The Education Gadfly Weekly

National Council on Teacher Quality
May 31, 2002

This report is a collection of thoughtful, pithy "briefing memos" commissioned by the National Council on Teacher Quality. Penned by a wide range of experts-including Teach for America's Wendy Kopp and alternative certification guru Emily Feistritzer-the memos address such topics as tenure reform, improving professional development, leveraging Title II dollars to promote leadership and reform, aligning teacher preparation with student standards, and more. Some of the essays paint a broad picture of reform while others examine specific states' experiences. You won't find anything earth-shattering here-indeed, much of the material has appeared elsewhere-but you will find some well-written, persuasive essays on topics that states and localities urgently need to address. All but one of the memos are available at http://www.nctq.org/press/2002_consumers_guide/index.html. To order a hard copy of the full report, email NCTQ at [email protected].

Monica Martinez and Judy Bray, National Alliance on the American High School
May 2002

This 40-page report by the National Alliance on the American High School analyzes states' numerous and varied policies to improve secondary schools. These policies are grouped into three main categories: (1) those that address high-school-specific issues like credits, graduation requirements and the GED exam; (2) those that "detail opportunities to learn," including basic funding, remedial help, teacher certification, charter schools, and other options beyond the traditional comprehensive high school; and (3) "new" policies such as standards, assessments and accountability. Each policy area is described with a view toward the latest trends, longstanding assumptions, and resulting tensions. Given the wide range of state policies, the report concludes that there is little agreement on what Americans expect from their high schools, and that state and local officials are struggling for control of the issue, which helps account for the lack of significant academic gains in grades 9-12. Martinez and Bray challenge states to create a set of coherent, well-defined policies regarding the role of the high school-one that defines progress in terms of high academic standards and achievement, not seat time. A PDF version of this report can be found at http://www.hsalliance.org/Allfinal.pdf. You can request a free hard copy via email ([email protected]), fax (202-822-8405), or snail mail (Publications, IEL, 1001 Connecticut Avenue NW, Suite 310, Washington, DC 20036).

Gerald Anderson and Patricia Davenport
2002

The Brazosport (Texas) Independent School District has done an exemplary job of narrowing the usual demographic achievement gaps and, in this 125-page book, two architects of that reform strategy explain how they did it. The keys seem to be a "total quality management" approach, the astute use of assessment data for feedback and improvement, and intelligent application of proven instructional strategies. The American Productivity & Quality Center is the publisher. (You can learn more about that organization's continuing education initiative-which includes expert consultation for other schools and school systems-by surfing to www.apqc.org/education.) Former Brazosport superintendent Gerald Anderson and Patricia Davenport are the co-authors. The ISBN is 1-928593-62-3. The pricetag is a hefty $20 (for a slender paperback). You can contact the APQC at 123 North Post Oak Lane, 3rd floor, Houston, TX 77024 or call (800) 776-9676. You can also surf to http://www.apqc.org/pubs/dispPub.cfm?ProductID=1340.

edited by Frederick Mosteller and Robert Boruch
2002

This solemn new Brookings volume, edited by Frederick Mosteller and Robert Boruch, is no page-turner but it's an important contribution to the evolution of education research by virtue of being perhaps the clearest guide yet to the merits and politics of "randomized field trials" (i.e. true experiments with proper control groups) in this policy domain. Eight mostly excellent chapters provide a solid grounding in what randomized field trials are, how they work, why they're desirable in education, why they're so seldom carried out, and what can be done in situations that don't lend themselves to this approach. 230 pages in toto, the ISBN is 0815702051 and you can learn more by surfing to http://www.brookings.edu/dybdocroot/press/books/evidence_matters.htm. - Chester E. Finn, Jr.

National Center for Education Statistics
2002

One of the more useful data series produced by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) is its periodic "schools and staffing survey" (SASS), of which this 245-pager is the latest. (It is just the first of a shelf of NCES reports to be based on this data set; others are listed on page 245.) Though the data are usually, as now, a couple of years old, they include a ton of information about primary and secondary schools in America: how many of them, how they're staffed, how old their teachers are, how many have various programs and facilities, etc. This year, for the first time, the report comes in four parts. The most familiar has to do with regular public schools. Then there's a 24-page section on private schools, subdivided into about 15 genres of private schooling. (You learn, for example, that while 100% of "Hebrew Day" school principals are former teachers, 58% of Missouri Synod Lutheran School heads have experience as coaches and athletic directors.) Then there's a brand-new section on public charter schools (from which we learn, for example, that about half require full state certification in the field to be taught while 45 percent require an academic major or minor in the field) and can also glimpse some important differences between newly-started charters and those that converted from conventional public-school status. Finally, there's a section-again for the first time-covering the country's 177 Bureau of Indian Affairs-funded schools (from which we learn, for example, that their average class size is 18 or smaller-fewer than in public, private OR charter schools). Though the data categories are not always comparable from sector to sector, and though there is lots more one wants to know about these schools and their staffs, the separate inclusion of charter schools is a major breakthrough for NCES and the data for all four sectors are valuable to have. Be aware that more than half of this report's considerable bulk consists of standard-error tables and technical notes. If you just want the statistics, download only the first 98 pages. You can find it on the web at http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/SASS/.

Annenberg Foundation and Annenberg Institute for School Reform
2002

The Annenberg Foundation and Annenberg Institute for School Reform recently issued this self-congratulatory celebration of "lessons learned" from the $500 million "Annenberg Challenge" program launched in 1993. It's a gushy 60-page recap of truisms and earnest inside-the-box notions about education reform ("every child benefits from high expectations," "schools need lots of allies to do this work," "professional development holds the key to better schools," "schools need strong leadership," etc.) from which you're not apt to learn anything you didn't already know except that the Annenberg folks evidently felt a powerful need to assert themselves in the face of criticism (some of it by us) that all this money has left few footprints. It seems they're content with fingerprints or, perhaps, leafprints. Should you want to see our skeptical appraisal of what the Annenberg Challenge produced in three major cities, surf to http://www.edexcellence.net/detail/news.cfm?news_id=41. Should you want to see our ideas about more effective education-reform philanthropy, go to http://www.edexcellence.net/publications/index.cfm?topic=22. Should you want to see this harmless but self-serving exultation by the Annenbourgeoisie, go to http://www.annenbergchallenge.org/.

After decades of often animated conjecture and debate, the Supreme Court concluded in Zelman that Cleveland's publicly-funded voucher program is constitutional. The Court's long-awaited decision is good news for choice advocates in general and thousands of low-income Cleveland school children in particular. In its 5-4 decision the Court reversed the Sixth Circuit court's conclusion that the Cleveland voucher program violates the First Amendment's prohibition on the establishment of religion. Writing for the Court, Chief Justice Rehnquist concludes that the Cleveland voucher program does not put the government in the unconstitutional position of sponsoring religious indoctrination. Justices O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy and Thomas joined on the Court's opinion.

A full picture of Zelman's impact on school choice will not emerge for some time. Although five Justices signed the majority opinion, the numerous concurring and dissenting opinions evidence a divided Court. Despite the complicated nature of this decision, however, four points are already clear.

First, Zelman will prove important for the way other voucher programs are structured. In stark contrast to the Supreme Court's 1954 Brown decision, the Zelman opinion is closely divided and comparatively narrow, evidencing the justices' collective caution. By confining itself to the technical constitutional question presented, the Court steered clear of endorsing voucher programs as a matter of education policy. However, the opinion makes clear that carefully crafted voucher programs can successfully navigate through the often murky First Amendment waters. The decision will likely stimulate prompt legislative activity.

Second, the Court expressly noted the larger educational context that framed Cleveland's voucher program. Specifically, the Court remarked that the voucher program is nested within a broader array of educational options that include such public choice options as magnet and charter schools. It is difficult to over-emphasize the substantive weight of this point. In many ways, this issue-raised at oral argument by Justice O'Connor-pivots on a denominator question. The religious neutrality of a voucher program is not determined by focusing on how many students take their vouchers to religious schools, as this represents only one portion of the denominator in question. Thus, the fact that 96 percent of students participating in the Cleveland voucher program attend religious schools, according to the Court, is of no constitutional concern.

Third, the Court places great weight on the nature and source of the choice decision itself. The Court makes the point that whether vouchers end up at public, private, or religious schools flows not from any governmental action but "only as a result of numerous, private choices of individual parents of school-age children." Thus, the Court concludes that it is constitutionally "irrelevant" that the vast majority of voucher recipients selected religious schools. Such a result does not dislodge the Court's characterization of the voucher program as religiously neutral.

Fourth, through its decision in Zelman, the Court effectively shifts responsibility for the development of voucher programs from the judiciary into the collective hands of lawmakers, governors, and citizens. That is, we can now expect choice supporters and opponents to take their cases to lawmakers and governors-rather than judges-with greater alacrity. (Of course, no decision will preclude courts from further involvement with disputes over choice programs and establishment-clause issues.) This represents a significant shift in terms of how the debate surrounding school choice is cast. Policy rather than constitutional law will likely moor future school choice debates. We should expect a fuller, more robust discussion of the political and policy issues surrounding school choice, including vouchers, especially if, as is likely, policymakers continue to pursue school choice as a viable education reform option. Political leaders and policymakers can no longer point to constitutional uncertainty as an excuse to deflect attention from school choice policies. It should become equally clear how political leaders discharge their obligations and address the political and policy factors shaping school choice.

Michael Heise is professor of law at Case Western Reserve University.

The College Board yesterday approved a bunch of changes to the SAT that were spurred by a threat that the University of California system would drop the SAT as an admissions requirement. Last year, UC President Richard Atkinson criticized the SAT for not reflecting high school curricula and offering an advantage to students who can afford expensive test prep courses. The most discussed change to the test is the introduction of a writing section; students will have 25 minutes to write an essay that will be graded by the College Board and also made available to university admissions committees online. The infamous analogies section of the SAT will be dropped, the "critical reading passages" section will be expanded, and Algebra II will be added to the math section. While the addition of an essay seems popular and sensible-too many admissions essays are of the pre-packaged, expertly edited, maybe storebought kind-ending the analogies has drawn criticism. In a commentary in The Chronicle of Higher Education, retired professor Paul Marx argues convincingly that students who lack the vocabulary and "core knowledge" to perform well on tasks like analogies will likely struggle to understand a newspaper article or challenging reading assignment in college. For more see "A New Look for SATs," by Mark Clayton, The Christian Science Monitor, June 25, 2002 and "Why We Need the SAT," by Paul Marx, The Chronicle of Higher Education, June 7, 2002 (available to subscribers only).

Last weekend, two dozen accomplished men and women-mid-career professionals from outside the education establishment-spent a weekend in boot camp training to become superintendents of urban school districts in a program aimed at funneling highly talented people into those key roles. Funded by Los Angeles philanthropist Eli Broad, the program is built on the belief that leadership skills translate from one field to another, and also that outsiders have not bought into "the dense web of understandings and accommodations that make it so difficult to change any large organization," writes reporter Ron Brownstein of the Los Angeles Times. ("Ailing School Systems Prescribed an Injection of Leadership," by Ronald Brownstein, Los Angeles Times, June 24, 2002) In Chicago, the school district is actively seeking former soldiers for teaching positions, with the goal of quickly moving them into jobs as principals. The district is advertising in military magazines and visiting bases to recruit members of the military for special programs that place applicants into full-time teaching positions while they earn certification as teachers and administrators. ("Chicago Seeks Soldiers for Schools," by Nicole Ziegler Dizon, Washingtonpost.com, June 21, 2002)

The Supreme Court's Zelman ruling is plainly good for poor children in Cleveland. It also proves beyond dispute that policymakers can, if they want to, craft a school-voucher program that will pass (federal) constitutional muster. Somewhere in America, there are bound to be a few legislators who had been wavering on the voucher issue who will now lend it their support. But because the constitutional fig leaf has been ripped away, the ensuing politics will likely be more naked than ever before.

I'm struck, too, by how the constitutionality of vouchers has now been entangled with other education policies and other kinds of choices. The Supreme Court's ruling hinged on whether the voucher program provides Cleveland families with a "true choice" among various kinds of schools, including but not limited to church-affiliated parochial schools.

Here is how one of the early news accounts summed it up: "Key to the court's reasoning...was that children in the Cleveland program have a theoretical choice of attending religious schools, secular private academies, suburban public schools, or charter schools run by parents or others outside the education establishment. The fact that only a handful of secular schools and no suburban public schools have signed up to accept voucher students is not the fault of the program itself, Ohio authorities say. The court majority agreed."

The four dissenters disagreed, asserting that the program's constitutionality was undone by the fact that, in Justice Souter's words, "There is...no way to interpret the 96.6 percent of current voucher money going to religious schools as reflecting a free and genuine choice by the families that apply for vouchers.'' By contrast, it was the existence of a "free and genuine choice" within the program that persuaded the Court majority, led by Chief Justice Rehnquist, that it passes First Amendment muster.

Many people will be commenting on this important decision and parsing the Court's words. What strikes me hardest is that the crucial factors shaping whether a voucher program is or isn't constitutional are now, indisputably, factors within the power of policymakers and educators to shape, control and alter. Which means they now become more vulnerable to politics than to judicial interpretation. Let me illustrate:

*One reason that Cleveland parents have multiple choices available to them is Ohio also has charter schools. That's the result of a separate state policy decision, but it's also vulnerable to legislative rollback and, especially, to another round of litigation that the teacher unions are spearheading to get the Ohio charter-school program declared unconstitutional on completely different grounds. We must assume that the unions and their allies will interpret yesterday's ruling as a broad hint that, if the charter school program were to die, the voucher program might perish along with it. I hope that "charter people" and "voucher people" now see that they need each other.

*One reason that Cleveland parents have relatively few PUBLIC schools
(other than charters and urban magnets) to choose among is that, while the voucher program ostensibly allows them to attend suburban public schools, the suburban school systems around Cleveland won't let them in. Whether this is due to snobbery, racism, a political plot to minimize the voucher program, or some simpler reason (such as overcrowded suburban classrooms), we must nonetheless note that it's within the power of suburban school boards and superintendents to second-guess the choices that the legislature sought to make available for urban youngsters. By constraining those choices, they also cast a cloud (now dispelled) over the voucher program's constitutionality. The legislature, of course, could change this in a flash by mandating participation by suburban public school systems. But that's heavy-duty politics, too.

*One reason that most Cleveland voucher-users wound up in parochial schools is because the voucher level (about $2250) is too low to pay the freight at other private schools, much less to make it worthwhile for education entrepreneurs to open or expand other (secular) private school options. Putting it simply, at so meager a funding level, only a Catholic school with empty seats can "afford" to take a voucher kid. This is another problem that the legislature could easily correct (as has happened in Wisconsin), simply by boosting the voucher's value closer to the true cost of educating a child.

In sum, the Court's decision had more to do with the specific facts of the program than with abstract theories or immutable principles. Those facts, however, are creatures of policy and politics. Which means, as we somehow already knew, that the big question on many minds-will vouchers now spread-will also be answered through policy and politics. The Court has, in effect, remanded this issue to voters and legislators-and the many interest groups that seek to sway them, mostly, alas, to sway them away from giving poor children more educational options.

After selling Netscape for $700 million, former president and CEO Jim Barksdale and his wife Sally pledged $100 million to help children in Mississippi learn to read. In a series of reforms designed largely by the state department of education and funded with the Barksdale largesse, eleven professors were hired to reform the training of reading teachers at Mississippi's eight state universities, and grants were also made to 73 of the state's lowest-performing schools to improve reading instruction. Jim and Sally Barksdale viewed the contribution as an investment, not a gift, and told the state superintendent that they'd take their money elsewhere if the venture was not successful. Two years later, while it is too soon for definitive results, the Barksdales are celebrating small victories while reflecting on the challenges of creating change in the public school system. "I was surprised at the difficulty of implementation," said James' younger brother Claiborne, who now runs the Barksdale Reading Institute. "Jim, Sally and I have come to realize what complicated organisms schools are and how difficult they are to change." One principal of a school where the reform eventually took hold explained, "Before, the idea was anything goes. ... You could say that reading teachers were self-employed." The principal said she had to spend much of the first year persuading teachers, particularly veterans, of the program's value. In other schools, reform never gained traction; two schools have been dropped from the program for failing to implement changes, many teachers still balk at the prescriptive instruction required by the Institute, and professors at ed schools have been particularly resistant, Claiborne Barksdale said. Still, some schools that have implemented the program have watched individual students soar after teachers began diagnosing their reading deficiencies, tailoring reading instruction accordingly, and regularly assessing progress. All eagerly await the results from Mississippi's statewide testing program next year. For details see "Words valued at $100 million," by Mike Bowler, The Baltimore Sun, June 9, 2002. (available for a fee at http://www.sunspot.net). The Thomas B. Fordham Foundation took a close look at different approaches to education philanthropy-including the Barksdales' efforts-and concluded that adding resources to a school system won't do much good unless there are also strong incentives in place for that system to change. For more see Making it Count: A Guide to High-Impact Education Philanthropy (September 2001), available at http://www.edexcellence.net/detail/news.cfm?news_id=39.

Many in the academic world don't like private schools because they believe that society has a duty to develop citizens who are fully autonomous, and they embrace the idea of our nation's public schools preparing students to reflect critically on the traditions they are taught by their parents. In a new book, political theorist and Democratic party activist William Galston argues that this position is based on a mistaken view of liberalism, and that making it a matter of education policy to force children to be free of their parents' beliefs conflicts with the liberal doctrine of protecting diverse ways of life. Galston agrees that it is reasonable for the state to require a certain level of education to further democracy, and approves of laws that would protect children from their parents in cases of abuse or neglect. But within these constraints, he makes the case for maximizing the control that parents have over their children's education, recognizing that parents play the most important role in teaching virtue to children, hence they must be partners in educational process. For a lengthier treatment of some of the ideas in Galston's book, see Peter Berkowitz's review in the June 17th issue of The Weekly Standard. The book, Liberal Pluralism, is published by Cambridge University Press and can be ordered at http://books.cambridge.org/052101249X.htm.

Annenberg Foundation and Annenberg Institute for School Reform
2002

The Annenberg Foundation and Annenberg Institute for School Reform recently issued this self-congratulatory celebration of "lessons learned" from the $500 million "Annenberg Challenge" program launched in 1993. It's a gushy 60-page recap of truisms and earnest inside-the-box notions about education reform ("every child benefits from high expectations," "schools need lots of allies to do this work," "professional development holds the key to better schools," "schools need strong leadership," etc.) from which you're not apt to learn anything you didn't already know except that the Annenberg folks evidently felt a powerful need to assert themselves in the face of criticism (some of it by us) that all this money has left few footprints. It seems they're content with fingerprints or, perhaps, leafprints. Should you want to see our skeptical appraisal of what the Annenberg Challenge produced in three major cities, surf to http://www.edexcellence.net/detail/news.cfm?news_id=41. Should you want to see our ideas about more effective education-reform philanthropy, go to http://www.edexcellence.net/publications/index.cfm?topic=22. Should you want to see this harmless but self-serving exultation by the Annenbourgeoisie, go to http://www.annenbergchallenge.org/.

edited by Frederick Mosteller and Robert Boruch
2002

This solemn new Brookings volume, edited by Frederick Mosteller and Robert Boruch, is no page-turner but it's an important contribution to the evolution of education research by virtue of being perhaps the clearest guide yet to the merits and politics of "randomized field trials" (i.e. true experiments with proper control groups) in this policy domain. Eight mostly excellent chapters provide a solid grounding in what randomized field trials are, how they work, why they're desirable in education, why they're so seldom carried out, and what can be done in situations that don't lend themselves to this approach. 230 pages in toto, the ISBN is 0815702051 and you can learn more by surfing to http://www.brookings.edu/dybdocroot/press/books/evidence_matters.htm. - Chester E. Finn, Jr.

Gerald Anderson and Patricia Davenport
2002

The Brazosport (Texas) Independent School District has done an exemplary job of narrowing the usual demographic achievement gaps and, in this 125-page book, two architects of that reform strategy explain how they did it. The keys seem to be a "total quality management" approach, the astute use of assessment data for feedback and improvement, and intelligent application of proven instructional strategies. The American Productivity & Quality Center is the publisher. (You can learn more about that organization's continuing education initiative-which includes expert consultation for other schools and school systems-by surfing to www.apqc.org/education.) Former Brazosport superintendent Gerald Anderson and Patricia Davenport are the co-authors. The ISBN is 1-928593-62-3. The pricetag is a hefty $20 (for a slender paperback). You can contact the APQC at 123 North Post Oak Lane, 3rd floor, Houston, TX 77024 or call (800) 776-9676. You can also surf to http://www.apqc.org/pubs/dispPub.cfm?ProductID=1340.

Monica Martinez and Judy Bray, National Alliance on the American High School
May 2002

This 40-page report by the National Alliance on the American High School analyzes states' numerous and varied policies to improve secondary schools. These policies are grouped into three main categories: (1) those that address high-school-specific issues like credits, graduation requirements and the GED exam; (2) those that "detail opportunities to learn," including basic funding, remedial help, teacher certification, charter schools, and other options beyond the traditional comprehensive high school; and (3) "new" policies such as standards, assessments and accountability. Each policy area is described with a view toward the latest trends, longstanding assumptions, and resulting tensions. Given the wide range of state policies, the report concludes that there is little agreement on what Americans expect from their high schools, and that state and local officials are struggling for control of the issue, which helps account for the lack of significant academic gains in grades 9-12. Martinez and Bray challenge states to create a set of coherent, well-defined policies regarding the role of the high school-one that defines progress in terms of high academic standards and achievement, not seat time. A PDF version of this report can be found at http://www.hsalliance.org/Allfinal.pdf. You can request a free hard copy via email ([email protected]), fax (202-822-8405), or snail mail (Publications, IEL, 1001 Connecticut Avenue NW, Suite 310, Washington, DC 20036).

National Center for Education Statistics
2002

One of the more useful data series produced by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) is its periodic "schools and staffing survey" (SASS), of which this 245-pager is the latest. (It is just the first of a shelf of NCES reports to be based on this data set; others are listed on page 245.) Though the data are usually, as now, a couple of years old, they include a ton of information about primary and secondary schools in America: how many of them, how they're staffed, how old their teachers are, how many have various programs and facilities, etc. This year, for the first time, the report comes in four parts. The most familiar has to do with regular public schools. Then there's a 24-page section on private schools, subdivided into about 15 genres of private schooling. (You learn, for example, that while 100% of "Hebrew Day" school principals are former teachers, 58% of Missouri Synod Lutheran School heads have experience as coaches and athletic directors.) Then there's a brand-new section on public charter schools (from which we learn, for example, that about half require full state certification in the field to be taught while 45 percent require an academic major or minor in the field) and can also glimpse some important differences between newly-started charters and those that converted from conventional public-school status. Finally, there's a section-again for the first time-covering the country's 177 Bureau of Indian Affairs-funded schools (from which we learn, for example, that their average class size is 18 or smaller-fewer than in public, private OR charter schools). Though the data categories are not always comparable from sector to sector, and though there is lots more one wants to know about these schools and their staffs, the separate inclusion of charter schools is a major breakthrough for NCES and the data for all four sectors are valuable to have. Be aware that more than half of this report's considerable bulk consists of standard-error tables and technical notes. If you just want the statistics, download only the first 98 pages. You can find it on the web at http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/SASS/.

National Council on Teacher Quality
May 31, 2002

This report is a collection of thoughtful, pithy "briefing memos" commissioned by the National Council on Teacher Quality. Penned by a wide range of experts-including Teach for America's Wendy Kopp and alternative certification guru Emily Feistritzer-the memos address such topics as tenure reform, improving professional development, leveraging Title II dollars to promote leadership and reform, aligning teacher preparation with student standards, and more. Some of the essays paint a broad picture of reform while others examine specific states' experiences. You won't find anything earth-shattering here-indeed, much of the material has appeared elsewhere-but you will find some well-written, persuasive essays on topics that states and localities urgently need to address. All but one of the memos are available at http://www.nctq.org/press/2002_consumers_guide/index.html. To order a hard copy of the full report, email NCTQ at [email protected].