That's Arne Duncan, responding to the proposed Lamar Alexander remix of No Child Left Behind. It's an interesting construction, an inspiring line.
The first picture that popped into my head was an old white guy in a suit, knocking on some family's front door. When a parent answers, he says, "Hello. I'm Senator Bumswoggle, and I'm here to help Chris study for the big algebra test tomorrow."
Okay, that's probably not what Duncan means. But it does raise the question-- what exactly can Congress do to help all children succeed? If we went into classrooms and asked the students, "What do you need from your Congressperson to help you succeed this week?" what would they say?
Would they say that they really, really need to take a bunch of standardized tests? "I think I'm getting better at reading," will say some bright-eyed eight-year-old, "but until I take a standardized test from Congress, I just don't know." Is that what would happen?
Would they say, "Please don't give any more resources to this school. Instead, give the money to some charter operator to set up a completely different school. Yes, I realize they might not let me go to that school, and I'll have to stay in this one scraping by with fewer resources, but I'll sleep better knowing that entrepreneurs have had the opportunity to unleash innovation while making good ROI."
It is sweet that Duncan and Congress want to help. The desire to help, particularly to help those who are most vulnerable, is a basic human impulse, and a credit to every person who feels it. But the desire to help does not automatically confer the ability to help.
Suppose one of my children is injured and rushed to an operating room. I would want to help. I would want to wave a magic wand and fix it, right now. But if I grab a scalpel and dash into the operating theater declaring, "I really want to help. What can I do?" they would have to throw me out, because as someone with zero surgery-related skills, the most useful thing I can do is get out of the way. Even if I am obscenely rich and incredibly powerful, I still don't have the skills.
So if Congress's message to children is going to be, "I'm from the government, and I'm here to help you" the question remains-- what can Congress actually do to help children succeed?
Not teach the children-- neither Congress nor the Department of Education contains barely any people with skills and expertise in actually teaching children. Congress doesn't know how to build schools or run a sceince fair or assess an essay. Nor would I want to watch a Congressman take a shift or two of lunch duty (okay, I might want to watch a little). With few exceptions, Congresspersons do not know how to do any of the things directly related to helping a child achieve success in school. So they won't help the children succeed that way.
In fact, Congress doesn't even know the individual children that it's talking about. This means that it has no idea what individual strengths and weaknesses the children have. It also means that neither Congress nor Secretary Duncan knows what each individual child means by "succeed." So the actual working with children is best left up to the people who are right there with them-- teachers and parents.That work includes defining and measuring success; Congress lacks the skills and expertise to do either of those tasks.
Congress does have the expertise to deal with the money and politics portion of the picture. Congress can do its part to make sure that every school has the resources that it needs, and Congress has a responsibility to do that honestly, without damaging fictions such as, "We can fund ten different excellent schools for the same money that's now spent on just one." Congress has a responsibility to do its homework, so that it's not making choices based on the lies in charter school PR materials.
Congress has the expertise and skills to make sure that states do not create funding formulas that treat some children like second-class citizens. Congress has the expertise and skills to require that states and school districts remain transparent.
Neither Congress nor the Department of Education has the expertise and skill to determine when a school is failing or what should be done with that failing school. They have been told that expertise in business, politics and money are sufficient to identify and cure failing schools; this is simply not true, any more than my expertise in teaching English means I belong in an operating room or a board room.
Congress's responsibility to help children succeed is not a bad measure. But if we're going to be honest and truthful about the matter, Congress's ability to help children succeed is nearly non-existent. Great responsibility can come with great power, but in this case, Congress's most important power is to step back and let the people with expertise, training and skills do their jobs.
Step back from telling us how to teach and step up with the equitable funding, especially with the recent report saying that yes, if you give poor schools more money they do better, and the other one that says that raising the minimum wage and tweaks to already existing programs can reduce child poverty by 60% and make improvements in the lives of 97% of poor children.
ReplyDeleteI've been pouring over the Federal Register and other things, in fits and starts, for weeks, to try to write something well-researched to comment about evaluating teacher prep programs, and I've about decided that I'm with Rand Paul, abolish the Department of Education, at least the way it's run now.
A cultural clash of grand proportions. This is how I would describe the education crisis in this country. If you put two politicians together, even from the same party, you hear different perspectives on the problems and their solutions. If you put two teachers together, you will hear different takes on the problems and solutions. If you put two parents together, you will hear two perspectives on the problems and solutions. If you put two students together, you will hear two perspectives on problems and solutions. Multiply that by the real numbers in this country, and all the individualistic values we hold so high become a stumbling block. Very, very few people are truly on the same page, even those sharing similar ideologies.
ReplyDelete"Why do I need to read British literature if I am going to be an accountant?"
"Why do I need to give these tests which do not assess anything accurately and are no reflection on the students' knowledge, abilities or performance?"
"Why are my taxes so high? Why can't students learn the basics with the money they already get from us?"
"Why is it that students spend years in school still end up not competent enough to get into college?"
"Why do I need to know geometry when I know I'll never use it again?"
"Why do we need to teach cursive when students will be typing everything?"
"Why should I use social media with my students when we are together in the classroom every day?"
"Why isn't my teacher using social media like other teachers?"
"Why is this school performing better than other schools even though it operates with a significantly smaller budget?"
"Why are students being subjected to so much testing?"
"Why don't we take advantage of this amazing technology and help kids be better prepared for the technology driven economy that is coming?"
"How will impoverished children be able to compete in the technology driven economy of the 21st century if they don't have the technological support to master the necessary skills?"
"How will this expanding gap between the haves and have-nots be closed if we don't invest the most needy schools?"
"Why don't we invest heavily in schools in disenfranchised areas and then test them to make sure we getting it right?"
"Why don't we spend more time discussing and developing our ideas and perspectives instead of being a slave to exam schedules?"
"Why don't we do more to drive up the test scores to make us more competitive with China?"
We have all heard these questions ad infinitum. The truth is, these questions reflect distinct personal values that people hold. These values are no longer plotted along the Republican - Democratic spectrum/continuum. We can no longer make simple assumptions about how people perceive the public education. Individual perspectives are here to stay, and the idea that the participants in society (teachers, parents, students, public citizens, administrators, politicians) will be unified is no longer plausible. People argue that this is a democracy which means no one stakeholder has full say on the answer to these questions. But until there is an understanding that people are not operating from ideological camps but rather divided personal cultural perspectives which are full of deeply rooted assumptions, everyone will just keep talking at each other, not hearing a word each other is saying. Our new era -- our new reality -- requires a new method for gaining consensus, leadership and implementation of goals. Lamenting the past is natural, but it will never come back. Even when Bill Gates and company are out of the picture, technology driven philosophies will lead the way because there is money to be made when every person in America is a potential customer at some point in his/her life.