Ted Hershberg: A comprehensive framework for reform

PODCAST: [Click arrow to listen] or download here

U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan warned recently that upwards of 80 percent of the nation’s schools this year will fail to meet adequate yearly progress under No Child Left Behind. When the law was passed in 2002, a bipartisan consensus assumed that educators would figure out how to get all students to proficiency by 2014.

What was not realized at the time is that the goal they set was impossible to achieve if pursued within the confines of the status quo public education system.

The deep flaw in NCLB was not that the nation had set an unprecedentedly challenging goal – educating all children to stand­ards – but that it had done so without at the same time aligning the incentives for adults with the new goal for students.

Indeed, Race to the Top, and the related reforms being introduced by the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion, are an attempt to remedy this situation, and it is the subject of our recent book, Theodore Hershberg and Claire Robertson-Kraft, eds., A Grand Bargain for Education Reform: New Rewards and Supports for New Accountability (Harvard Education Press, 2009).

We argued that success can come only when public education’s rewards (how teachers and ad­min­i­stra­tors are evaluated, compensated, remediated and dismissed) and supports (how to provide our ed­u­ca­tors with expanded and enhanced pro­fes­sional de­vel­op­ment) are aligned with the new goal of all students achieving at high levels, and our volume presents a com­pre­hen­sive frame­work for school reform describing how this can be done.

The deep flaw in NCLB was not that the nation had set an unprecedentedly challenging goal – educating all children to stand­ards – but that it had done so without at the same time aligning the incentives for adults with the new goal for students.

The new reforms unavoidably require the introduction of a new way to measure how much students learn other than achievement, which cannot be used because it is highly influenced by family income. Fortunately, a new metric based on growth (academic progress made by individual students over a school year) has emerged as a promising and much fairer alternative. But because it is both new and cannot yet be applied to all subjects and ed­u­ca­tors, it has generated considerable criticism: The cur­ri­cu­lum is being narrowed to a few tested subjects, there is too much testing and too much teaching to the test.

Many people, with limited know­ledge of our nation’s education history, have fallen into the trap of believing that once there was a golden age of public schooling and that NCLB has “ruined” our schools. They need to be reminded that before NCLB there was neither mandatory state stand­ards nor account­abil­ity at the school level (let alone at the level of in­di­vi­dual ed­u­ca­tors), that American students fared even worse in in­ter­na­tional assessments of skills and know­ledge than they do today and that very few of our schools were providing students with the critical thinking and problem-solving skills required in a highly competitive and technologically advanced glo­bal economy.

When viewed from a vantage point a decade in the future, these initial reforms will be seen as crude, but necessary first steps in overhauling our school systems. New rigorous national stand­ards and in­ter­na­tion­ally bench­marked assessments adopted voluntarily by the states that address higher-order thinking will vastly improve our testing and reverse the “race-to-the-bottom” inadvertently set in motion by NCLB.

Our systems of ed­u­ca­tor evaluation will be more nuanced and sophisticated, but still steadfastly focused on student learning outcomes rather than solely on ed­u­ca­tor inputs.

We don’t just need stronger accountability, we also need to provide educators with requisite supports to improve their instruction. Our session in Denver this morning included a brief overview of our school reform frame­work, with special emphasis on an important and very timely component (chapter 9 in A Grand Bargain) that will turn the unavoidable shift to larger class sizes driven by fiscal austerity into an opportunity to boost student learning and raise ed­u­ca­tor morale.

Developed by Joel Giffin, a long-time principal in Tennessee, now retired, we explained how his Maryville Middle School became by far the most successful in the state in promoting student growth.

When students are grouped homogeneously by achievement levels, large classes are much easier to teach because instruction does not have to be differentiated. When these larger classes are taught by teachers assigned based on their ef­fec­tiveness with different groups of students (previously low-, average- or high achieving), the result is sig­nif­i­cant increases in student growth. We described how new software developed by John Schacter, working with Giffin, helps prin­ci­pals build layered cur­ri­cu­la and student IEPs.

Our systems of ed­u­ca­tor evaluation will be more nuanced and sophisticated, but still steadfastly focused on student learning outcomes rather than solely on ed­u­ca­tor inputs.

Finally, we addressed the importance of helping ed­u­ca­tors understand how to use data – both formative and summative – to improve their instruction and enable students to become more active agents in their own process of learning and how to establish and sustain pro­fes­sional learning com­mu­ni­ties where on a regular basis ed­u­ca­tors can interact with each other as adults and reflect on the efficacy of the application of theory and practice in their class­rooms.

The recent study of bonus pay in Nashville – that found little positive impact of pay-for-per­form­ance – made clear that teachers have not been withholding their expertise waiting for more money. The best reform efforts, ours included, are designed to align new rewards and supports with our nation’s goal of all students achieving at high levels, to provide a fairer way to evaluate and compensate teachers, to attract and retain more of the best and the brightest and to provide all ed­u­ca­tors with the necessary know­ledge and skills required to help our students meet the education challenges of the 21st century.

Similar Posts:

Share
March 20th, 2011  in Education News No Comments »

Leave a Reply