The Death and Life of the Great American School System

1. Education reform has strayed from its original purpose, focusing on testing and accountability instead of curriculum and learning

The effort to upend American public education and replace it with something market-based began to feel too radical for me.

Reform gone astray. Education reform in recent decades has shifted dramatically from its original focus on improving curriculum and learning. Instead, it has embraced market-based solutions, high-stakes testing, and rigid accountability measures. This approach, while well-intentioned, has often led to a narrowing of the curriculum and an overemphasis on test preparation rather than genuine learning.

Unintended consequences. The intense focus on test scores and accountability has resulted in:

• Neglect of subjects not directly tested (e.g., history, science, arts)
• Teaching to the test rather than fostering deep understanding
• Increased stress on students and teachers
• A devaluation of teacher professionalism and autonomy

The author argues that this shift has moved education reform too far from its core purpose of providing a rich, well-rounded education to all students. Instead of improving education, these reforms may be harming the very system they aim to fix.

2. The standards movement was hijacked by test-based accountability, narrowing the curriculum

When NCLB was passed, curriculum and instruction were swept off the table as national priorities.

Standards derailed. The standards movement of the 1990s aimed to establish clear, high-quality learning goals for all students. However, this promising approach was overtaken by a narrow focus on test-based accountability, particularly with the passage of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) in 2001.

Curriculum neglected. This shift had several negative consequences:

• State standards became vague to avoid controversy
• Focus narrowed to primarily reading and math
• Rich content in history, science, and the arts was often neglected
• Teaching became more about test preparation than deep learning

The author argues that this emphasis on testing and accountability came at the expense of developing strong, content-rich curricula. By focusing solely on measurable outcomes in a few subjects, the broader goals of education – fostering critical thinking, creativity, and civic engagement – were often sacrificed.

3. Market-based reforms and charter schools have not consistently improved education

School choice does not miraculously produce good schools.

Choice is not enough. While school choice and charter schools have been promoted as solutions to educational inequities, the evidence for their effectiveness is mixed at best. The author argues that market-based reforms alone cannot solve the complex challenges facing public education.

Mixed results. Research on charter schools and choice programs shows:

• Some charters perform well, others underperform traditional public schools
• Choice can lead to increased segregation
• High-performing charters often benefit from selection effects or additional resources
• Systemic improvement remains elusive

The author contends that while some charter schools have shown promise, they are not a panacea. The focus on choice and competition has often come at the expense of improving the existing public school system, which continues to educate the vast majority of students.

4. Teacher evaluation based solely on test scores is flawed and counterproductive

Value-added assessment of teachers is a sham.

Flawed metrics. The push to evaluate teachers based primarily on their students' test scores, often through "value-added" models, is fundamentally flawed. This approach fails to account for the many factors outside a teacher's control that influence student performance.

Negative impacts:

• Encourages teaching to the test
• Demoralizes teachers and discourages collaboration
• Fails to capture many important aspects of good teaching
• Can produce unreliable and inconsistent results year-to-year

The author argues that effective teacher evaluation requires a more holistic approach, including classroom observations, peer review, and multiple measures of student learning. Relying solely on test scores creates perverse incentives and fails to improve teaching quality.

5. Philanthropic foundations have outsized influence on education policy without accountability

There is something fundamentally antidemocratic about relinquishing control of the public education policy agenda to private foundations run by society's wealthiest people.

Unelected influence. Major philanthropic foundations, such as Gates, Broad, and Walton, have come to exert enormous influence over education policy in recent years. While well-intentioned, this outsized role raises concerns about democratic accountability and the narrowing of reform approaches.

Problematic power dynamics:

• Foundations can quickly scale up favored reforms without public input
• Their focus on market-based solutions may not align with public priorities
• Grant-making can shape research agendas and silence potential critics
• Lack of accountability when reforms fail

The author argues that while philanthropic support for education can be valuable, the current level of influence is problematic. Education policy should be shaped through democratic processes, not by the preferences of a few wealthy individuals or organizations.

6. No Child Left Behind set unrealistic goals and narrowed the curriculum to tested subjects

NCLB was a punitive law based on erroneous assumptions about how to improve schools.

Flawed assumptions. No Child Left Behind, while well-intentioned, was based on flawed assumptions about how to improve schools. Its unrealistic goal of 100% proficiency by 2014 and its rigid accountability measures led to numerous unintended consequences.

Negative impacts:

• Narrowed curriculum to focus on tested subjects (reading and math)
• Encouraged teaching to the test and gaming of the system
• Labeled many schools as failing without providing adequate support
• Ignored the role of poverty and other out-of-school factors in student achievement

The author contends that NCLB's approach of measuring and punishing schools failed to address the root causes of educational inequity. Its emphasis on high-stakes testing came at the expense of a well-rounded education and often harmed the very students it was meant to help.

7. A strong curriculum in liberal arts and sciences is essential for a well-rounded education

Our schools will not improve if we continue to focus only on reading and mathematics while ignoring the other studies that are essential elements of a good education.

Broad knowledge matters. A rich, well-rounded curriculum in the liberal arts and sciences is essential for developing educated citizens capable of participating fully in a democratic society. The author argues that the current narrow focus on reading and math skills is insufficient.

Key components of a strong curriculum:

• History and civics to understand our democratic heritage
• Literature to develop cultural literacy and empathy
• Science to foster critical thinking and understanding of the natural world
• Arts to nurture creativity and self-expression
• Foreign languages to broaden perspectives

The author contends that by neglecting these subjects, we fail to provide students with the knowledge and skills they need to thrive in a complex world. A return to a content-rich, broad curriculum is essential for improving education.

8. Public education remains vital to American democracy and should not be privatized

The market serves us well when we want to buy a pair of shoes or a new car or a can of paint; we can shop around for the best value or the style we like. The market is not the best way to deliver public services.

Public good, not commodity. The author strongly argues that public education is a cornerstone of American democracy and should not be treated as a market commodity. While private schools have a role, a strong public education system is essential for fostering civic engagement and equal opportunity.

Risks of privatization:

• Increased segregation and inequality
• Loss of democratic control and accountability
• Neglect of students with greatest needs
• Erosion of common civic culture

The author contends that while choice and competition may have a role, they should not be the primary drivers of education reform. Maintaining and improving a strong public education system should be a national priority.

9. Effective reform requires improving curriculum, instruction, and learning conditions

The most durable way to improve schools is to improve curriculum and instruction and to improve the conditions in which teachers work and children learn.

Focus on fundamentals. The author argues that lasting educational improvement requires a focus on the core elements of schooling: what is taught, how it is taught, and the conditions in which teaching and learning occur. This approach contrasts with reforms focused primarily on governance, accountability, or market-based solutions.

Key areas for improvement:

• Developing rich, coherent curricula in all subject areas
• Investing in teacher preparation and professional development
• Reducing class sizes and improving school facilities
• Addressing out-of-school factors that affect learning (e.g., poverty, health)

The author contends that these fundamental improvements, while perhaps less flashy than some reform proposals, are essential for creating high-quality educational experiences for all students. By focusing on these core elements, we can build a stronger, more equitable education system.

Last updated: September 16, 2024