The administration’s blueprint for NCLB/ESEA reauthorization (Ed Week, NYT, WSJ, WP) provides reason for encouragement and worry, happiness and deep, deep disappointment.

If the administration gets its way, the federal role will be greatly diminished, restoring federalism’s place in education and conceding Washington’s inability to control local K-12 policies, practices, and outcomes. These are important philosophical and procedural gains, but they also bear the enormous risk of returning us to an era when achievement was uneven, progress was slow, deeply troubled schools and systems were ignored, and millions of students were left behind.

A glass-half-full view of the proposal is that the Obama administration has learned from the nation’s 8-year experience with NCLB; that it is holding on to some of the most important components of accountability while adding valuable new features; that it is openly recognizing Uncle Sam’s strengths and weaknesses; and that those best suited to controlling schools–state and local leaders–will be re-empowered.

The half-empty interpretation is that the administration is abandoning meaningful federal accountability, handing the reins back to entities that failed too many kids for too long, and capitulating to establishment organizations that bristled at being required to increase the achievement all of kids.

The proposal would overhaul–in effect eliminate–the core of NCLB’s accountability framework (for wonks, sections 1111 and 1116). There would be no more AYP, no “in need of improvement” status. There would be no more public school choice or free tutoring for students in failing schools. There would be no more “corrective action” or “restructuring” for the failing schools themselves.

Schools would still be required to administer reading and math assessments and publicize results; this information would be even more meaningful through the required use of growth measures. But after scores are calculated and disseminated, the federal government’s role, in the vast majority of cases, would be complete. Where, when, and how to intervene would be left to states and districts.

The administration’s theory of action is that the combination of common standards, reliable metrics, public transparency, and state and local leaders’ best intentions will drive continuous school improvement. That is a reasonable hypothesis. But it is worth remembering that prior to NCLB we had NAEP, and many states had accountability systems.  For whatever reason, pre-2002, state and local control plus data plus shame didn’t equal the results we wanted.

Moreover, the removal of tough federal accountability would return us to the days when tens of billions of federal dollars flow to states and districts every year with minimal federal control over results. The administration’s proposal would give Uncle Sam a say in the highest performing 10 percent of schools (they’d get more money and flexibility) and the lowest performing 5 percent (they’d be subject to the four SIF interventions). But for the 85 percent in between–which would undoubtedly include many, many schools with serious problems–the feds would be wholly hands-off.

A number of other blueprint provisions deserve attention (including holding districts accountable, making RTT and i3 permanent, and establishing a 2020 performance deadline), and I’ll write about those more later. But the changes to federal accountability are the most important and deserve the most scrutiny.

My tortured views on federalism in public education are the result of two completely contradictory notions: first, that lots of kids were ill served when the federal government was virtually hand-off; and second, that the federal government, as a matter of principle, shouldn’t get too involved and, as a matter of policy, probably couldn’t do much better.

Therein lies my support for and misgivings about NCLB. Therein lies my support for and misgivings about the administration’s proposal. I can only hope that others feel similarly conflicted.

–Andy Smarick

Related posts:

1. A “reform realist’s” guide to ESEA reauthorization
2. Is NCLB reauthorization moving?
3. Duncan’s speech

It looks like this approach may be catching on. A new coalition designed to drastically improve K-12 education in Detroit is following this path. Called Excellent Schools Detroit, this broad organization plans to invest vast sums of money and energy in overhauling schooling in the city: closing failing schools, opening new schools, and providing a wide array of services (the Free Press writes it up here).

But rather than just dumping more funding into the broken traditional school district, listen to how they frame the issue in their introductory document:

This is a citywide plan to help all children, whether they happen to attend a traditional public school, public charter school, or an independent school. Every Detroit child should be attending an excellent school.

And in a FAQs section on the website:

Are you dealing only with Detroit Public Schools?

No. The plan addresses the needs of all school children in Detroit, whether they choose DPS, one of the more than 70 public charter schools, or the many independent schools now operating in the city.

This is music to my ears: the quality of a school matters infinitely more than its sector. Get disadvantaged kids in great schools now.

–Andy Smarick

Related posts:

1. Panic in Detroit?*
2. Detroit
3. Detroit and skunk works

Caption: Too tight - like some recent education reform proposals.

Usually bad news gets released on a Friday afternoon in this town, so what does it mean that the Obama Administration is about to make its ESEA reauthorization proposal public? They are briefing reformers and education groups now (yours truly not included–I was disinvited a few hours ago out of fear that having a blogger in the room would chill the conversation; I’m not making that up!).

No doubt newspaper articles will examine how reform-minded the proposal is. Does it stick it to the unions? Back down on accountability? Push hard on merit pay? Double-down on the achievement gap? But this is the wrong lens to look through, because of a delicate thing called federalism. It’s not enough to call for tough-minded reforms; the Administration also has to be realistic about which reforms might succeed from Washington.

In our view, that’s a short list. We’ve been arguing for over a year for “reform realism“–an approach that is humble about what can be achieved from the shores of the Potomac, but still seeks to provide political cover for reformers at the state and local level.

To that end, the real question is not how reform-minded the proposal is, but to what extent Arne Duncan lives up to his promise to promote a “tight-loose” approach (tight on the results expected but loose on the means). Between Race to the Top, the recent civil rights announcement, and the move to link the adoption of college-ready standards with Title I money, we’re seeing an awful lot of “tight” where we’re supposed to be seeing “loose.” If Duncan doesn’t reverse that trend, he could be running into the buzz-saw of anti-Washington fervor that is boiling up around the country.

Stay tuned!

P.S. You can find a great cheat-sheet on the reauthorization at Politics K-12.

(Photo by miketembo from Flickr)

-Mike Petrilli

Related posts:

1. Is NCLB reauthorization moving?
2. To renew NCLB, redefine “reform”
3. 2010: The Year of the Tiger, and the Year of the Reauthorization?

–Chester E. Finn, Jr.

Related posts:

1. Common Core standards: Let the commenting begin!
2. Ohio keeps its word, will adopt Common Core Standards
3. Video now available from ‘World-Class Academic Standards for Ohio’

–Marisa Goldstein, Fordham intern

Related posts:

1. Education news nuggets
2. Education news nuggets
3. Education news nuggets

“D.C. Ward 6 parents seek new options for middle school,” Washington Post

50%
The expected increase in Georgia schools run by community groups and management firms in the coming school year.

“Parents call in national firms to launch new schools,” Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Related posts:

1. Quotable and notable
2. Today’s Quotable and Notable
3. Today’s ‘Quotable and Notable’

Conservatives, and an increasing number of moderates, look grimly at the prospect of government-run health care, and they see our elected officials – at both the state and local levels – begging DC for stimulus funding and federal contracts with increasing distress. Can’t we solve anything for ourselves? Do we really need DC to fix everything?

Enter into this general anxiety education reforms like Race to the Top and Common Core. I’ve heard rumblings that it is disconcerting, and even distasteful, for our state officials to march off to DC and grovel for Race to the Top dollars. Why, some ask, should Ohio and other states have to make a pitch to the Feds to distribute – some would say redistribute – taxpayer dollars back to citizens via a competition designed by federal bureaucrats? Will states that lose the RttT sweepstakes take the rejection well or will there be serious finger pointing?

Further, to many Ohioans, the effort to create national standards seems like an effort by experts far removed from children to tell states and local communities what they should teach their children. No Child Left Behind was sold as a great national endeavor to improve public education, yet almost everyone associated with that effort has moved to disown it or large parts of it. Why should states have any confidence that this time will be any different?

What is seen as federal intrusion into education is especially galling to some as they argue the Constitution makes clear that education is an issue for states and local governments. Under what authority are the Feds getting deeper into the day to day operations of public schools? In Fordham’s surveys of citizens’ attitudes over the years Ohioans regularly say they trust educators closer to children (teachers and principals) more than they trust state officials to do right by kids. No doubt they trust state government more than they trust Washington.

There is great excitement in the education reform community about the power of Race to the Top to be a game-changer, especially for our neediest children. There is real hope that the move toward common national standards will ultimately lead to better educated high school graduates. I share in this excitement, but sense that many in the heartland are greatly skeptical of these efforts and see them as nothing more than Washington intruding deeper into their lives and that of their children. I worry that this could end badly.

-Terry Ryan

Related posts:

1. Robert Scott, right-wing Reaganite?
2. National Standards: Rush to Judgment?
3. School reform and the growing disconnect between DC and the states

Take education. Obama has taken on a Democratic constituency, the teachers’ unions, with a courage not seen since George W. Bush took on the anti-immigration forces in his own party. In a remarkable speech on March 1, he went straight at the guardians of the status quo by calling for the removal of failing teachers in failing schools. Obama has been the most determined education reformer in the modern presidency.

Do you agree? Cast your vote below.

-Mike Petrilli

Related posts:

1. More thoughts on Obama’s education reform speech…..
2. President Obama, education standards and accountability
3. President Obama pushes for education reform

Students at CCA , May 2009

Columbus Collegiate Academy, one of the charter schools the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation authorizes in Ohio, was just named one of only nine charter elementary schools nationwide to receive the silver EPIC award by New Leaders for New Schools for dramatic gains in student achievement.

New Leaders started EPIC — the Effective Practice Incentive Community – in 2006 to link principal and teacher incentive pay to the wide-scale sharing of effective educational practices. EPIC recognizes are rewards school leaders and staff in these schools and creates comprehensive case studies of their successes so that others may learn from them.  The program has granted $7.3 million dollars in incentive awards to over 2,700 educators in 120 schools nationwide. Eligible staff at Columbus Collegiate Academy will earn much-deserved cash awards for their success.

We’re incredibly proud of school leader Andrew Boy and his staff, who after only one year of operation led their inaugural class of sixth graders from just 35 percent proficient in reading and 41 percent proficient in math (as fifth graders) to 74 percent proficient in reading and 82 percent proficient in math, on the Ohio Achievement Tests. These academic gains earned the school recognition as the highest performing public middle school in Columbus, despite serving a student population that is 95 percent economically disadvantaged.

Ohio’s charter school sector often has struggled to produce stellar results, and our governor and teachers unions haven’t made it easy for charter start-ups to do well. There are a handful of high performing charter schools across the Buckeye State—but not many. That Columbus Collegiate Academy has achieved these results, despite obstacles related to funding, facilities, and startup costs unique to Ohio’s general anti-charter climate, is remarkable.

Columbus Collegiate’s winning peers include charter schools from the models YES Prep, KIPP, GreenDOT, and Mastery Schools in Philadelphia, and others which are some of the highest-performing charter school organizations in the country. Columbus Collegiate Academy – a small school nestled in the Weinland Park neighborhood of Columbus– now ranks alongside those hailed by President Obama and Secretary of Education Arne Duncan as exemplars of how to close the achievement gap and turn around schools successfully.

Congratulations to all of this year’s winning schools.

Photograph by Laura Pohl

Related posts:

1. Ohio wins a major award – aka the ‘leg lamp’ of education
2. Making middle schools work
3. Columbus Collegiate Academy: School’s in session

-Mike Petrilli

Related posts:

1. All about Arne Duncan (New Yorker style)
2. Arne Duncan speaks to the nation’s education writers
3. Going head-to-head with Arne Duncan