DisruptionU Penn Dean of Ed School offers commentary on the effects of a decade or two of creative disruption as a reform strategy in public education.

Bill GatesAn editorial in the Los Angeles Times quotes (here) from a Gates Foundation letter that admits failure in their education reform efforts. The Times editorial in effect says the billionaires "shouldn't be setting America's public school agenda" because they're making a hash of it. But Bob Peterson points out (here) that they shouldn't get to just walk away either after wreaking so much havoc. This is an interesting moment of reconning for the education reform movement.

Elaine WeissThe Broader, Bolder Approach newsletter this month is devoted to an explanation of what the recent drop and more long term trends in NAEP scores mean. Comparing state NAEP scores turns out to be a better asssessment of progress than PISA and other international tests. And there's more on the recent drop in scores here.

Kevin WellnerKevin Wellner of the National Education Policy Center offers (here) one of the better commentaries on the hypocritical response of reformers to the drop in NAEP scores that came out this week.  Carol Burris of the Network for Public Education pointed out today on national Public Radio, that the proponents of test-based accountability took a very different posture in 2013 when a very small uptick in NAEP scores were cited by Arne Duncan as proof that the strategies in place were working. Perhaps the no excuses crowd should think twoce about blaming the drop in student scores on the recession. After all, student poverty is just an excuse.

Paul ThomasFurman University in South Carolina professor Paul Thomas posted a nice summary of what we know about the track record of charter schools, and Valarie Strauss re-posted it for the Washington Post here. He reminds us of the clear track record that demonstrates that the myth of charter schools is all about public relations rather than different results. In spite of that, the US Department of Education and billionaire philanthropists continue to promote the myths and ignore the data. Thomas' eloquent summary deserves to be circultated because the pattern he describes is true of charters all across the country, including Washington DC, where they enjoy more advantages than anywhere else in the country. 

Broader BolderAs summarized in an excellent blog post at the Broader Bolder Approach web site and on the Shanker Institute's fantastic new web site, new research on the effects of early childhood education and on the effects of poverty is shedding light on why past ed reform strategies aimed at narrowing the achievement gap have failed. Narrowing the gap is the right goal, but false mythologies have prevented real solutions. Teachers and parents are starting to demand honesty in education reform.

George W BushBoth Democrats and Republicans seem to want to quickly reauthorize ESEA, dubbed No Child Left Behind when the accountability centerpiece of education reform was reauthorized last in 2002. But first its time to look at the data on how the test-based approach has fared. Two studies have done just that. The National Center for Fair and Open Testing examined the data here. And the National Education Policy Center did so here. Turns out we were doing better under strategies being pursued before these "reforms." Perhaps its time to hold the architects and purveyers of the test-based accountbility reform strategy accountable.

Journalist Dana Goldstein has written an excellent analysisDana Goldstein of what's wrong with the Gates MET study of whether standardized tests, evaluator observation or student surveys do a better job in assessing teacher quality. She boldly presented her article at AEI's Feb 5 2015 conference on: "Is the 'new' education philanthropy good for schools?" It must have been an "emperor has no clothes" moment. In a nutshell, she points out that the MET study asked whether actual observation of teaching, student surveys, or VAM test score measures did a better job of predicting future student test score growth, which "privileges" test scores by using it both as a variable being tested and as the outcome reflecting gains. Her article is also an excellent history of approaches to standardized testing and the role of philanthropy in determining educational measures and outcomes. It's to be published soon and is worth a read here attached.

Andy ShallalDC Candidate for Mayor Andy Shallal issued an analysis of DC Public School Reform on his Web site February 14. Contrary to pupular opinion, an analysis of NAEP scores shows that low income and African American students have actually seen little to no improvement over the six years of experimentation with reforms under chancellors Rhee and Henderson. Budget Analysis Mary Levy also developed revealing charts based on the NAEP scores that show clearly that whites and wealthier students have been the only beneficiaries. The trajectory of improvement was actually better before the reformers came to town. Shallal also lays out his vision of what an alternative approach would look like -- one based on "support, collaboration and respect" rather than "test and punish." On March 12th, Washington Post columnist and blogger Valerie Strauss wrote about Andy's paper and posted 7 charts (here), that show the failed track record of DC School Reform.

Greg AnrigIn a nice summary of what top researchers tell us should be the focus of education reform in this country, the Century Foundation's Greg Anrig offers an excellent Commentary in Ed Week. Successful models of reform in health care and carful research from the Consortium for Chicago Schools Research, UC Berkeley and MIT point to the professional culture in schools, a spirit of collaboration, and parent-community-school ties as the keys to school improvment. 

Full Article:

CommentaryRead more

A Tale of Two Districts 

By Mark Simon

• marksimon's blog
• Add new comment