Pages

Tuesday, November 23, 2010

Education Reform: Personal Bias and Further Research

As I began to think about education reform, I felt that I needed to confront a personal bias. Prior to reviewing Joel Klein and Michelle Rhee’s article in the Washington Post (October 10, 2010: How to fix our schools: A manifesto by Joel Klein, Michelle Rhee and other education leaders), I had watched Rhee and others on Oprah. Part of that interview can be seen here: http://youtu.be/i_C0CYScOwc . After reading Klein and Rhee’s manifesto, and revisiting the Oprah episode (for text: http://www.oprah.com/oprahshow/The-Shocking-State-of-Our-Schools), I kept trying to put my finger on just where my bias came from. I was not impressed with Michelle Rhee, but what was it about her personally or ideologically that raised my hackles. Both Rhee and Winfrey make it clear that they are not anti-teacher. But Rhee is famous for speaking out against ineffective teachers, and for taking actions to back up her words. In her short tenure (2007 -2010) as chancellor of the DC School District she closed 21 schools and fired 266 teachers (Wikipedia, 2010). She is not particularly loved by teachers’ unions. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing, and in fact there is evidence that Rhee’s policies have had a positive effect. Her Wikipedia page notes that
“High school graduation rates were at 72 percent in 2009, an increase of three percentage points from 2008. By 2010, D.C. Comprehensive Assessment System reading pass rates had increased by 14 percentage points, and math pass rates had increased by 17 percentage points. Enrollment decreased by one percent, a slower decline than prior years. [The Mayor points to] data showing that 72 percent of students graduated in 2009, up nearly three points from the previous year.”
So why would I feel threatened? Those numbers look pretty good! But they only tell a very narrow story over a short time period. I suspect that part of my reservations stem from the inherent uncertainties that an aspiring teacher feels. How can any single human being possibly know enough or have enough training to deal with every possible variable in the classroom? Is it healthy to teach in an environment where you feel like your boss is waiting off stage ready to give you the hook? And doubly so when the perception is that your achievement is tied to the achievement of your students.

Ultimately, I think that political and attention-seeking types make me suspicious. I find myself asking “What is their hidden agenda?” Is closing schools and firing teachers the long term fix, or an expedient Band-Aid? Are high achievement and learning the same thing? What are the roll of NCLB and high-stakes testing on school reform? Where does technology fit in? Parents? SES? Earlier I asked what purpose the Chicken Little approach serves in identifying and addressing specific failures and issues? I’ve already made it clear that while I agree that closing schools and firing teachers might have some merit, it is not the only course of action or issue at hand. For me the answer is to learn more about what these issues are and how they can best be addressed.


Joel Klein, Initials. (2010, October 10). How to fix our schools: a manifesto by joel klein, michelle rhee and other education leaders. Washington Post. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2010/10/07/AR2010100705078.html

Wikipedia. (2010). Michelle Rhee. Wikipedia. Retrieved November 10, 2010, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelle_Rhee

1 comment:

  1. I too wonder where my biases come from, except I agree with Rhee that ineffective teachers must be let go. Unfortunitly with senority first and effectiveness last it seems strange to me. In the buisiness world effectiveness is first. In the military world senority is everything. If you suck at your job you are promoted out of there! Which one is better?

    ReplyDelete