Category Archives: School System Design

Thiel, Cowen, Taleb, Options, Candler, Tiny Schools, Regulation

2 Replies

I just read this transcript from Tyler Cowen’s interview of Peter Thiel.

I found myself not being able to fully evaluate many of the claims that were made. I don’t know if this is because Cowen and Thiel are simply operating from a much deeper knowledge based than myself, or because they were just being vague and non-linear. It is likely some combination of the two.

Anyways, I did agree with this from Thiel:

If you are starting a computer software company, that costs maybe $100,000, to get a new drug through the FDA, maybe on the order of a billion dollars or so. If the FDA were regulating video game technologies, and you had to do a double-blind study to make sure that the video games weren’t addictive, damaging to your brain, etc.

In short, there are some sectors, predominantly health and education, where over-regulation hinders innovation.

___

I’m currently reading Black Swan and AntiFragile by . (HT Ethan Fletcher)

Taleb has so many strong opinions, some of which seem clearly false, that it makes hard to know which of his ideas to trust. But many of his ideas do seem insightful.

I was particularly drawn to his emphasis on options as being a model for how we should think about innovation. Basically, an option minimizes downside while maximizing upside, in that, for a price, you get the option to buy at a certain price without having to commit to buy at a certain price.

His point is that with innovation you similarly want to minimize downside risks while maximizing upside opportunity.

The VC sector basically works on this model: make a bunch of (relatively) small bets, all of which have very high upsides, and hope that one of them works.

In this sense, options are a way of incorporating intellectual humility into bets about the future.

___

Recently, Matt Candler has been advocating for Tiny Schools.

One way to think about Tiny Schools is that they are just that: schools with not a lot of kids. An entrepreneur opens a Tiny School, educates some kids, and hopefully the school succeeds.

Another way to think about Tiny Schools is as options: an entrepreneur starts a schools with 15-20 kids and tries to get the model right. If the school doesn’t work, 15-20 kids get a subpar education experience for a few years. Not really the end of the world, though of course not ideal. If the school does work, then the entrepreneur can attempt to scale the model, either by opening more Tiny Schools or by converting the Tiny School into a Regular School.

In short, launching Tiny Schools minimizes downside risks (less kids, no need to buy a large facility) and maximizes upside potential (the schools that do well can then be scaled).

___

What regulatory structure might allow for Tiny Schools to thrive?

One model is just to keep Tiny Schools private. This is fine, but requiring tuition inevitably limits who will be served.

Another model is to use public funding, but to make the regulatory model very thin.

I discussed this with Adam Hawf and landed at the following:

Market Size: A state would limit the amount of Tiny Schools that received public funds in any given year: perhaps 100 Tiny Schools with no more than 50 students each in any given year. This equates to roughly 5,000 students / $50 million a year, assuming $10K in public funding per student. This limits the downside for taxpayers.
Entry: The application process would be a slimmed down version of a charter application. The entrepreneur would need to have a budget, brief description of the model, and a basic opening plan. 30 pages at most.
On-going Regulation: On-going regulations would be based on homeschooling regulations. Basic reporting on students served and finances, but very little oversight.
Back End Accountability: There would be no back end accountability. Zero testing requirements or anything of the sort. Rather, the license to operate a Tiny School would be a one time, four year license. Once the license expired, the operator would either need to apply to become a charter school or a private school. From there, the school would enter what ever accountability system the state used for the chosen sector.

___

If even ten states adopted this model, at any time we’d have a 1,000 different Tiny School pilots going on around the country.

The downside would be very small.

The upside could be incredibly high.

School Choice Protects Against the Tyranny of Local Majorities

3 Replies

The blogosphere gained a great voice yesterday: Justin Cohen launched a new blog. I’ve known Justin for years and admire both his intelligence and humor.

In his first post, Justin commented on my post, Value Tensions in Education Reform; he writes:

That said, after years of working on the ground, particularly in and with communities of color, I have come to view the dismissal of local democracy as equally noxious to the debate. The big problem here is that somehow we have arrived at a point wherein placing value on student achievement results is mutually exclusive to respecting the voting rights of African-American communities. There is no education reform in a world where the values of voting rights and student achievement are in conflict, for it forces communities to balance their current sovereignty against their children’s future. That is a fight that neither side can win, nor should want to fight.

Some thoughts:

1. Justin’s argument, I think, is that I was erroneously placing the values of student achievement and local democracy inapposite to each other. While I do think they are tensions between the two, the specific point I was making here was about the tension between voting (electoral power) and choice (control of tax funds). I wrote: “I view local choice as a much more effective democratic power than local voting.”

2. When it comes to where to vest educational authority, I’m probably more of a pragmatist than Justin. Justin is right to point out that moving authority to the state level can dilute the voice of African-Americans, in that African-Americans may have local majorities but be statewide minorities. But if there is a history of African-American children being harmed by one governance structure, and a new governance structure shows promise of reversing this trend, then I’ll generally be open to experimenting with this new governance structure.

3. I imagine there are middle ground solutions. For example, having an elected, local charter school board allows for both local democracy while eliminating the monopoly power of the traditional district. Paul Hill and Ashely Jochim’s new .

4. Another way to think about this as school choice being a check against the tyranny of the majority. What if I happen to live in a city where the school board elections keep on being won by leaders who fail to deliver high-quality schools? If I’m rich, I can opt out. If I’m poor, I can’t opt out. My child has to attend a failing public school.

5. In many cities, the school board (the representatives of the majority) actively fights the expansion of school choice, both by enforcing neighborhood zoning and by denying the expansion of charter schools. They do this despite their historical inability to turnaround failing schools.

6. If I live in a city where leaders who protect the monopoly keep winning elections, then my major hope, in a democracy, is that another governance entity intervenes. In our country, this will either be the county, state, or federal government.

7. In an ideal world, local communities would always look after the interests of all their citizens. History has proven that we don’t live in an ideal world. In this sense, I don’t believe the voting rights of local communities should always be held sacred; rather, I think we should have checks and balances between different levels of government, so as to protect those who might be harmed by majorities.

8. I should have made this the main point of my previous post: It’s not that I’m against local electoral power, I’m just against leaving this power unchecked. In public education systems, alternative governance models and school choice provide an extremely important check on local school boards.

Justin, do you agree?

The Times – Are They A Changin’?

6 Replies

I sometimes wonder if we are witnessing a changing of the guard in education reform. I’m not sure. But I had a good talk last night with a great reformer and here is what we were mulling over.

If the times are a changin’, my guess it’s happening in these areas.

Equity

The 1990-2010 generation of reform did not prioritize serving all children. Rather, they prioritized proof points. They rightfully wanted to prove what is possible. A great teacher could prove what is possible with 20 children. A great school could prove what is possible with 500 children. A great network could prove what is possible with 2,000 children.

But no one was really thinking about what it would take to serve 50,000 children, or a 150,000 children, or 500,00 children.

The fact is, when you serve every child in a city, you must serve students: (1) with severe special needs (2) who transfer midyear (3) who are expelled from other schools (4) whose parents don’t actively seek out the best school (5) and so on.

If the times are a changin’, the new times will require reformers to serve all students.

Politics

Many 1990-2010 reform organizations used political connections to attain priveledge: budget line items were passed, facilities were secured, and political cover was granted. Reformers rightfully wanted to gain quick entry into stagnating systems. These organizations did not intend to be scalable entities with diverse and large scale support; rather, they played an elite status game perfectly. Good ideas, ivy league degrees, and social networks carried they day; movement building did not.

If the times are a changin’, the new times will require reformers to build large constituents bases that can lead to sustained political support.

School

The 1990-2010 reform organizations doubled down on strict discipline, data analysis, and alogrithm based learning. This provided real, meaning full gains in student learning. However, this school model had real limitations in terms of developing higher order thinking and individual autonomy.

If the times are a changin’, the new times will require reformers to push the boundaries of how to provide a safe and structured environment while also requiring students to do heavy intellectual lifting through expanded instructional techniques; including: rigorous discussion, complex writing, mathematical concept mastery, technology utilization, experiential learning, and leadership.

Structure

The 1990-2010 generation of reform aimed to make school districts better. Reformers reasonably thought that an infusion of innovation and leadership could transform school districts. This led many organizations to invest in district improvement rather than outside of the system entrepreneurship. To date, these reformers have been proven wrong: their goals have not been met. At the same time, non-profit led schools, while suffering from real issues in quality variance, have still been the primary leaders of innovation and performance across the country.

If the times are a changin’, the new times will require reformers to push government to relinquish school operation to educator led non-profits, while at the same time ensuring that the government becomes an excellent regulator of performance and equity.

In Sum

In discussions, conferences, convenings, blog posts, op-eds, and email chains – I sometimes see the 1990-2010 generation of education reformers struggling with many of the above issues.

Or to put it another way: they are struggling to determine whether they can actually be the new public system of schooling in America.

While this struggle is playing out, a new generation of reform has formed and this generation believes it can be the next evolution of public schooling in America.

This generation believes it can serve every student; it understands that it will need to be build a broad base of support in order to do so; it knows that it will have to invent new models of schooling to prepare students for higher education and career; and it believes that educator led non-profits, rather than government, will deliver these educational opportunities.

Are the time a changin’?

It’s hard to know when you’re in the thick of it.

But I hope so.

And I hope that the brilliant reform organizations of 1990-2010 evolve to become the brilliant reform organizations of 2011-2030.

Some likely will, while others won’t.

The Three Decouplings

1 Reply

Three decouplings may drive the future of education across the world.

Each decoupling is somewhat connected to the others, though they all are, to some extent, forces upon to themselves.

The Decouplings

Decoupling #1: The Decoupling of Government and School Operation

Some call this relinquishment. It is the trend to separate the duties of public school regulation and public school operation. With the charter sector growing at 14% this year, this decoupling is in full swing.

Overtime, I think this decoupling with lead to increased equity (via better regulation), more innovation (via entrepreneurship), and increased academic outcomes (via the scaling of the best school organizations).

Decoupling #2: The Decoupling Between School and Learning

Right now, schools are the main vehicles for student learning. This will likely change. In the future, physical textbooks and human teachers will be less important for academic learning. Computer programs and tutors will likely play a much bigger role. Computer programs and tutors need not be attached to schools, especially in the typical 8AM-3PM lecture based school day.

The combination of adaptive assessments, instructional playlists, and Uber for tutors will position parents and children, rather than schools, in the driver-seat of learning.

This will especially be true for the wealthy families and students over the age of 12 or so.

This transition will likely lead to significant gains in student achievement (nothing increases student achievement like targeted tutoring), the reinvention of the role of teacher (to more of a quasi-contractor role), and potentially, increases in achievement gaps (if wealthier and better educated families are able to better harness the advances in technology).

Decoupling #3: The Decoupling of Body and Mind

At some point, we will likely transition our minds out of our brains and onto computers. This could come from advances in programming or emulation.

I don’t think we’ll really be human anymore, so perhaps this decoupling should not be included, but the decoupling will have a profound effect on learning.

The biggest change will likely be the speed at which learning occurs. It takes humans a long-time to learn things. Our future selves will be able to learn much quicker.

What we learn over a lifetime, they will be able to learn in, perhaps, a few minutes.

The Relationship Between the Decouplings

Decoupling #1 will likely increase the speed at which Decoupling #2 is realized. A more entrepreneurial and innovative education system will restructure itself at a greater speed.

The technology advances behind Decoupling #2 will ultimately lead to Decoupling #3. Artificial intelligence will eventually evolve from adaptive assessments to consciousness.

The Race Between the Decouplings

The pace of technological change will determine whether Decoupling #2 happens before Decoupling #1 is complete, as well as whether Decoupling #3 happens before Decoupling #2 is complete.

Speculative Predictions

The years 2015 to 2035 will see major advances in Decoupling #1.

The years 2025 to 2055 will see major advances in Decoupling #2.

The years 2275 to 2375 will see major advances in Decoupling #3.

Education Governance in the Time of Corruption

1 Reply

Ira Thomas, an elected representative of the Orleans Parish School Board, has been charged with taking a $5,000 bribe. He is stepping down from office.

Earlier this year, Thomas told the Lens: “It’s time now, in my opinion, for the Recovery School District to exit the city of New Orleans.”

It will be Thomas, and not the Recovery School District, that exits education in New Orleans.

Ira’s arrest may increase calls for keeping schools under state control.

Well, it’s worth keeping in mind that Walter Lee, an elected member of the state board of education, was recently indicted for fraud.

So perhaps we should just devolve all power to schools.

Well, Lagniappe Academy, a Recovery School District charter school is under investigation for major special education abuses.

Unfortunately, the work of educating children provides no safe harbor from the worst of human nature.

Moreover, even good people will sometimes make moral mistakes.

The worst of us don’t account for all of our wrongdoings.

So what should we do?

We should decentralize power and create redundancy in oversight.

Power to Families

The more power families have, the less power will be available to be abused by educators and government leaders. In education, this means giving families choice of where they send their children to school, as well as transparent information on how well these schools are performing.

Without choice and information, the primary form of accountability is one level of government putting pressure on another level of government. History has shown (especially in education), that this is not enough.

Power to Educators

The more power educators have, the less power will be available to be abused by district and school board officials. When educators are making decisions about curriculum and instruction, and when school operators are making operational decisions about issues such as transportation and custodial services, there will be less opportunity for corruption through large, centralized contracts.

Redundancy in Oversight

Oversight functions should not sit in one entity.

Rather, four levels of oversight should be instituted.

Non-profit boards of directors should govern school operators and provide the first line of oversight.

Charter school authorizers, including school districts, should provide the second level of oversight.

Elected school boards should provide the third level of oversight, for both schools that they directly run and for charters that are authorized by other entities but reside in their geographic boundary.

The state should provide the fourth level of oversight, and it should have the right to assume governance of perpetually failing or legally incompliant schools, be they district or charter.

In Sum

Too often, education governance decisions are made based on a determination of which governance entity has the most legitimate claim of power.

A better conversation would begin with the assumption that families and educators should be the primary carriers of power, and that all other power should be distributed across multiple governance entities – as none of these entities will be perfect, and all, at some moment in time, will be corrupt.

The Case for All Charter Districts

What Netflix Public Communications Tell Us About Education Best Practice Adoption

3 Replies

I tweeted about this yesterday: on its investor relations website, Netflix basically tells the world the broad outlines of its strategy.

The “Netflix Longterm View Page” provides: an analysis of the overall market; what the future will hold; in what areas Netflix will compete; how it will compete; what markets it will enter; and its margin structure.

In short, if you want to create a Netflix competitor, the basic playbook is right there for you to copy.

Clearly, Netflix does not think it will win because of its overarching strategy.

The strategy is necessary but not sufficient.

Rather, my guess is that Netflix thinks it will win because it will execute better than any of its competitors (as well as capitalize on its current market position, given the high barriers to entry in its business).

All this is to say: if it were possible to simply adopt all of Netflix’s “best practices,” you could become a billionaire within a few years.

Of course, you won’t be able to do this. Netflix is an organization, not a set of practices. And organizations are very difficult to replicate.

And yet so much of education reform is based on best practice adoption, not organizational building.

This is foolish.

Of course, organizations can learn some things from each other. And we should support this transfer of knowledge.

But, ultimately, it is great organizations, and not a menu of great practices, that will provide us the best chance to give children the education they deserve.

This is why I believe we should relinquish power to educators; let them form non-profits to operate schools; and scale the best of these organizations to serve students across the country.

relinquishment

writing about handing power back to educators and families – and other thoughts