Obama's Next Issue: Education Reform

Administration Seeks Converts to Education Plan

Array of Hurdles Awaits New Education Agenda

via NYTIMES

Today, President Obama signed into law the sweeping healthcare bill. He is now onto his next overhaul- the education system in America. Say what you will about Obama, but he and his staff are doing a phenomenal job of being focused on their agenda- healthcare- check, education- here we come. Might he be the next LBJ?

I think President Obama and Secretary Duncan are on the right track when it comes to education reform. While I think No Child Behind had good intentions (remember- the law came about with much help from the late Senator Ted Kennedy), there are problems with just using test scores as a measure of progress. It sometimes doesn't paint an accurate picture. There has been much talk about teaching to the test and lowering goals as well. And then to punish schools that weren't meeting their goals by closing them, or cutting off funding just didn't make sense.

In the "Converts" article, there seems to be much opposition to some of the suggested changes of the administation from teachers' unions. Many of them argue that the changes are putting much more responsibility on teachers, when it comes to students' success. Sure, administration leadership by the principal and funding are a major part of progress, but the Obama's assertion that teachers are really the key, I absolutely agree. They spend 7 hours a day in the classroom. Who is having the biggest impact on students then? This is why the teaching profession really needs to be respected even more than it is now. This should be reflected in pay and benefits. Teachers really need to understand the seriousness of what they're doing. They need to understand that because their job is sooo important, they need to be evaluated. Maybe this evaluation shouldn't be in the form of their students' test scores, but they need to evaluated somehow. I do understand this can be scary because the evaluations may seem to be subjective (so you might feel you shouldn't have been let go, when they do let you go), so some system needs to be developed to ensure the teacher of fairness.

We need to get more motivated people into this field. Teaching needs to be highly valued. Thus, if a teacher is not a good teacher--- they need to get out. I've definitely experienced teachers who had no business being in the field- those who didn't have the qualifications or the motivation to teach.

The "Hurdles" article stresses how ambitious Obama's plan is, and how long it is going to take to implement. For example, the blueprint calls on states to create new standards that make students college and career ready by the time they graduate high school. The plan also shifts focus off of student's meeting proficiency standards to them just improving gradually in whatever areas. The problem with this, however, is that many states don't have advanced student data tracking systems needed to measure student academic growth. It would take years to develop these systems. The plus side to some of this criticism is that many, including key Republicans, believe these plans are heading us in the right direction.

I like that the administration will focus more of their concentration on "failing" schools.

“It’s a serious blueprint, and one that would be a huge improvement over current law,” Michael Petrilli, a vice president at the Thomas B. Fordham Institute who served in George W. Bush’s Education Department, wrote in his blog. One feature he liked, Mr. Petrilli said, was that the blueprint would “focus most of its muscle and prescriptiveness on a handful of the worst schools.”

The current law requires that test scores increase in every school every year, to meet the requirement that 100 percent of students reach proficiency by 2014. According to a new research report by Mr. Jennings’s center, 31,737 of the 98,916 schools missed the law’s testing goals last year, vastly more than any level of government can help to improve.

The administration’s blueprint would refocus the most energy and resources on about 5,000 truly failing schools, and it outlines several models for how districts could intervene in them. Most would involve dismissing the principal and many teachers.

I think for these "failing" schools to succeed, we need to do a better job of sharing best practices with one another. What are distinguished schools, with a similar situation (demographics etc.) to a "failing" school, doing to succeed? Can't we share their best pratices with each other? And maybe we also need to look outside of the U.S.? What are they doing in Europe and Asia? For the United States to continue being a superpower, we need to level the field in education, so that our children can be the leaders in science, technology, and other fields.

Obama's goals:
-would encourage states to raise academic standards after a period of dumbing-down
-end the identification of tens of thousands of reasonably managed schools as failing
-refocus energies on turning around the few thousand schools that are in the worst shape
-help states develop more effective ways of evaluating the work of teachers and principals

*someone had argued that the 41 page blueprint was too short (NCLB was 600 pages in comparison)-- there will be questions--- I like that it's short because questions are good- perhaps gets more people involved?, there's a clear vision/expectation in play, so there's no confusion of what outcomes are desired