The Education Gadfly Weekly

Robert Gordon, Thomas J. Kane, and Douglas O. Staiger
The Hamilton Project, Brookings Institution
April 2006

This paper makes the case for improving teacher quality by basing tenure and bonus-pay on student achievement while lowering barriers for certification and, thus, entry into the profession. We've heard these ideas before, but rarely from prominent Democrats; Robert Gordon is former policy director for the Kerry/Edwards campaign and currently with the Center for American Progress. And rarely have these ideas been presented so simply and with such sturdy logic and explanations. Everyone should read the material covering the authors' second of five recommendations-"Make it harder to promote the least effective teachers to tenured positions"-in which they propose denying tenure to teachers who are ineffective during their first two years. The report suggests that administrators evaluate student achievement data, and supplement that data with subjective factors such as classroom observation, to weed-out the bottom quartile of new teachers. But wouldn't other inexperienced teachers then take their place, and wouldn't quality suffer? No, say the authors. While more new teachers would certainly be needed, the net effect on teacher quality would be overwhelmingly positive. And although it's possible for struggling new instructors to develop into good teachers, these data show that teacher performance in the first two years is a good predictor of future success or failure; the worst new teachers generally become the worst veteran teachers. Wouldn't eliminating certification requirements to expand the pool of new teachers lower quality? No, again. Research shows trivial differences in performance between certified and uncertified teachers-differences dwarfed by the benefits of weeding out the worst performers from a larger pool. This report's recommendations-backed by lots of hard data-are so solid that resistance to them can only stem from unwillingness to change or, inevitably, from political allegiances. (See, for example, the current imbroglio over a modest performance-pay plan in Florida.) This paper delves into performance pay, too, and it suggests large bonuses for effective teachers willing to work in the worst schools. And while more details need fleshing out, the report admirably considers the challenges of data collection, of controlling for student characteristics, and of applying its ideas to all grades and subjects. Its thirty-five efficient pages are well-worth your time, and well-worth serious consideration in school systems everywhere. Find a copy online here.

Nancy Martin and Samuel Halperin
American Youth Policy Forum
2006

Every nine seconds in America, a student becomes a dropout, and only about two-thirds of all students entering 9th grade graduate four years later. Whatever It Takes asks two questions: What can be done to recover and reconnect those young people most at risk of dropping out, and what is being done to reengage out-of-school youth? The report profiles twelve community case studies and six major national programs, and it demonstrates they've gained traction in youth dropout recovery. Through a mixture of promoting community service, "real-world, career-oriented curricula," and multiple schooling options (among other approaches), some communities have achieved notable successes. At the Sinclair Fast Forward Center in Fordham's hometown of Dayton, Ohio, counselors can refer youngsters to dropout recovery charter schools or other employment programs. Baltimore, Maryland, established a network of vocational-type high schools with partnerships with the private sector. There is no one-size-fits-all model here, nor is there one, definite answer to the dropout problem. These case studies work well as a "practical resource" of how certain tailor-made programs have produced demonstrable successes on the ground. It's notable that charter schools-largely immune to the bureaucratic bulkiness of traditional public schools-are popular among nonprofit organizations, which can use charters to enroll out-of-school youth. The report also evaluates and gives good information about national programs, such as Job Corps, which enroll a large portion of the nation's out-of-school youth. Thanks to burgeoning media coverage, more Americans are becoming aware of the dropout problem in their communities. And this report shares some of the institutions and ideas which combat that problem successfully. Check it out here.

Introduction by Tavis Smiley
Third World Press
2006

The majority of this book (currently number 26 on Amazon.com) may not be as vapid as its examination in chapter two, or "Covenant II" as the chapters are named, of how to better educate black students. But I read only Covenant II-and it's pretty awful. Not only does the chapter avoid saying anything substantial, but most of its sentiments are either wrongheaded or just plain wrong. Take, for example, this sentence from the chapter's introductory essay by Edmund W. Gordon: "As members of the black community, we must take responsibility for educating all our children-whether ours by birth or otherwise-to uplift our people as a whole." One expects the next paragraphs to expand upon this theme, perhaps by suggesting how black communities can take responsibility for educating their children. But Gordon doesn't have time for substance; he's got a lot of fluff to cover. He kicks it up a notch when his meaningless musings become overtly ridiculous. He writes, for example, about America's "caste-like system" and puts forth unreasonable thoughts about redistributing the nation's income, wealth, and resources. And of course, as an Ed school professor (at Columbia, no less), Gordon must incorporate sentences like this: "But even more problematic may be the changing and rising demands for intellective competence that are associated with urbanicity and post-modernity, at the same time that blacks are trying to close the achievement gap." Ugh. Are we even still talking about education? The rest of Covenant II is no better. There are many platitudes about demanding high standards and universal pre-K, and a lot of nice notions such as making sure everyone in the family has a library card. Nothing of substance here; no hard questions addressed in a serious way. Cornel West writes that this book is "an historic document...." No, it's really not-skip it.

From Los Angeles to D.C., and from Phoenix to Chicago, students are taking to the streets in numbers not seen since the 1960s, in this case to voice their opinions about immigration. Such public demonstrations are central to democracy, but are they central to education?

Schools in Montgomery County, Maryland-a tony suburb of D.C. with a Latino population just under 12 percent-say yes. The district decided that high school students could count their time demonstrating on the Mall in Washington this past Monday toward the 60 hours of community service that Maryland demands of all students to graduate high school. The policy requires that students participating in marches do so outside of school hours. And because this week's large protests fell during Montgomery County's Spring Break, no class time was missed.

But on the other coast, in tiny Tulare County, California, where the Latino population tops 50 percent, the district has different ideas. Students who left Dinuba High School to join protests in nearby Farmersville found themselves rewarded not with service hours, but unexcused absences. Los Angeles Unified also worked hard to prevent its students from protesting off-campus by placing schools under literal lockdown. Some students climbed fences in order to take to the streets, and the district has alerted their parents that disciplinary action will be taken.

It's reasonable to believe that the students of Tulare County will take more from their experiences than will Montgomery County's youngsters. After all, the Golden State's students put themselves on the line knowing that their actions would result in punishment. Admittedly, an unexcused absence is a mild form of punishment. But it's punishment nonetheless. It takes character to act when one knows that consequences are imminent. That's the essence of the great civil disobedience movements.

Character is what Montgomery County hopes to instill in its students by requiring service hours. At the conclusion of each service activity, students must contemplate the "impact of his/her service on the community and his growth and feelings related to the service." The program stems from the popular character education movement. (For more on character education, see here.) While students should certainly be encouraged to stand up for their personal convictions, can such activity truly be considered service? Or character-building?  

Character formation is vitally important, and schools have many opportunities to help shape it-through the study of history, requiring students to perform at high levels, and teaching them to take responsibility for their actions. And sometimes schools do it by saying no.

Dinuba High School arguably did more to teach its students character by not condoning their actions than Montgomery County did by rewarding kids for getting involved. Kudos to the district for sticking to the things it values (class time and formal education). And kudos to the students who took it upon themselves to learn that democracy comes at a price-sometimes small, oftentimes not.

Imagine a world in which hundreds of thousands of low-income families experience educational freedom for the first time. Parents choose from a vibrant marketplace of educational providers: public schools, for-profit companies, faith-based groups, local charities, and even collections of innovative teachers.

In this world, the school choice movement-advocacy organizations, parent associations, market-based think tanks-would play a prominent role. Whenever the system threatened to take away the families' newfound freedoms or block access to critical services, these groups would hold parent rallies, write letters to newspapers, push the press to report the scandal, and otherwise make the needs of the children visible.

Of course, such a world already exists. It's the universe of supplemental educational services (SES). Except in this world, the school choice movement is missing in action. Why is that?

A key provision in the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), SES is triggered when schools receiving Federal Title I funds fail to make adequate yearly progress for three consecutive years. At that point, districts must offer low-income students in these schools free after-school tutoring through any of the more than 700 nationwide providers that the state approves (whether public, private, or for-profit). In theory, parents simply choose the one that best meets their children's needs, and the per pupil share of Title I funds ($1,500 on average) follows the students to the tutor of choice.

This program is the first federal attempt to attach dollars to students and make those dollars "portable"- thereby breaking the traditional means of fund delivery which places districts in the driver's seat. But choice advocates show little enthusiasm for it, in part because they're still angry that President Bush took his voucher proposal off the table to get Senator Ted Kennedy's support for NCLB. Some believe SES puts too much power in the hands of state education bureaucrats, who have the right to approve providers, and local education bureaucrats, through whom the funding for tutors must flow.

Whatever the reason, advocates who choose to ignore SES are missing an opportunity to learn how to do choice more effectively. For example, empowering parents to make choices for their children does little good if they don't have the necessary information to select wisely. Sometimes districts don't have the resources to provide the information, other times they lack the will.

Consequently, many parents are lured into accepting providers for reasons unrelated to their ability to serve their children well. In Chicago, for example, parents have over 40 providers to pick from during this school year. Unfortunately, though not surprisingly, some providers have differentiated themselves by offering parents cash payments, video game consoles, or other incentives for enrolling their children. Hardly a good reason for selecting a provider. Sometimes parents in the Windy City select a provider simply because it conveniently serves their students on the school site.

How much better choices could parents make if there were a "Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval" for providers? But states have neither the capacity nor the funds to monitor and evaluate SES providers. Consequently, many students end up in sub-standard programs. School-choice advocates should be particularly interested in SES's problems with quality. If left unremedied, they could cast a dark shadow on future efforts to expand choice and to allow newcomers to build innovative programs for low-income students. The choice movement needs to be involved in offering solutions.

Another reason that choice advocates should care about SES is that the parents who benefit from the tutoring program are the same ones most likely to support school choice. Most of the families offered SES are, for the first time, tasting the flavor and challenges that come with educational freedom. If their initial experience with a reform along the lines of SES does not offer confidence and hope, future attempts to mobilize them for greater parental choice will be met with skepticism-as they should be.

When Congress enacted a small school choice program in the District of Columbia (the D.C. Student Opportunity Scholarship Program), an outside entity called the Washington Scholarship Fund got the job of enrolling low-income students in the program. It took WSF dozens of parent meetings and nearly $1 million (in public and private funds) to attract approximately 5,400 applicants, of which 1,700 eventually matriculated into private schools. Like those who qualify for SES, most of these students came from families that attended public schools for generations and were completely unfamiliar with the process of choosing schools. SES could benefit from a WSF-type organization in each district to help guide parents on making good decisions.

Those who believe in the power of parental choice can contribute to SES's future success by demonstrating that the road to parental empowerment does not stop at enrollment. Low-income parents, like their middle- and upper-income counterparts, want what is best for their children. If enough parents make good tutoring selections, the school choice movement will have another way to demonstrate how parental choice can lead to quality education. The choice is ours.

Time’s latest cover story (published in conjunction with a two-day series on the Oprah Winfrey Show) sheds light on what may be America’s toughest education problem—the fact that 30 percent of American high school students don’t graduate. What drives the mass exodus? It isn’t overly-demanding curricula; 88 percent of dropouts report having passing grades upon leaving high school. In fact, American schools aren’t academically demanding enough. Dropouts frequently report boredom as a reason for leaving school prematurely. Adding to the problem has been some educators’ willingness to cover up its severity. Paul Peterson writes, “Most school districts report as dropouts only those who entered the year as seniors but did not remain in school until the end of that year.” The Time article profiled one city, Shelbyville, Indiana, which had long reported a 98 percent graduation rate because it counted as a grad any dropout who promised “to take the GED test later….” The agreement made by the nation’s governors this summer to report dropout rates uniformly should help, but only to cast light on the problem. Now we have to find some solutions.

“Dropout Nation,” by Nathan Thornburgh, Time, April 17, 2006 (subscription required)
 
“How Educators Hide the Sorry Truth,” by Paul E. Peterson, Hoover Digest, Winter 2006 (originally printed in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram on October 3, 2005)

Eleven schools in Baltimore managed to dodge the accountability bullet one more time this week. The city successfully beat back Maryland Superintendent Nancy Grasmick’s plans to take over its worst-performing schools after Martin O’Malley—Baltimore’s mayor—led a successful charge in the state legislature to postpone the action for one more year. O’Malley claimed that the eleven schools were making progress (if small), and that Baltimore can, should, and will fix its own schools. Gadfly hopes Charm City’s schools can accomplish in one year what they’ve failed to do over the past five, but we doubt it will. U.S. Education Secretary Margaret Spellings took Grasmick’s side in the debate, noting that “to sit idly by with the kind of data and results and chronic failure that has been demonstrated is education malpractice. Accountability is meaningless if there is no end of the line.” Could this telling episode (and this excellent statement in support of school choice) hasten the end of the kinder, gentler U.S. Department of Education? Let’s hope so.

“Senate blocks city schools takeover,” by Jill Rosen, Baltimore Sun, April 12, 2006

“Should state take over city schools?,” by Andy Smarick, Baltimore Sun, April 6, 2006

“U.S. education secretary applauds state move,” by Liz Bowie, Baltimore Sun, March 31, 2006

Students at Bonham elementary school in Abilene, Texas, faced a serious problem last week when the school's toilets stopped working. Principal Diane Rose acted quickly and smartly. Instead of preparing mops and buckets, she called in the buses. Throughout the day, while the Abilene utilities crew repaired a water main, Bonham's 600 squirming students rode buses to "nearby schools that offered the use of their restrooms." After all was said and done, Rose seemed to count the day a success, and she told reporters, "It was just like a little field trip." But should principals in schools without proper plumbing-where students can't learn arithmetic because they're too worried about overflowing toilets and contaminated drinking fountains-be so nonchalant? Gadfly left several messages on Jonathan Kozol's machine; he hasn't returned our calls. But we already picture his next book: Injustice Overflows Like an Abilene Toilet.        

"School improvises when toilets go out," Associated Press, April 10, 2006

Introduction by Tavis Smiley
Third World Press
2006

The majority of this book (currently number 26 on Amazon.com) may not be as vapid as its examination in chapter two, or "Covenant II" as the chapters are named, of how to better educate black students. But I read only Covenant II-and it's pretty awful. Not only does the chapter avoid saying anything substantial, but most of its sentiments are either wrongheaded or just plain wrong. Take, for example, this sentence from the chapter's introductory essay by Edmund W. Gordon: "As members of the black community, we must take responsibility for educating all our children-whether ours by birth or otherwise-to uplift our people as a whole." One expects the next paragraphs to expand upon this theme, perhaps by suggesting how black communities can take responsibility for educating their children. But Gordon doesn't have time for substance; he's got a lot of fluff to cover. He kicks it up a notch when his meaningless musings become overtly ridiculous. He writes, for example, about America's "caste-like system" and puts forth unreasonable thoughts about redistributing the nation's income, wealth, and resources. And of course, as an Ed school professor (at Columbia, no less), Gordon must incorporate sentences like this: "But even more problematic may be the changing and rising demands for intellective competence that are associated with urbanicity and post-modernity, at the same time that blacks are trying to close the achievement gap." Ugh. Are we even still talking about education? The rest of Covenant II is no better. There are many platitudes about demanding high standards and universal pre-K, and a lot of nice notions such as making sure everyone in the family has a library card. Nothing of substance here; no hard questions addressed in a serious way. Cornel West writes that this book is "an historic document...." No, it's really not-skip it.

Nancy Martin and Samuel Halperin
American Youth Policy Forum
2006

Every nine seconds in America, a student becomes a dropout, and only about two-thirds of all students entering 9th grade graduate four years later. Whatever It Takes asks two questions: What can be done to recover and reconnect those young people most at risk of dropping out, and what is being done to reengage out-of-school youth? The report profiles twelve community case studies and six major national programs, and it demonstrates they've gained traction in youth dropout recovery. Through a mixture of promoting community service, "real-world, career-oriented curricula," and multiple schooling options (among other approaches), some communities have achieved notable successes. At the Sinclair Fast Forward Center in Fordham's hometown of Dayton, Ohio, counselors can refer youngsters to dropout recovery charter schools or other employment programs. Baltimore, Maryland, established a network of vocational-type high schools with partnerships with the private sector. There is no one-size-fits-all model here, nor is there one, definite answer to the dropout problem. These case studies work well as a "practical resource" of how certain tailor-made programs have produced demonstrable successes on the ground. It's notable that charter schools-largely immune to the bureaucratic bulkiness of traditional public schools-are popular among nonprofit organizations, which can use charters to enroll out-of-school youth. The report also evaluates and gives good information about national programs, such as Job Corps, which enroll a large portion of the nation's out-of-school youth. Thanks to burgeoning media coverage, more Americans are becoming aware of the dropout problem in their communities. And this report shares some of the institutions and ideas which combat that problem successfully. Check it out here.

Robert Gordon, Thomas J. Kane, and Douglas O. Staiger
The Hamilton Project, Brookings Institution
April 2006

This paper makes the case for improving teacher quality by basing tenure and bonus-pay on student achievement while lowering barriers for certification and, thus, entry into the profession. We've heard these ideas before, but rarely from prominent Democrats; Robert Gordon is former policy director for the Kerry/Edwards campaign and currently with the Center for American Progress. And rarely have these ideas been presented so simply and with such sturdy logic and explanations. Everyone should read the material covering the authors' second of five recommendations-"Make it harder to promote the least effective teachers to tenured positions"-in which they propose denying tenure to teachers who are ineffective during their first two years. The report suggests that administrators evaluate student achievement data, and supplement that data with subjective factors such as classroom observation, to weed-out the bottom quartile of new teachers. But wouldn't other inexperienced teachers then take their place, and wouldn't quality suffer? No, say the authors. While more new teachers would certainly be needed, the net effect on teacher quality would be overwhelmingly positive. And although it's possible for struggling new instructors to develop into good teachers, these data show that teacher performance in the first two years is a good predictor of future success or failure; the worst new teachers generally become the worst veteran teachers. Wouldn't eliminating certification requirements to expand the pool of new teachers lower quality? No, again. Research shows trivial differences in performance between certified and uncertified teachers-differences dwarfed by the benefits of weeding out the worst performers from a larger pool. This report's recommendations-backed by lots of hard data-are so solid that resistance to them can only stem from unwillingness to change or, inevitably, from political allegiances. (See, for example, the current imbroglio over a modest performance-pay plan in Florida.) This paper delves into performance pay, too, and it suggests large bonuses for effective teachers willing to work in the worst schools. And while more details need fleshing out, the report admirably considers the challenges of data collection, of controlling for student characteristics, and of applying its ideas to all grades and subjects. Its thirty-five efficient pages are well-worth your time, and well-worth serious consideration in school systems everywhere. Find a copy online here.