The evening after President Obama addressed Congress, I flipped on
Charlie Rose to see who was guest. Some crazy guy was advocating keeping schools open 12 hours a day, 12 months of the year, six or seven days of the week to serve as community centers. Has he really worked in schools? I wondered. Every other word seemed to be "innovation," with vague explanations as to what this meant. Who is this guy? I thought.
In a few moments his name and title flashed on the screen: Arne Duncan, U.S. Secretary of Education. Ohhh, it's this guy. I'd heard his name but knew little of him. Here was my chance.
Regarding the school as a community center, an idea many in my Teacher Corps class played with when we designed our own school district as a final project for our "Innovations in Education" course (myself included), Mr. Duncan argued that there are schools in every neighborhood, with classrooms, computer labs, libraries, and gyms, whose resources are not being maximized. "Schools belong to the community," he said, and suggested that schools partner with nonprofits such as YMCA or Boys and Girls Club to offer a variety of activities and programs: sports, debate, chess, drama, enrichment, GED, ESL, family literacy, potlucks. "Our society has changed; our schools have not kept pace. This needs to be what the 21st century school looks like- the norm, not the exception."
I love the idea. It's great. It makes sense. But having worked in the public education system for going on five years now, where often you feel that you've landed in Opposite-Land, my initial reaction was skepticism, because I saw such a practical, common sense approach would meet opposition. In general, public education behaves like a really old, slow, stupid animal.
I gathered that he served as head of Chicago schools, tried some new things, such as financial incentives for successful students in the inner city, closed some failing schools, and overall did a good job, which is why he was selected for the position. There was also mention of his background and personal experience with children in poverty. (His mother has run an after school program on Chicago's South Side since before his birth.) He cited the example of childhood friends: the ones who got out of the neighborhood went on to become very successful, while the ones who did not, died. "They literally did not make it,” he explained, and added that the difference between the ones who did and the ones who did not, he realized later, was education.
Things he talked about:
We need to do "what works" for children and use "best practices" (It was not clear that he knew what these actually were.)
Good teaching matters; it is the number one factor affecting student achievement. To this end, great teachers need to be rewarded with incentives, besides induction, mentoring, and support.
The importance of early childhood education as well as making sure kids are well-fed, healthy, and safe so that they can focus on learning
Other nations value education and invest in it. U.S. should do the same. The stimulus package provides $115 billion to do so.
Keeping some parts of NCLB, changing others, and re-branding it to reflect a new approach
Growing support for a national set of standards, rather than the fifty different versions that now exist. (Most other industrialized countries i.e. “our competitors” have a single set of standards – Japan, Germany, India, for example. Our Department of Defense schools follow a single curriculum, making it easy for children to move from one school to another in any part of the world, relatively seamlessly.)
Paying math and science teachers more, because currently there is a shortage, and it is in these areas that American students are falling behind their international counterparts.
Charter schools --- good charter schools, he emphasized -- and getting the best and the brightest college graduates into the classrooms at a time when Baby Boomers will be retiring in large numbers
Re-envisioning schools, opening them up as community centers as described previously
Duncan has experience in educational policy and management, but has not himself been a teacher. I found much of his talk lacking vague, and while I don't doubt his good intentions, as an educator, when it came to details, I wondered if he really knew what he was talking about. But maybe it doesn't matter. Maybe an idea of the big picture is all that's required. If he can effect some positive changes, terrific.
What was he vague on? Assessment of both student achievement and teacher performance, specific changes to NCLB, teacher tenure standards, how performance pay might work, who might oppose his "creative innovation" plans and what they may oppose about them, how the $115 billion will be allocated, charter schools, (as mentioned above) best practices. It's easy to say "induction, mentoring, great teachers, think differently, culture of high expectations" - but what does that all mean in real terms? Maybe it's too early for him to give specifics, or maybe he's not as skilled at conveying information as his boss is. This was clear, however:
"Education is THE civil rights issue of this generation," he said early in the interview and later toward the end, "This is about more than education; this is a battle for social justice."
To that I can agree. It will be interesting to see what changes he is able to implement in the coming year and how the stimulus money is handled.
(P.S. When did "incent" start being a word? i.e. "We need to
incent great teachers." Oh ...
1981. I missed that.)
PostScript: New York Times article, 1/13/09, "
Few Picks from Education Pick," covers his confirmation hearing, in which many of these same ideas are aired.
Labels: arne duncan, barack obama, charlie rose, education