Category Archives: Education Reform

Education Reform is Getting Less Fragile

1 Reply

fragile

Fifteen years ago, if you somehow had gotten rid of the Gates Foundation, the Walton Family Foundation, and Teach For America, you may have squashed much of education reform in its tracks. Education reform was fragile.

I don’t think this remains the case.

Education reform is much less fragile than it used to be. Now, more than ever, it can take hits, learn from mistakes, contain defeats, and accelerate innovations.

Why?

Education Reform has Gotten More Local

The rise of local harbor master organizations, coupled with the related increased sophistication of local philanthropic efforts, coupled with the development of local charter school organizations – has led to the decentralization of education reform.

There is no central brain dictating reform strategies; no central mouth leading a national reform cry; no central body delivering reform across the country.

In addition, numerous organizations, such as 50 Can (with their fellowship model), Achievement First (with their charter school accelerator), Teach For America (with their current decentralization efforts), and KIPP (with their fellowship program) – are all advancing the effort to localize reform.

This is not to say large, national organizations cannot add value; rather, it’s only to say that the increasing scope of locally driven efforts makes the movement less fragile as a whole.

Education Reform has Gained More Constituents 

Modern education reform was born out of an alliance of policy elites, civil rights organizations, and business elites. This, in and of itself, is a formidable coalition – and it has carried the movement far.

But the rapid growth of the charter sector, which now serves 3 million students, is creating an even more important constituent group: parents.

Or to put it another way: there are now roughly as many students in charter schools as there are teachers in the NEA and AFT.

Given that (unfortunately), teachers unions have often opposed the expansion of charter schools, the  increasing number of charter school parents could, eventually, lead to a real power shift.

Implications, Issues, Looking Forward 

The power of schools boards and teacher unions has in large part been due to their diffuse nature.

Education reform is increasingly building up a robust set of local, decentralized institutions that should provide long-term staying power.

Though there are some weak spots: education reform is still too heavily finance by philanthropy; over time, it will need to utilize its growing constituency base to provide increased public funding to reform efforts that support the public good.

Additionally, going from a niche role to a systems level role is causing some growing pains, both in terms of mindset and capacity (See: The Times – Are They a Changin’).

But, overall, education reform continues to gain momentum, achieve results, and localize.

This all bodes well for its future.

Having Skin in the Game in Education Reform

Leave a reply

bailout

In his book, , Nicholas Taleb comes down hard on people who don’t have skin in the game.

His list of bad actors is wide ranging: op-ed writers, corporate executives, consultants – to name a few.

His main argument is that all of these folks get paid handsomely and yet have no exposure to downside risk. Op-ed writers are rarely fired if their predictions are wrong; corporate executives still cash out if their companies go under; and consultants create powerpoint decks and then go onto the next client.

As a blogger (low status op-ed writer) and education consultant, this made me consider my own work (I’ve previously written about my worries about being a consultant).

___

The truth of it is this: in most ways that really matter, I don’t have skin in the game in education reform.

I don’t have children.

I don’t live in most of the communities where I work.

And, push comes to shove, I could probably find another career if my education work failed.

The only real skin in the game that I have is my reputation.

___

I try to mitigate not having skin in the game in a few ways:

1. I try to increase public accountability by being explicit about my theory of change and expected outcomes: I believe urban educational systems can achieve ~.1 effects by transitioning to all charter systems. I say this consistently and clearly. In the one area I do have skin in the game (my reputation), I’ve tried to act in a manner that allows others to hold me accountable.

2. I try to pay a lot of attention to those who do have skin in the game. I take parent demand very seriously.

3. I try to put myself in the position of the families I attempt to serve. When I led NSNO, we reflected as a staff on the question of which schools in New Orleans we would send our children (real or imagined). This line of thinking has led to me increasingly supporting diverse by design schools, as these are the schools I believe that I would most likely send my own (imagined) children to. Ultimately, imagined skin in the game is a weak form of having skin in the game, but it is a starting point.

___

I do think I can be a part of increasing educational opportunity and equity despite not having children.

But I’m not ignorant of the risks of my position: in so many ways, I don’t have a skin in the game.

Of course, many education reformers do.

American Millennials are Dumber than Other OECD Millennials

1 Reply

Robert Pondiscio recently blogged on this report AMERICA’S SKILLS CHALLENGE: Millennials and the Future.

Both are worth reading.

Basically, just about anyway you cut it, America’s millennial (ages 16-34) do worse than most OECD countries on skills tests; specifically:

1. As a nation, we do worse as a whole when compared to other OECD nations.

2. Our best millennials do worse than the best millennial of other nations.

3. Our lowest performing millennials do worse than the lowest performing millennials of other nations.

4. Our native born millennials do worse than the native born millennials of other nations.

5. Our gaps between highest and lowest performing millennials are amongst the highest in the OECD.

6. Perhaps most distressing, this generation is performing worse than previous American generations.

7. Also, we spend more on education than just about any nation in the world.

Reflections

The Link Between Test Performance and Economic Growth

America has always done mediocre on international assessments, yet we’re the richest large nation in the world. Clearly, some combination of our culture, policies, and resources continue to deliver significant wealth.

Of course, this is not a controlled experiment. Perhaps if we were betted educated we’d be even richer. And perhaps our other competitive advantages will erode due to globalization and technology.

In a World of Limited Resources, Where Do You Invest?

Even if you believe that raising academic achievement would increase economic growth, this does not mean that raising academic achievement is the most efficient way to increase economic growth.

For example, if you had a billion dollars to give, you might spend it on immigration reform rather than education, with the idea that more immigrants = more entrepreneurs = more wealth creating companies.

Just because you identify a problem, it doesn’t mean that it’s the problem you should be devoting marginal resources to solving.

In this sense, you could argue that we should be cutting spending from education (since we are paying so much for such mediocre outcomes) and put the funds in areas that are more likely to deliver better societal outcomes.

If You Want to Make Things Better, What Do You Do?

Regardless of where you invest or cut marginal resources, we’re still going to be delivering publicly funded education, so it’s definitely worth trying to make it better. Over the past few years, I’ve been fairly consistent in my recommendations for improving American education: (1) devolve operational control of schools to non-profits (2) increase selectivity and training of new teachers (3) make long-term bets on technology (4) restructure grades 11-16 to better transition students into gainful employment (5) increase wage subsidies and the EITC to reduce poverty.

Culture

That being said, there will always be a ceiling to what education reform and poverty alleviation can accomplish.

Ultimately, we cannot outperform who we are. We study less than the top Asian nations. And we kill each other more often than most European nations.

But there is also this:

Screen Shot 2015-03-02 at 8.31.29 PM

Nearly all of the top 10 companies in the world (measured by market value) are located in the United States.

Somethings we do well.

Which begs two questions:

Will we continue to do well what we currently do well?

Or will our weak academic outcomes catch-up with us?

It’s difficult to tell.

Why Do You Work in Education?

3 Replies

This Gregory Clark piece on social mobility is well worth a read.

Clark’s argument:

Given that social mobility rates are immutable, it is better to reduce the gains people make from having high status, and the penalties from low status. The Swedish model of compressed inequality is a realistic option, the American dream of rapid mobility an illusion.

Before you dismiss his argument, note that Clark is a thoughtful and thorough researcher. His book made my list of greatest personal intellectual influences.

Furthermore, regardless of what you believe on the possibility of increasing social mobility, it’s at least highly plausible that tax transfers, rather than educational improvement, are the most effective way to reduce inequality.

All this is to say, if you are working in education to increase social mobility or to reduce income inequality, it’s worth being humble about what your efforts might accomplish. There are other forces at play in addition to education, and these forces are strong – social networks, racism, genetics, globalization, nationalism, technology, to name a few.

Personally, my motivations for working in education have evolved over time.

Some of them are personal, and selfish, I suppose (I like the people I work with; I find the problems interesting; I’m compensated well enough).

And some of them are about helping others.

In terms of this set of motivations, I hope that improving educational opportunity can:

1. Reduce injustices in educational opportunity that continue to plague our country, whereby the color of a a people’s skin or the size of their bank account determines the quality of the education they receive.

2. Allow individuals to gain the ways of thinking, information, and income necessary to lead a fulfilling life (as defined by the individual).

3. Curb ills that, at the very least, are correlated to education, such as propensity for violence, unemployment, and fractured families.

4. Provide vehicles for the world changers (in every sense of the world: curing diseases, discovering new energy sources, creating beautiful art), to accelerate their world changing pursuits.

Of these four reasons, only the first is really about where an individual falls along the curve of outcomes. The remaining three are more about shifting the whole curve to the right.

I’m sure my thinking will continue to evolve over time.

But, every once in awhile, it’s worth taking the time to reflect on the question: why do you work in education?