There's a motto that I like to think by: "Doubt what you know." It's a comfortable, if somewhat ambiguous way to go through life. Take sports, for example. I knew the Mariners were going to be competitive this year. but I also doubted it.
When it comes to school reform, I know certain things. I know that merit pay doesn't work and that total restructuring - firing an entire staff and selectively rehiring some of them - doesn't work.
But then came Annapolis High School. In a recent story for NPR, Claudio Sanchez (the coolest voice on the radio) reported on AHS's graduating seniors. When they were freshmen, the school was a train wreck. They had a huge achievement gap, with black male ninth graders failing at a rate of 72%, and they made Maryland's list of worst schools.
Along came a charismatic principal and $3 million dollars of school district money.
They fired everyone (even the charismatic principal) and rehired those teachers (and the principal) who would agree to a 12-month school year, home visits and careful attention to low-performing students. They also instituted merit pay; teachers could make over fourteen thousand dollars a year in bonuses. In short, they tried everything, all at once.
And it worked. The achievement gap has virtually disappeared and AHS has a new-found reputation as a great school.
It's not clear which of the measures did the trick. A more scientific approach would have had them isolating each variable; trying each measure in turn to see which one worked. But they figured the students' futures were coming up fast and they didn't have that kind of time. So they threw every gadget they had at the problem. And it worked.
So I might be wrong. Apparently merit pay and mass-firings might work. I might stand corrected.
But I know something else. I know that when we institute unsustainable school reform measures, those measures will only be successful while they're in place. When we can't sustain them any longer, the success, along with the funding, will go away.
Annapolis High School is going back to a nine-month school year, without the merit pay and without all the individual attention. They can't afford it anymore.
So I know that their school will go backwards, towards where they used to be.
Of course, I might be wrong.
But I doubt it.
Unfortunately, John, I think the Administration thinks about education the same way they think about businesses: a little start-up money is all it takes and if they know what they’re doing they’ll make it. That’s not how it works in education, however; education needs a stable, sustainable revenue source.
And by the way, that’s exactly why I hate the term “school reform.” It sounds too much like a one-time event. “School Improvement” works better, since it conotes a continual, gradual process.
I had the same feelings, so before I blogged on that report at This Week in Education, I checked out newspaper accounts. As it turns out, this successful turnaround followed a several year long semi-successful turnaround. Annapolis followed a path similar to schools in Rudy Crew’s turnaround chancellor Districts. They improved and then declined when the money dried up.
Secretary Duncan says the right things about early education, community schools, pre school and teaching kids to read for comprehenension not just decoding. But then he fights for billions for a superstructure to fire teachers and (hopefully) create monetary incentives, and pennies for the real capacity-building.
At any rate, the Administration’s School Improvement Grants for Oklahoma were approved late last week. Teachers for those schools report tommorrow. Or should I say, the teachers who have been hired for those schools report tommorrow. For some reason, veteran teachers have had the same suspecions and the promise of merit pay was not enough to fill all of the positions.
What’s great is that they were able to turn it around. If an additional 3 million dollars (what did they spend it on?) and three months more of school a year can erase the performance gap, I’m excited. I’m excited only for a short time though, because unless teachers step up and do all of that for free, no public school can afford to have a 12-month year.
What kills me is that the performance gap has clear causes and clear solutions. Kids who live in poverty, who live with violence and instability, who have under-educated parents, perform worse than their financially comfortable, safe, well-fed classmates who have educated parents.
The performance gap is less about the teachers and more about the home life, so if we want to truly close the gap we’ll put enough money into low-performing schools that the school can cover territory the families can’t. And, since teachers aren’t signing up to adopt but are signing up for a career, covering that territory should be part of the job description and should be paid for.
Your sustainability point is the most important, I think. They had to throw a ton of money and time at that school to turn it around, and if they would have continued to throw that money and time into the mix, they’d probably have seen continued success (though I think it would have diminished over time as novelty wears off).
This is THE problem with school reform. It WILL cost money not just for the change but for the maintenance of the change after the paint dries and the shine has worn off a little. I’d be willing to be the whole farm that within three years a clear and distinct backward slide will be obvious at Annapolis HS.
I hope you’re wrong, too.
There’s a chance that the school culture is what changed by bringing in an entirely new staff and system which was mission-aligned from top to bottom. It may be the case that even without some of the reforms that provided them with the time and motivation to do the much needed catch up work that the culture has substantial changed and that effect will linger for many years to come.
I’m not sure if this is all a good sign for education, but this is precisely the kind of turnaround that I believe guys like Andy Smarick and Justin Cohen (who disagree on these issues a lot) think could work– drastic problems call for drastic measures to create a serious break from what was and what is (and how what is will get to what we need).
Like you, I have my doubts.