No one reforms my kid’s education
No one but me
This isn’t a breaking news story, but something interesting from last week’s Wall Street Journal:
No education secretary has ever enjoyed anything close to Mr. Duncan’s level of funding. Aside from the Race to the Top fund, the administration has received about $5 billion for various school-improvement and innovation grants as part of the $787 billion federal stimulus package and the 2009 budget. Combined, all eight previous education secretaries had less than half as much in discretionary funding over 29 years.
Combined. Less than half combined. (Did I mention “combined?”)
The political battle lines on education are well-defined. A new movement of politicians (including Secretary Duncan and President Obama) have pushed for a revolutionary change in the way we organize schools. Ideas include merit-based pay, hiring and firing based on student performance, student incentives, charter schools and more. In some communities, parents have resisted what they see as government encroachment on their domain and teachers unions have waged an intense campaign to preserve a tenure based system that has served their members well.
What is the appropriate federal role? Sounding the clarion call for change or strong-arming struggling districts with control over vital cash?
A huge portion of the Duncan’s $5 billion comes in the form of the $4.3 billion Race to the Top Fund:
The Race to the Top Fund provides competitive grants to encourage and reward States that are creating the conditions for education innovation and reform; implementing ambitious plans in the four education reform areas described in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA); and achieving significant improvement in student outcomes, including making substantial gains in student achievement, closing achievement gaps, improving high school graduation rates, and ensuring that students are prepared for success in college and careers.
Seems great, right? The problem is that some states, like California, actually have laws that prohibit the use of data on student performance to evaluate teachers. In July, Duncan made clear that such states would not be eligible for Race to the Top money until they undid such laws.
The fund is both carrot and stick. Cash-strapped school districts around the country are hard-pressed to make do — much less innovate — within existing funding streams. But they can’t get their hands on the green until they make changes teacher unions almost uniformly oppose.
Creating incentives and disincentives is one thing the feds are pretty good at. They do it through regulation as well as tax rebates or direct payments. But is it appropriate in education?
There is no federal law requiring primary and secondary school attendance in America. That falls to states, which mandate education in a floating range of about 6-18 (with some schools coming in at fewer mandatory years).
The federal government has long supported public education, but always allowed a tremendous amount of local control. After all, no one knows what students in a given district need better than their own parents, teachers and administrators, right?
Maybe not. The explosion of stringently allocated federal funds Duncan now controls may transform how we provide a universal education. Previously, the federal government was there to ensure that students received an education. Now they have something to say about what kind of education they will get.
In this case, the normative claim to federal power over education hinges on their descriptive claims about what a “good” education is. What does that mean? Duncan and the feds are betting that the research on which they rely accurately finds that the key determinants of student performance are good teachers. Their opponents believe that there’s a lot more in play–students’ home life, the community, and the children themselves. Teachers, they say, can only control so much.
If the feds are right about the facts, then they’re right about their role as well. The goal of providing an adequate, universal education isn’t premised on some notion of local autonomy. It’s about a vital resource children need to succeed. If local governments can’t or won’t fill that role, then the feds have every right to do so.
But if Duncan and his ilk are wrong, $5 billion is a lot to wager.
-Sam
Related posts:
- Education back on the table
- National vs. state standards for education and why it matters
- A classic education for the rest of us
- Hot for teacher’s checkbook
- Guest post: education, democracy and reform
ShareComments
One Response to “No one reforms my kid’s education”
Leave a Reply
[...] week, I wrote about the battle between local and federal control over schools when it comes to reform. Another [...]