|
Little Bang for Big (Stimulus) Bucks
 A new report from Bellwether Education Partners probes the impact of the federal government's massive stimulus spending on education reform developments the money was intended to incentivize. The results are disappointing, if predictable. According to a press release accompanying the issuance of the report, the $100 billion allocated for public education by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (AKA "The Federal Stimulus Bill"), has yielded results that "...significantly lag behind the ambitious education intentions of the law." The report, "Conflicting Missions and Unclear Results : Lessons from the Education Stimulus Funds," which can be accessed here, notes that for the most part, the massive infusion of money, "...simply helped districts tread water, as several states reduced education budgets by roughly the same amounts they received in ARRA allocations." While the one-time injection of funds provided a welcome palliative to cash-strapped states, the report's authors caution that, "...success in closing state and local budget gaps is only temporary; districts will face even greater pain once funds go away." A summary of the report's major findings and recommendations can be found, here. Among their findings, the report's authors noted: "Mixed messages from senior officials at the U.S. Department of Education, multiple competing priorities, and delays in receiving official guidance from ED and states created confusion at the district level about the purpose of ARRA funds and how they should be used to preserve jobs and advance reform." They, therefore, recommended that, "Federal policymakers should not expect federal funds to generate reform unless they are attached to clear reform requirements. Policymakers can combine stimulus and reform but must acknowledge the trade-offs, structure the funding accordingly, and communicate their priorities and goals clearly to recipients of funds." That's a tall order to fill. Under "normal" conditions, the development of federal regulations is an arduous, and deliberate process. And well it should be when $100 billion is at stake, a sum that dwarfs the Department of Education's total (regular) annual budget. However, both the economic and political intent of Congress and President Obama was to move the money into the economy as quickly as possible. The Bellwether authors' recommendation should be qualified by the exigent circumstances accompanying the passage of the stimulus bill.
Some districts succeeded in using the funding to support reform initiatives. Two such examples are noted by The Hechinger Report's Davin McHenry: "Charlotte-Mecklenburg used the combination of budget cuts and ARRA to advance a fundamental overhaul of its approach to human resource development. Charlotte-Mecklenburg was able, among other things, to base layoff decisions on performance rather than seniority and made strategic increases in class size in order to maintain funding for academic coaches who work with new or struggling teachers. Florida's Hillsborough County (which includes Tampa) used a portion of its Title I stimulus dollars for a teacher incentive pay program, and Seattle is using stimulus funding to support a new STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Math) high school program and to reform English language learner programs." Stimulating experimentation with performance-, as opposed to seniority-based teacher layoffs, and larger class sizes is unlikely to win any slaps on the back from the teachers unions. Nor will the unions be likely to look favorably upon the following Bellwether report recommendation (though it will be music to the ears of the Obama Administration): "Competitive funding programs, such as Race to the Top, appear to be more effective in driving change than formula-driven programs, through which most ARRA education funds were distributed." One of the report's recommendations is borderline inscrutable: "Federal policies that prevent districts from using stimulus funds for practices known to be ineffective may be more effective than policies that encourage spending those funds on new reform activities." It is a prescription that calls to mind the following R.D. Laing quote: "There is a great deal of pain in life and perhaps the only pain that can be avoided is the pain that comes from trying to avoid pain." If both the Bellwether report authors and the late Scottish psychiatrist are correct, one wonders why the government allocated the money in the first place. |
|
A Hebrew-Immersion Charter School in New Jersey
 A proposed Hebrew-immersion charter school in Bergen County, New Jersey is generating controversy. Backers of the Shalom Academy have already seen three previous charter applications denied, and have generated opposition from both local public and private schools. With a new, charter-friendly governor now ensconced in Trenton, and a more receptive state department of education, the fourth time may prove to be the charm. (New Jersey is currently home to a miniscule charter school population, with approximately 26,000 students attending 73 charters. That amounts to less than two percent of the state's total number of public school students.)
The proposed Hebrew-immersion school intends to serve students residing in the towns of Englewood and Teaneck. According to an Education Week article, it is estimated that the new charter school, if approved, will cost the Teaneck public school district $1.4 million, and the Englewood district slightly more. But Teaneck Interim Superintendent Barbara Pinsak didn't emphasize dollars and cents when voicing her misgivings about the proposed charter school, asking instead: "Are you really going to attract the diversity that is Teaneck when you have such a narrow focus?" (One wonders when diversity became a goal in its own right.) Other critics contend that the proposed school is "...a 'thinly veiled' attempt to provide a publicly funded alternative to Jewish day schools, where tuition can be $15,000 annually." If Shalom Academy's charter application is approved, it would not be the Garden State's first Hebrew charter school. This past September, the Hatikvah International Charter School opened its doors in East Brunswick. That school's website explains the prominence it bestows upon Hebrew by noting, " Hebrew is a classical language like Greek and Latin and, through much of human history, has influenced many languages in Western culture." It goes on to explain: "From an economic and global perspective, Hebrew is becoming increasingly relevant in the world of international business as Israel's influence in the world markets continues to expand. As an indication of this influence, Israel is second only to the United States in having the greatest number of companies listed on the NASDAQ exchange." The school, which currently operates in a Presbyterian church standing adjacent to the offices of the local public school district, claims it already has more applications than available seats for the coming academic year. According to Englewood Superintendent of Schools Richard Segall, when surveyed to determine whether they wished for a Hebrew immersion program to be established within the local public schools, only 15 families expressed interest. Piecing together bits of circumstantial evidence, one could make a case that the Hebrew charter schools appeal to families for whom the transmission of the Hebrew language is more important that the inculcation of Jewish religious beliefs and practices, particularly when accomplished in a more culturally homogenous environment than the local public school, and with no accompanying tuition. Non-religiously observant Israeli immigrants, for example, may be drawn to such schools in significant numbers.
This fall, the opening of the Albert Einstein Academy in suburban Los Angeles was accompanied by similar questioning concerning its nature and intentions. The school's principal, Edward Gika, was quoted in a JewishJournal.com article as justifying the Academy's focus by observing: "Whether it's Urdu or Mandarin, it really doesn't matter, because the higher order of learning is what we're focusing on." Some Jewish day school leaders regard Hebrew charter schools with a degree of suspicion. Dr. Bruce Powell, Head of School at New Community Jewish High School in West Hills opined: "If we think that [Hebrew charter school education] is a substitute for Jewish education in the most profound way - and I'm speaking from a high school perspective - I think that we are fooling ourselves." Others are quick to note that the Hebrew charter schools make no such claims. As public schools, they are obligated to steer clear of religious instruction and observance, a constraint that some claim is particularly difficult in light of the dual role of Hebrew as both a modern language, and a biblical language unique to the Jewish faith. One thing seems certain. Experimentation with Hebrew, and other charter schools that skirt the boundaries of religion (i.e. Islamic, Catholic) is just beginning. Will they be a short lived byproduct of an evolving public education landscape? Will they be a stepping stone to educational choice arrangements that permit parents to direct public funds for access to private religious schools? Or, will they simply be a passing fad? Stay tuned! |
|
Quick Takes
 Michelle Rhee Launches New EndeavorUsing an appearance on the Oprah Winfrey Show to kick-start her new initiative, former D.C. Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee has founded a new advocacy group named "StudentsFirst." The organization's website informs readers that its mission is, "to build a national movement to defend the interests of children in public education and pursue transformative reform, so that america has the best education system in the world." According to a New York Times article, Ms. Rhee has set "a highly ambitious target of raising $1 billion to promote 'transformative reform,' primarily by backing laws and political candidates, from local school boards to Congress." A Flypaper article quotes the American Enterprise Institute's Frederick M. Hess as opining that Ms. Rhee is, ""very explicitly is setting out to be a political answer to the unions."
Hard to Swallow
As a volunteer member of an organization that reads aloud, one-on-one, to low-income students, Flypaper's Peter Meyer recently had occasion to eat lunch with a couple of third graders at a nearby public school. The fare served up by the school cafeteria, as part of the federally funded National School Lunch Program, consisted of a "hotdog, 8 tater-tots, a small pile of mushy string beans, [and] chocolate milk." In the manner of a surreptitious participant-observer, Mr. Meyer reports: "Paul sipped some milk, ate a few bites of the dog, held a single bean up to his nose, went "ugh!," then picked up his tray, marched over to the 50-gallon garbage can at the door, and tossed it. He wasn't the only one. Most of the trays I saw being tossed had 'food' still on them." The National School Lunch program currently serves some 31 million children from low-income families attending public schools, nonprofit private schools, and residential child care facilities. According to a program fact sheet: " School lunches must meet the applicable recommendations of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, which recommend that no more than 30 percent of an individual's calories come from fat, and less than 10 percent from saturated fat. Regulations also establish a standard for school lunches to provide one-third of the Recommended Dietary Allowances of protein, Vitamin A, Vitamin C, iron, calcium, and calories. School lunches must meet Federal nutrition requirements, but decisions about what specific foods to serve and how they are prepared are made by local school food authorities." That's well and good, assuming the kids actually eat the food.
Mr. Meyer observes: "I'm sure someone is keeping track of how much of this stuff gets tossed every day, but as far as I can see the School Lunch program is another horrible waste of the public's money: for all the great intentions about feeding hungry people, no one is making sure that the kids eat the free food (even if you don't want to call it that). Isn't the point of this to feed people? In my day, there was a nun posted at the exit garbage can and her job was not to smile and say beautiful things, but to make sure that not a single scrap of food was dumped, no matter what it looked or tasted like. And she could spot a mouthful of peas from 50 yards." You can read his account, here.
One Man's Edublog Nominees
David B. Cohen, a founder of Accomplished California Teachers and, himself, a public high school teacher, has produced a list of nominees for the 2010 Edublogs Awards. Categories include: Best Individual Blog, Best Group Blog, Best New Blog, Best Resource Sharing Blog, Best Teacher Blog, Best Individual Tweeter, and others. Readers may wish to check out some of the links, and/or to submit their own nominations.
More from New Jersey
Speaking at a recent education forum convened by former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, New Jersey's incumbent governor, Chris Christie had the following to say about the Garden State's teachers unions, "It is an obscenity-an obscenity-that those who claim to be involved in public education for kids aren't just as offended and just as impatient as I am." Of New Jersey's public school system, the outspoken Mr. Christie added, "It is simply a system that is there to serve the adults, not to serve the children." While Mr. Christie has quickly won a following among supporters of school choice, he isn't winning any popularity contests among the state's public school teachers. A Facebook page titled "New Jersey Teachers United Against Governor Chris Christie's Pay Freeze," has attracted 74,000 followers. The governor's proposed salary freeze comes on the heels of a $820 million year-to-year reduction in state assistance to public schools. |
|
Bill Gates, Diane Ravitch, and History
 Readers of the E-Mailer are aware that New York University Professor Diane Ravitch has been ultra critical of wealthy philanthropists who have bankrolled various education reform efforts not to her liking. In her most recent book, Professor Ravitch lambasts such patrons in a chapter titled, "The Billionaire Boys Club." And no one better personifies that elite club than does Microsoft founder, philanthropist, and would-be education reformer Bill Gates. The controversy between Mr. Gates and Professor Ravitch is heating up and becoming somewhat more personal. In a recent Newsweek article, columnist Jonathan Alter produced precisely the sort of Gates quote that his NYU antagonist finds so objectionable. Reacting to an arrangement in which compensation is determined primarily by seniority, Mr. Gates is reported to have said: "Is there any other part of the economy where someone says, 'Hey, how long have you been mowing lawns? ... I want to pay you more for that reason alone.'" Mr. Gates was than asked about Ms. Ravitch, whom Mr. Alter characterized as "...a jaundiced former Education Department official under George H.W. Bush, who changed sides in the debate and now attacks Gates-funded programs in books and articles," and was also described as, "the Whittaker Chambers of school reform." To which Mr. Gates responded: "Does she like the status quo? Is she sticking up for decline? Does she really like 400-page [union] contracts? Does she think all those 'dropout factories' are lonely? If there's some other magic way to reduce the dropout rate, we're all ears."
Two days after the publication of the Newsweek column, Professor Ravitch fired back: "Since Gates is a multibillionaire, he can't possibly understand what it means to work in an environment where you might be fired for disagreeing with your boss. Nor can he possibly understand that schools are collaborative cultures that need senior teachers who are ready and willing to help newcomers. He can't imagine that school is different from Microsoft or other big corporations. Let's be honest. CCSSO and The New York Times pay attention to what Gates says because he is so rich. If he didn't run the biggest foundation in the world, if he wasn't one of the richest men in the world, would anyone care about his opinion of education? Really, who would care what he said if he were the chairman of the Whatzit Corporation and sold widgets?"
Friction between big business and education is nothing new. Writing in the prestigious Educational Review in 1911, economist Simon Patten ecoriated the education system for its failure to provide quantifiable measures of success: "The advocate of pure water or clean streets shows by how much the death rate will be altered by each proposed addition to his share of the budget.. Only the teacher is without such figures. Must definite reforms with measurable results give way that an antiquated school system may grind out its useless product?"
Similar challenges soon produced a response from Frank Spaulding, the Newton, Massachusetts Superintendent of Schools who would later chair Yale University's nascent Department of Education, in the form of an adaptation of Frederick W. Taylor's principles of " Scientific Management," a method whose essential features included: - the measurement and comparison of comparable results;
- the analysis and comparison of the conditions under which given results are secured, and;
- the consistent adoption and use of those means that justify themselves most fully by their results.
These, and similar ideas would find cogent expression, three decades later, in the form of University of Chicago Professor Ralph Tyler's "Four Questions": - What educational purposes should the school seek to attain?
- What educational experiences can be provided that are likely to attain these purposes?
- How can these educational experiences be effectively organized?
- How can we determine whether these purposes are being attained?
Professor Tyler's prescriptive questions subsequently gave rise to the behavioral objectives "movement" of the '60s and '70s, and provided new impetus for research and development in the areas of testing and evaluation. These developments, in turn, contributed to the emergence of standards-based instruction and a variety of state and federal accountability frameworks. Given the cultural salience of empiricism, science, and technology, such developments are scarcely surprising. But they have not occurred in the absence of challenges, pushback, and alternative visions. Over the course of the preceding 100 years, educators, policy makers and pundits have been riven by conflicting conceptions of the enterprise of education and its components: science or art? Quantitative or qualitative? Summative or formative? Business people have long contended that education must deliver the "bottom line" with greater efficiency, and educators have long retorted that "schools can't be run like widget factories." The repartee between Bill Gates and Diane Ravitch can scarcely be regarded as a sign of the times. If anything, it's a tell that the same conversation will still be taking place 100 years down the road. Education is what it is, and we humans are what we are. Ron Reynolds |
|
