.”

McWhorter meanwhile urges Arne Duncan, the next Ed Secretary to consider “taking the blinders off and forcing America’s urban school districts to teach poor kids to read with tools that we have known to work since the Nixon Administration.”

 

KIPP Founders: National Standards Will Raise Achievement

Published by Robert Pondiscio on January 9, 2009 in Assessment and Testing, Educational Policy and accountability. 5 Comments

Kipp founders Mike Feinberg and Dave Levin have an op-ed in the Washington Post today “how to channel Obama’s ‘yes, we can’ spirit into substantive education reform.”  Some of the pair’s five suggestions are pure bully pulpit stuff – inspiring Americans “to set a goal for our educational system akin to putting a man on the moon,” for example, and helping build enthusiasm and respect for teachers.  But the KIPPsters also issue a ringing call for national standards and assessments:

Perhaps the single greatest lever for raising expectations and achievement for all children in America would be the creation of national learning standards and assessments. With KIPP schools operating in 19 states, we have seen how the maze of state standards and tests keeps great teachers from sharing ideas, inhibits innovation, and prevents meaningful comparison of student, teacher and school performance. Rather than there being 50 different standards, Obama could unify the country around a common vision for the kind of teaching and learning we need to prepare our children for the future.

The pair also want Obama and Ed Secretary-designate Arne Duncan to back assessing teachers “on their demonstrated impact on student learning, not whether they hold a traditional teacher certifications,” and giving all public “the ability to hire, fire and reward principals and teachers based on their students’ progress and achievement.”

Red Ink Blues

Published by Robert Pondiscio on January 8, 2009 in Educational Policy. 6 Comments

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger wants to shorten the school year by 5 days to save money.  Georgia is proposing larger class sizes for next year.  One Detroit elementary school is even asking for donations of toilet paper and light bulbs to continue operating.

Things are tough all over, but with drumbeats for a bailout of state budgets growing louder, Mike Petrilli, Checker Finn and Rick Hess argue at National Review that a stimulus package may retard education reform.  “There’s scant evidence that an extra dollar invested in today’s schools delivers an extra dollar in value,” the trio note.  “And ample evidence that this kind of bail-out will spare school administrators from making hard-but-overdue choices about how to make their enterprise more efficient and effective.”

Over at Flypaper, Petrilli writes with eyes wide open, “Yes, we’re ready for the hate mail.”