At CRPE, we believe strongly in taking a city-wide view of education. The reality of urban education these days is a complicated mash-up of schools run by districts, charter providers, independent private schools, and sometimes even state agencies. It’s usually the case, however, that research reports (e.g., the NAEP TUDA, the CREDO studies, the Brookings Choice report) focus only on a small portion of that picture. We were therefore happy to see that Fordham’s new study on school choice took a specifically urban view to identify the most “choice-friendly” cities in the country. As Rick Hess described it, the report is basically a gardener’s guide: Through an exhaustive array of indicators, the authors have developed a list of soil components that they believe should make for a healthy choice environment.
We produced our own city-wide indicators a few months ago. In Measuring Up: Educational Improvement and Opportunity in 50 Cities, we assessed all public schools on a variety of outcomes: what share of schools were performing above other schools with similar demographics, how quickly all the cities’ schools (both charter- and district-run) were improving compared to other schools in the state, what percentage of low-income students had access to high-performing schools, and so on. If Fordham’s report is a guide to soil conditions, our study is more like a plant inventory.
It’s hard to relate the two, but the discouraging results in our report—including the cities that Fordham lists as most hospitable to choice—suggest that choice friendliness is no guarantee of good things happening for kids. Everyone has work to do.
Both publications are important, but they leave out something important: the link between soil conditions and plant growth is good horticulture—the types of techniques that can help great schools take root and spread (and improve or prune the worst schools). Those techniques include informed parental choice, recruitment and development of great educators, adequate and strategic funding, a diverse range of incubators and other supports for schools, and thoughtful authorizing and quality control.
At CRPE, we call these functions the Portfolio Strategy—basically the things that need to happen to create a dynamic system of strong schools run by empowered and effective educators. More and more cities are learning what it takes to make choice work well for families through investments in common enrollment systems, transportation, and information. They are learning about ways to make sure that district schools can compete effectively in high-choice environments by having similar flexibilities and performance agreements.
The cities that rank highest on Fordham’s choice report, Washington, D.C. and New Orleans, also tend to rank high on some important outcomes that we track, such as percentage of students enrolled in schools that beat their demographic odds. We’ve found that New Orleans, D.C., and Denver are also more likely than other “high-choice” cities to have made progress on transportation, fair enrollment processes, and information systems. These cities recognize that choice doesn’t automatically produce strong outcomes, but it is an essential soil condition. They don’t know the best farming techniques, but they are committed to trying different approaches until they get it right.
Choice is a means, not an end unto itself. Cities should take pride in being friendly to choice only if that friendliness results in better outcomes for kids.
Robin Lake and Michael DeArmond are the director and senior research analyst of the Center on Reinventing Public Education.
Editor's note: This post was first published on Flypaper on December 17.
