True, but at least they're doing something about public education reform. Notice the similarity between Bush's proposals and Blair's?
---------------------------------------------------------
No Myth
The British Have Proven That Genuine School Reform Isn't a Fantasy
ppionline.org.
Andrew Rotherham
LONDON -- Decentralization, performance-based approaches, school-site autonomy, high standards, real accountability and support, choice and competition -- it's a New Democrat's public-education fantasy. But as the American education establishment so often reminds us, it's just that -- a fantasy. These ideas won't work, we're told. They're impractical, misinformed, unnecessary, even harmful.
I guess that's why you have to go to Britain, the myth-steeped country Shakespeare called "the envy of less happier lands," if you want to see dreams come true.
The British are massively upgrading their state-supported schools under the leadership of Prime Minister Tony Blair and his government's dynamic Ministry of Education. New Labour policymakers clearly grasp the importance of improving schools to meet the challenges of the New Economy.
Not that long ago, the British education system was characterized by low demands, minimal standards, little accountability, and minimal financial support. As in America, this model suited Britain's economy and society well for most of the last century. During the 1980s and '90s, Britain's Tory governments recognized the need for improvement. They decentralized schools and implemented a national curriculum. British schools now faced higher demands, but still lacked the financial resources they needed to meet the goals set for them.
When Blair took office in 1997, he promised to overhaul the schools and dramatically improve educational outcomes. He increased education funding but kept a focus on standards and accountability -- including intervention in low-performing schools and school districts. In only a few years his government has turned the corner and built the high support/high demand school system that the New Economy demands. Just Enough Pressure From Above
The Blair government has created a system that keeps school decentralization intact but exerts just enough pressure from above to drive effective practices. For example, the government has instituted a "literacy and numeracy strategy" that provides schools with detailed curriculum guides to help them upgrade instruction and ensure that students are meeting new math and reading goals. Schools must set aside a certain amount of time for reading and math, but it is up to local officials to decide how best to teach these subjects.
In effect, every British school operates like a charter school. Teacher hiring and dismissal decisions are made at the school level, and parents are free to choose among schools, space permitting. The common thread running through this system is fidelity to the national standards, accountability for results, access to all, and no fees. There are theme schools, single-sex schools, and a host of other models. Contrary to some critics' predictions, school choice has not Balkanized British society. In fact, the focus on achieving high standards through diverse means actually increases societal cohesion because expectations for all children are uniform and high.
The British reforms are creating a market for technical assistance, professional development, and other services of exactly the type envisioned by New Democrat Sens. Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, Evan Bayh of Indiana, and other U.S. advocates of local school decision making. In fact, the ambitious education reform bill that Lieberman and Bayh promoted in Congress this past year generally mirrors the British model. Of course, the experts tell us that bill is unneeded and unworkable too.
Perhaps most noteworthy, Blair did something that few American politicians have the gumption to do: He called the education establishment's bluff. Blair introduced a pay-for-performance plan for experienced teachers that was roundly criticized by entrenched interests. No teachers would want to participate in such a system, they predicted. Undeterred, Blair took his proposal directly to the teachers. And lo and behold, of the 250,000 eligible teachers, 200,000 applied to participate. It's a lesson that Democrats in this country would be wise to heed. Bumps on the Road
Of course, the road to school reform in Britain has had its share of bumps. I have heard teachers and administrators complain that the Tory decentralization program continued under Blair destroyed some valuable local partnerships and support structures, and that schools are too isolated and being left to sink or swim. Blair is trying to remedy this by ensuring that schools and school districts that need support get it. Others complain that student performance, particularly in writing, is not improving rapidly enough. Some within the education system grumble that the pace of change is too rapid.
On balance, however, even Blair's critics acknowledge that the schools are improving and that opportunities for students are brighter. Despite pockets of institutional resistance to standards and their accompanying accountability measures, the British public overall supports Blair's efforts to raise the bar for youngsters.
Recently, I visited the Rushmore Primary School, located in a rough part of Hackney just outside of London. I was struck by the impact of Blair's reforms on the students, who overwhelmingly come from poor families. As they move from grade to grade, these children are closing the achievement gap that separates them from their more affluent peers. Teachers at Rushmore are convinced that their students' gains are largely due to the structure provided by the standards, coupled with the flexibility to design their own program afforded by site-based management. Liz Thompson, Rushmore's energetic and talented "head teacher" (i.e., principal), thrives in the autonomous environment. The school's success in the face daunting circumstances is a testament to her leadership.
Meanwhile, Blair's support and accountability measures are there to help those schools that don't succeed in an autonomous environment and need more than a "light touch" from the government.
Essentially, although most decisionmaking is left to individual schools, Blair has created a system that drives effective practices in all schools. The result is improved student achievement. And the greatest beneficiaries are the students in the most challenging circumstances, who now are held to the same standards and are learning the same skills as more economically advantaged students. This is the promise of the standards movement. Hunger for Improvement
Historically, the British have been more open than Americans about the existence of a stratified class system. For a long time, much of the British public accepted the lack of opportunities for economic advancement. Voltaire famously characterized British society as "like their own beer: froth on the top, dregs at the bottom, and the middle excellent."
The same was largely true in the United States, although we took great pride in denying it and in trumpeting our egalitarian nature. But any objective analysis of our public education system would have to conclude that it was not designed to afford poor and minority students opportunities on a par with those afforded to more affluent youngsters. In the New Economy, the countries that educate all of their students well and increase opportunities for social mobility will be the ones that prosper.
It would be ironic if the British overhaul their schools to provide all students with equal educational opportunity before we do. But that's the way it looks now. While we continue to squabble over inputs, standards, charter schools, and accountability, the Blair government has already fought and won those battles. Its success, no doubt, has much to do with Britain's constitutional structure and the absence of structural barriers to reform that are prominent in the United States. But some of it also must be attributed to a greater hunger for school improvement among leading policymakers and actors than is frequently the case here.
Churchill once said of the English that, "we do not covet anything from any nation except their respect." When it comes to education reform, they certainly deserve it. |
