I got deeply involved in the closure/new start vs. turnaround debate because it has a major bearing on the basic argument of my book project. So I started thinking through and researching the various angles several months ago when this was still a relatively sleepy, back-burner issue. Little did I know that the stimulus legislation would include $3 billion for the School Improvement Fund or that Secretary Duncan would make turning around 1,000 schools per year one of ED's priorities.
As I've mentioned many times, I'm concerned that the good intentions and hope motivating the turnaround crowd could lead us to spend inordinate sums of money on a venture that hasn't worked well to date, and which, based on the evidence, I believe has little potential to do much better in the future.
Since major policy and funding decisions on turnarounds will be made in the months to come, I've turned my chapter on turnarounds into an article. The great people at Education Next have accepted it and accelerated its publication; it should be out in print this fall, with the online version available even sooner.
Hopefully this will play a small role in helping ensure this debate gets the consideration it deserves.
Thanks to the Hassels for contributing to this discussion. Later today, I'll briefly respond to their latest rejoinder.