In a famous 1974 fight in Zaire, an aging Muhammad Ali retreated to the ropes early, covered up, and allowed the undefeated champion George Foreman to slug away, round after round. Foreman, and just about everyone watching, thought the bigger, stronger, younger man had it won.
But Ali was luring him in, just getting his opponent into position. In the 8th round, Ali knocked him out, and the legend of the rope-a-dope was born.
I took a serious bruising reading the first three-quarters of Secretary Duncan's December 10th speech to the National Conference of State Legislators. I figured there'd be things in the talk I didn't like given the audience.??As Mike wrote about this summer the links between NCSL and teachers unions are well known and meaningful. I suspected that the secretary would tell them some things they wanted to hear. These prospects didn't bother me too much; nothing egregiously wrong about knowing and playing to your audience, as long as it doesn't go too far.
But this went very far. After the obligatory flattering (legislators do the tough work and governors get all the credit) and a nod to the difficult economic times facing the legislators, the secretary's words about policy were marginally disquieting. First there was a reference to ???innovative, autonomous schools,??? code for the faux charters that many state legislators prefer to truly independent public schools (and which found their way into the RTT application).??Then there was the line about not liking charter schools, only liking good charter schools???a fine sentiment but easily turned into ammunition for caps and more regulation by charter antagonists.
Then there was the praise for the several states that had passed laws recently getting tough on charters. All of this, but not a single word about the states that had lifted charter caps.
The reform community's legs got wobbly when the secretary ended this flurry with a quote from AFT president Randi Weingarten???that state laws not only need to do what is right for kids but also be fair to adults. That argument, of course, can and has been used to defend a whole host of troubling policies: strict pay scales, rubber rooms, data firewalls, and so on.
Just when I was about to throw in the reform towel, the secretary rallied. And then some. He had saved his energy for some tough talk on teachers. And, I suspect, with his previous honeyed words still clinging to the crowd's ears, he had a receptive audience.
He began by talking about the hundreds of pages of state code on pay, tenure, and evaluations, and yet the deafening silence on teacher quality. ???We have a law for every aspect of the teacher's career???except one to recognize success.???
He then cleverly flipped the traditional defense of today's system???that current rules treat educators as professionals.??He said that instead we would treat teaching as a ???revered, distinguished profession??? if we measured teacher quality based on student learning and if we used that data to evaluate teacher preparation programs. Again playing on the theme of professionalism, he later said, ???Teachers would have to demonstrate their ability to be successful in the classroom, not merely show minimal competence and subject knowledge to get a license, just as other professionals are now required to do.???
He said in an ???exemplary system,??? ???tenure decisions would consider in significant measure whether teachers improved student performance.??? Consistently weak teachers would be ???counseled to another profession.???
This argument culminated in his asking the legislators to consider their own policies and to be ???honest when we see a law that protects an adult interest but does not advance those of our students.??? Such policies include restrictive licensing rules, single-salary schedules, weak evaluation and tenure systems, the inequitable distribution of high-quality teachers, and rules that turn ???the process of removing a chronically ineffective teacher into something resembling a lengthy legal trial.???
Very strong, much-needed statements from the secretary. I'm uneasy that he sacrificed charters along the way, but maybe that's the price for getting state legislators to lean forward in their chairs and take note.
Ultimately, the winner of this fight will be determined by what these legislators do when they get back to their state capitals. Do they answer the bell, come out swinging, and craft new, reform-oriented laws in order to compete for the Race to the Top? Or do they declare ???No mas ??? and retreat to their corners and the comforts of existing, establishment-friendly policies?
This was no knock-out, but the secretary had a couple very, very good rounds.
-Andy Smarick
Photograph from Library of Congress