The Education Gadfly Weekly

Harvard Educational Review
Vol. 79, Number 2, Summer 2009

There are fever swamps on the left, too, and when it comes to education they appear to drain into the editorial offices of the Harvard Educational Review. I don't think you really want to read this special issue--400 pages worth--of that once-illustrious journal but you may want to know that it exists. With entries from 27 students (from 2nd grade on up) and 20 more-or-less-grown-ups (a mix of practitioners and scholars), it mostly views Barack Obama in messianic if not divine terms. (One item is even titled "Obama, Where Art Thou?") But it's a whole lot more skeptical about his education policies and, in particular, about his choice of Arne Duncan, who is seen by multiple authors as deeply suspect because of his commitment to standards, tests, and results-based accountability. (They regard such things as antithetical to "social justice.") The editors rounded up a lot of the usual suspects--Henry Giroux, Maxine Greene, even FOB Bill Ayers--as contributors, and many of their contributions throb with passion, self-righteousness, and a deep aversion to almost every important education reform innovation of the past half century. The one worthwhile exception is a longish piece by Linda Darling-Hammond, who headed the Obama education-policy-transition team, and who does a praiseworthy job of explaining where the President is "coming from" with regard to education issues. But I'd encourage you to skip the rest! (If you cannot resist, it's available here.)

Joanna Smith, Caitlin Farrell, Priscilla Wohlstetter, and Michelle Nayfak
Center on Educational Governance, University of Southern California
April 2009

It's been a big summer for charter school quality, with Arne Duncan's NAPCS conference speech and a much discussed study by CREDO. This USC team (which includes former Fordham Fellow Caitlin Farrell) goes behind the scenes to investigate a structural arrangement that might be expected to advance such quality: charter management organizations (CMOs). It's the most expansive overview to date--that we can recall--and nicely complements other CMO reports. Based on their criteria (non-profit, common instructional philosophy, central office management, three or more schools, and plans to grow), the USC analysts found 39 CMOs operating in the U.S. They interviewed leaders of 25 (others declined or did not respond) and share several useful statistics. Most CMOs are less than a decade old. Together, they operate schools in 26 states. Approximately 70 percent operate 10 or fewer schools, and the majority operates K-12 schools. CMOs garner significant support from such philanthropy heavyweights as the New Schools Venture Fund and the Gates Foundation, and in some cases they also receive assistance from state legislatures. Yet CMO founders vary in their motive and strategy: Some focus on helping a specific city or regional area, while others concentrate their efforts where laws are most receptive to charter schools. Unsurprisingly, the CMO model has grown in popularity. Whereas early CMOs mostly grew out of single-campus schools, of late a CMO is more apt to be established before opening any school doors. This trend may be explained by the benefits of the CMO structure. Unlike stand-alone charters, CMOs can centralize administrative and support functions, replicate schools quickly, and enroll a critical mass of students. But however beneficial the streamlined model to organizational needs, the real question is whether it helps student achievement, too. Let's hope someone tackles that subject next. You can find the paper here.

Joan Baratz-Snowden
Center for American Progress
June 2009

As its title indicates, this paper is a plan to rethink and rework the tenure of public-school teachers. Tenure, explains author Baratz-Snowden, is "a concept much misunderstood, and often unfairly identified as the major obstacle to assure that all children are taught by effective teachers." It is not, she insists, a fatal flaw, just a practice in urgent need of reform. The key lies in teacher evaluation systems, tools that Baratz-Snowden admits, and others have repeatedly shown, are mostly useless in their current form. Baratz-Snowden has some suggestions for creating better ones, such as establishing clear and precise teaching standards, including a professional development component that would provide feedback, and incorporating evidence of student achievement (through multiple measures such as portfolios and teacher-designed assessments, in addition to standardized test scores). But that's not all. Tenure evaluations should take into account "teachers' teaching and learning environment," since school environmental factors (like leadership, availability of supplies, and safety) affect an educator's ability to perform. And dismissal processes, she believes, must be developed in collaboration with teachers. The need for teacher buy-in seems strange (though not unexpected) since she refers numerous times to relations between "management and labor," but seems to believe they should be treated as professionals making faculty-style decisions. Still, she proffers three promising examples: Toledo, Minneapolis, and Green Dot's collective-bargaining agreement with the Los Angeles teachers' union. All of these maintain union involvement and emphasize teacher improvement over weeding out bad apples. Overall, her suggestions are union-friendly, yet constructive, provided one believes, as she obviously does, that any form of tenure--or "continuing employment status" as she would have us call it--is warranted. But to carry out her recommendations will be pricey--all those advanced data systems and arbitration arrangements--not to mention politically challenging. Read it here.

It's Trivia Night on a lazy summer evening and the MC bears an uncanny resemblance to Mr. Jones, he of 6th grade science and big baby blues. Wonder why? Because it is Mr. Jones, and he's gotten himself a second gig. Central Massachusetts is seeing an influx of teachers moonlighting for extra cash on their summer vacations--as trivia moderator at the local tavern. According to owners of the hosting establishments, teachers' adeptness at crowd control and tendency to possess wide-ranging knowledge make them the perfect candidate. Bob Carney, a trivia-night organizer, explains the phenomenon thusly: "Teachers are knowledgeable. They know how to control a room full of people. And if you can handle a 10-year-old, you can handle the occasional drunk."  For many bar owners, that skill set has turned their worst nightmare into an anticipated (and lucrative) event. Teachers seem to be getting a similarly rewarding, and perhaps therapeutic, experience. "We spend our days urging students to think deeply about complex ideas," explains assistant principal Joel Bates. "And then that night, we're at a trivia event asking, 'Who was the lead singer for Def Leppard?'" Can't stump Gadfly with that one.

"School's out, but factoids are in for teachers," by D.C. Denison, Boston Globe, July 1, 2009

Around this time last year, schools in Texas were waiting with bated breath for their state report cards. This year, the pressure's a little less intense. That's because, under Texas's six-month-old revamped accountability system, some students who fail statewide tests will still be counted as passing--so long as they're on track to pass at some point before they graduate high school. Growth models like this one have been slowly catching on in many states in the hope of softening NCLB's binary scoring scheme. And of course there's much talk of replacing simple "proficiency" determinations with value-added metrics in the next round of NCLB itself. But here's one question left unanswered: What happens if, when the fated "passing" year arrives, a student still doesn't pass? The answer: Nothing. That's because the Texas Projection Measure, as the system is called, never tempers score predictions with reality. Say a sixth grader fails TAKS but is projected to pass in eighth grade; if that same student actually fails in eighth grade, the school is not penalized. Instead, projections readjust, and our former-sixth-now-eighth-grader's scores are now calibrated to predictions for passing the eleventh grade test. As Education Trust's Daria Hall explains, "From a school perspective, a student never has to actually be proficient. It's always projected into future grades." Though the Texas Education Agency says the tool is still "evolving," this system resembles the opposite of survival of the fittest.

"Schools get credit for kids predicted to pass TAKS," by Molly K. Hacker and Jeffrey Weiss, Dallas Morning News, July 5, 2009

We were lukewarm on Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick's "Readiness Project" last summer, but it seems that a year's time has made some of its elements slightly warmer. Patrick now seeks to allow the state to take over the 30 worst failing schools, render moot portions of teacher contracts that pose impediments to reform, and clear the path for the state to repair broken schools. The new powers, which would allow Patrick to change school leadership, teacher contracts, and curriculum, and possibly bring in outside operators, would also allow him to create his signature "readiness schools." (Like other Bay State charter-lite options, these would maintain district oversight and unionized teachers.) The dirty thirty would be returned to their districts' mercies eventually, most likely under the readiness model. While we applaud Patrick's push for changes, including some pushback against restrictive union contracts, state takeovers have a notoriously rocky history. And we're not sure Massachusetts needs yet another version of charter-esque schools (it has two already) when the real thing would certainly do the job, and better. But accompanying legislation reveals that Patrick is also planning to lift the charter cap in "high needs" areas, which would apparently make room for both his readiness schools and more charters. (This is a change from last summer, when Patrick planned to freeze charters as an incentive for districts to accept readiness schools. Could charter-friendly stimulus dollars possibly be affecting his thinking?) Overall, what we're hearing out of Boston is far from red hot, but we're encouraged that parts are at least temperate.

"30 failing schools may face takeover," by James Vaznis, Boston Globe, July 2, 2009

"School 'reform' snubs students," by Charles Chieppo and Jamie Gass, Boston Herald, July 3, 2009

"Lifeboat for failing schools," editorial, Boston Globe, July 6, 2009

School-less school districts? There are more than 285 of them across the land; but as of fall 2010, that number will decline by 26, thanks to New Jersey. Governor Jon Corzine has just signed legislation that would close down the twenty-six in an effort to "[reduce] the size of government," "[develop] greater efficiencies over time," and ease tax burdens. And the districts slated for extinction? Not so thrilled. See, a no-school-district is a sneaky way for affluent towns to avoid taxes. Residents of the town of Tavistock, for example--by "town" you should read sizable golf course with a population of 20--fear they'll have to pay property taxes on their lavish homes to benefit the nearby district that actually has pupils, instead of their current low taxes and an annual $14,805 tuition-style payment for their one outsourced student. But perhaps Tavistock's residents have forgotten that once they leave their green, 18-hole island, public education is paid for by all citizens. Sadly, the Garden State isn't the worst offender. Massachusetts, Maine, and Vermont each had more than 50 such school-less bureaucracies as of the 2005-2006 school year. Let's hope they soon follow New Jersey's lead.

"Book closes on NJ school districts without schools," by Geoff Mulvihill, Associated Press, June 30, 2009

Sometimes you have to take one step backward to go two steps forward. That's more or less what happened in New York State when the clock struck midnight on July 1, the long-scheduled date for "sunset" of mayoral control of Gotham's schools. The State Assembly had done its part and passed a bill that kept Mayor Michael Bloomberg in charge of the nation's largest school district, as he has been for the last seven years. But then, the State Senate--or, more specifically, Democrat John Sampson--staged a political stand-off that left the Senate unable to vote on the bill before the clock ran out. The vote's deadline came and went; sunset indeed fell; and at 1 p.m on July 1, five borough representatives, a few Bloomberg deputies, and hizzoner himself convened to resurrect the New York City Board of Education. Ironically, by slamming on the voting brakes, Senator Sampson ceded more control to the mayor, at least for now, than the current bill languishing on his desk would vest in City Hall, since Bloomberg's crew was delighted to immediately sign power back over to him and reappoint Joel Klein as chancellor. And with the help of those cooperative borough presidents and supportive new board members (and the abandonment of scare-tactic rhetoric), Bloomberg and Klein opened summer school for 120,000 students without a hitch. Whether mayoral control of the Big Apple's schools has been a success remains a topic of much contention. But certainly, state lawmakers owe it to the city to make a decision.

"Senate Impasse Forces City to Revive Old School Board, in Name," by Javier C. Hernandez, New York Times, July 1, 2009

"Mike nails class clowns, boosts school control with new ed board," by David Seifman, Carl Campanile, and Brendan Scott, New York Post, July 2, 2009

Harvard Educational Review
Vol. 79, Number 2, Summer 2009

There are fever swamps on the left, too, and when it comes to education they appear to drain into the editorial offices of the Harvard Educational Review. I don't think you really want to read this special issue--400 pages worth--of that once-illustrious journal but you may want to know that it exists. With entries from 27 students (from 2nd grade on up) and 20 more-or-less-grown-ups (a mix of practitioners and scholars), it mostly views Barack Obama in messianic if not divine terms. (One item is even titled "Obama, Where Art Thou?") But it's a whole lot more skeptical about his education policies and, in particular, about his choice of Arne Duncan, who is seen by multiple authors as deeply suspect because of his commitment to standards, tests, and results-based accountability. (They regard such things as antithetical to "social justice.") The editors rounded up a lot of the usual suspects--Henry Giroux, Maxine Greene, even FOB Bill Ayers--as contributors, and many of their contributions throb with passion, self-righteousness, and a deep aversion to almost every important education reform innovation of the past half century. The one worthwhile exception is a longish piece by Linda Darling-Hammond, who headed the Obama education-policy-transition team, and who does a praiseworthy job of explaining where the President is "coming from" with regard to education issues. But I'd encourage you to skip the rest! (If you cannot resist, it's available here.)

Joanna Smith, Caitlin Farrell, Priscilla Wohlstetter, and Michelle Nayfak
Center on Educational Governance, University of Southern California
April 2009

It's been a big summer for charter school quality, with Arne Duncan's NAPCS conference speech and a much discussed study by CREDO. This USC team (which includes former Fordham Fellow Caitlin Farrell) goes behind the scenes to investigate a structural arrangement that might be expected to advance such quality: charter management organizations (CMOs). It's the most expansive overview to date--that we can recall--and nicely complements other CMO reports. Based on their criteria (non-profit, common instructional philosophy, central office management, three or more schools, and plans to grow), the USC analysts found 39 CMOs operating in the U.S. They interviewed leaders of 25 (others declined or did not respond) and share several useful statistics. Most CMOs are less than a decade old. Together, they operate schools in 26 states. Approximately 70 percent operate 10 or fewer schools, and the majority operates K-12 schools. CMOs garner significant support from such philanthropy heavyweights as the New Schools Venture Fund and the Gates Foundation, and in some cases they also receive assistance from state legislatures. Yet CMO founders vary in their motive and strategy: Some focus on helping a specific city or regional area, while others concentrate their efforts where laws are most receptive to charter schools. Unsurprisingly, the CMO model has grown in popularity. Whereas early CMOs mostly grew out of single-campus schools, of late a CMO is more apt to be established before opening any school doors. This trend may be explained by the benefits of the CMO structure. Unlike stand-alone charters, CMOs can centralize administrative and support functions, replicate schools quickly, and enroll a critical mass of students. But however beneficial the streamlined model to organizational needs, the real question is whether it helps student achievement, too. Let's hope someone tackles that subject next. You can find the paper here.

Joan Baratz-Snowden
Center for American Progress
June 2009

As its title indicates, this paper is a plan to rethink and rework the tenure of public-school teachers. Tenure, explains author Baratz-Snowden, is "a concept much misunderstood, and often unfairly identified as the major obstacle to assure that all children are taught by effective teachers." It is not, she insists, a fatal flaw, just a practice in urgent need of reform. The key lies in teacher evaluation systems, tools that Baratz-Snowden admits, and others have repeatedly shown, are mostly useless in their current form. Baratz-Snowden has some suggestions for creating better ones, such as establishing clear and precise teaching standards, including a professional development component that would provide feedback, and incorporating evidence of student achievement (through multiple measures such as portfolios and teacher-designed assessments, in addition to standardized test scores). But that's not all. Tenure evaluations should take into account "teachers' teaching and learning environment," since school environmental factors (like leadership, availability of supplies, and safety) affect an educator's ability to perform. And dismissal processes, she believes, must be developed in collaboration with teachers. The need for teacher buy-in seems strange (though not unexpected) since she refers numerous times to relations between "management and labor," but seems to believe they should be treated as professionals making faculty-style decisions. Still, she proffers three promising examples: Toledo, Minneapolis, and Green Dot's collective-bargaining agreement with the Los Angeles teachers' union. All of these maintain union involvement and emphasize teacher improvement over weeding out bad apples. Overall, her suggestions are union-friendly, yet constructive, provided one believes, as she obviously does, that any form of tenure--or "continuing employment status" as she would have us call it--is warranted. But to carry out her recommendations will be pricey--all those advanced data systems and arbitration arrangements--not to mention politically challenging. Read it here.