The recent Federal Update from Brustein and Manasevit (21111 Brustein & Manasevit.pdf) reports the House Committee on Education convened its first full hearing since Republicans gained a majority in the House.  Opening remarks by the Republican Chairman and Ranking Member for the Democrats were similar by lamenting that American students have fallen behind other nations and that employers, including the military, find that recent high school graduates lack the basic skills for hiring.  Both agreed that ESEA needs major revisions and that reauthorization needs to happen “this year”.  Following the opening statements, the Committee heard statements from four witnesses: a state superintendent from Indiana and three persons representing private education organizations.

I find it interesting that employers are finding high school graduates unprepared to hire. During the last ten years there has been significant involvement and influence nationwide of industry and business representatives in setting the agenda for education.  Many states adopted standards and benchmarks that reflected what corporate leaders said students needed to learn to enter the workforce and keep America competitive.  What happened? I still hear parent complaints that their high school graduate cannot balance a checkbook or manage a budget (but they sure know how to navigate the social networks). As I have mentioned in a previous Blog (and one Committee witness reinforced) teachers have played a limited role in influencing the direction of education and “are often overruled by national organizations with broader interests”.  There appears to me to be an emphasis on finding and getting rid of “bad” teachers and too little effort in developing models to effectively involve teachers in developing and maintaining high performing students and schools.

One Committee witness representing a private think-tank organization pointed to the failure of federal programs to improve student learning.  He did a good job of representing his organizations dedication to limited government and stressed that, in most cases Congress, is overreaching its constitutional powers by creating federal education programs.  Evidently he felt one of the “overreaching” federal programs was for free and reduced-price school meals.  He suggested that when students have no alternative for lunch at school, they will bring their own lunch.  Makes me wonder how much thinking goes on in that tank and how eliminating meals for children from low income families contributes to the organizations stated commitment to “expanding a civil society”.

Committee hearings will continue in the near future and Brustein and Manasevit report there appears to be agreement on some areas of focus:  teacher recruitment, evaluation, and training, charter schools and vouchers, student assessment, and the proper role of the federal government in state and local government.

Advanced copies of results from an international test were provided to the media on Pearl Harbor Day and U.S. officials were stunned (121010 Brustein & Manasevit).  The test, the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), is administered annually to students in about 65 countries. On the latest test, U.S. students scored 23rd or 24th in most subjects.  According to U.S. Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, “We have to see this as a wake-up call… we are being out-educated”.  And with the debut of China in international standardized testing, students in Shanghai surprised experts by outscoring dozens of other countries.  For example, in math, Shanghai students scored 600, in Singapore 562, in Germany 513, and in the U.S. 487.  The average math scores of U.S. students put them below 30 other countries.  What does this mean for the U.S.?  “Nations with the most educated workers will prevail”, said President Obama, “and as it stands right now, America is in danger of falling behind.”

Some education researchers were skeptical about the results from Shanghai but a review indicated the administration and results to be “unassailable” and, on the technical side, sampling was acceptable and there was no evidence of cheating.  Although there are some factors that may have influenced the outstanding performance of Shanghai students (such as being told the test was important for China’s image and thus being motivated to do well),  the results are another sign of China’s rapid modernization.  Education reform in China has been dramatic and has included decentralization of textbooks and curriculum, elevating teaching as a preferred occupation with higher salaries, and students being able to extrapolate and apply knowledge in novel situations (see Chapter 4 in “… Lessons Rom PISA for the United States” http://www.edweek.org/media/gps-us-strong-performers-and-successful-reformers.pdf)
United States educators are left with the question: “What now?”  What strikes me is that for the past ten to fifteen years there has been an incredible amount of involvement of corporate leaders in influencing the direction education in the U.S.  Is it working?  Or is the bombardment of pop-culture from the media reinforcing a “dumbing-down” of America? Are we going to be able to sort out what really works in education?  Yes, I believe in the determination of our classroom teachers and the recent growth of their meaningful involvement in structuring effective schools is a bright light on the horizon.

The prospects for ESEA being reauthorized any time soon seem to be dimming.  It appears the lame-duck session will be used by lawmakers to display lack of cooperation.  As Brustein and Manasevit point out in their current Federal Update (111910 Brustein & Manasevit – orange box), the “flurry of rhetoric from both parties shows a general unwillingness to work in a bipartisan fashion to the end of December”.  We will now have to witness members of Congress acting badly while they draw lines in the sand to gain concessions from the opposing party.  Most stakeholders agree that ESEA reauthorization in unlikely in 2011 and possibly even in 2012.

Rhetoric regarding ESEA ranges all the way from less to more federal requirements for improving schools and student achievement.  One point of agreement is that school districts will have to improve while their budgets are declining.  Education Secretary Arne Duncan recently emphasized that the focus of education reform in times of doing more with less must be on “cost-saving opportunities” that do not hurt students.  He cited examples such as rethinking teacher evaluations systems, compensation, and integrating technology into school systems (see current Federal Update, “Lawmakers and Advocates Setting Table for ESEA Debate”).

As all the political positioning continues, ESEA (also known as No Child Left Behind) remains the law of the land.  The U.S. Department of Education will continue to monitor compliance with familiar NCLB requirements.  And while these requirements may be familiar, results of federal monitoring in 13 states for 2009-1010 reveals significant problems for LEAs and schools in such areas as parental involvement and notification,  private school consultation and services,  and fiscal requirements such as maintenance of effort, supplement/supplant and adequate internal controls for fiscal record-keeping (http://www2.ed.gov/admins/lead/account/monitoring/reports10/index.html).
One point of bipartisan agreement amongst a number of lawmakers is moving away from the 2014 deadline for all students to perform at grade level.  There is political safety in agreeing on the obvious.

Perhaps it was politics as usual, but the recent election saturated the media with the worst and most expensive campaign tactics I have ever experienced.  I felt like I was watching the introduction to the spectacle of a professional wrestling match intended to evoke as much emotion as possible and stimulate little (or no) thinking.  Such tactics obliterate critical analysis or questioning.  Was the candidate’s opponent really responsible for jobs being lost overseas, unemployment, and the national debt?  Or, are there issues that need to be addressed like the impact of deregulation, globalization, and the need for a skilled and competitive workforce?  Demonizing a political opponent or proposing a simplistic “fix” is much easier that addressing core issues.

Will a diverse Congress be able to agree upon reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act?  Observers feel there is common ground on some issues such as educational standards, accountability, and the proliferation of quality charter schools.  However, almost all Republican candidates campaigned on greater local control in education and a balanced budget which may require the Obama administration to compromise on such issues as the Race to the Top (RTT) turnaround models.  There does seems to be agreement on targeting educational funds on the lowest performing schools as required in states that receive School Improvement Grants (SIG) but resistance to increasing funding so that all states may participate.  This is all pointing in the direction that teachers will be held accountable for raising student achievement with larger class sizes and fewer resources.  As one political analyst pointed out, we ask much from a profession that is treated less than professional.