Harvard Honors Wendy Kopp, Founder of Teach for America, with Doctorate of Law

reddit4 · 3 days

The problem lies in incentives. Charter schools typically work outside the confines of teacher unions and collective bargaining agreements. If the charter system works well, it casts a bad light on things such as rigid labor controls, teacher tenure and lockstep compensation.

dgodon · 3 days

This was a really good article - thanks for passing it along. I always enjoy reading Dr. Darling-Hammond's writing and haven't come across this particular article before. It is true that she finds for-profit educational management firms (Edison Schools probably being the best example of this) to be risky, and I personally agree with her - the kinds of charters I support are of the non-profit variety, like KIPP, IDEA, YESPrep, Achievement First, etc.

I personally love that she goes above and beyond just criticizing reform to offer her own action-plan of solutions, many of which I think are really solid.

Kranky_Old_Dude · 5 days

http://vcumasc684.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/dept-of-labor-stats-salary-info.jpg?w=500&h=375

dgodon · 10 days

I certainly agree that the genesis of the deficit in math and reading can be traced back to the difference less pre-school learning in low-income households. Kids show up to kindergarten with the achievement gap already thoroughly in place - some kids show up being able to count, add, and even read a little, and others show up practically mute, having never been engaged. From there the magnitude of the gap just gets worse and worse over the years.

I also agree that there is a disaffected socio-cultural narrative in the inner-city and rural communities where low-income kids tend to live. But I disagree with the following:

If you don't deal with that, you can run all the tutoring, remedial, supplemental, special programs you want; you will barely dent the problem.

First of all, the extra tutoring, remediation, and the longer school day in general are just a foundation. To use an analogy, if two kids walk into a hospital - one for a check-up and one with a broken arm, you're going to give the one with a broken arm a splint. You aren't going to give both patients a splint, just the one that needs it. In the same way, you don't give all kids extra math and reading, just the ones that need it because they showed up to school a few grade levels behind. Also, the splint itself isn't enough - if the skin is broken, you also need to treat with an anti-septic to prevent an infection. Similarly, just the extra time, tutoring and remediation isn't enough, there is so much more that needs to be done.

I think "extra tutoring and remediation" represents an oversimplification of what high performing charter school networks like KIPP, YesPrep, Achievement First and Idea Academy do. To the outside observer, it may seem like all these schools are doing is tutoring, remediation, and special programs - but they're making more than just a dent, because they also tackle the underlying narrative and create a culture where learning is celebrated.

Consider this: http://new.pentagram.com/2010/03/new-work-achievement-first-end/

It's Achievement first propaganda. From the second you walk into that school, you are bombarded with the message that Education is important, and that Education will set you free. These schools go above just giving kids extra time to learn reading and math (which is important), they indoctrinate their kids with the belief that they are smart, that they are awesome, and that they are on a path to college.

Kids definitely show up to Kindergarten with an achievement gap - but imagine if this gap could be closed by the 3rd grade instead of waiting until kids are in 8th grade to close it. This is the cutting edge of education reform - reforms in early elementary that aim to get kids caught up before they are 10 years old. If the fundamental reading/writing/math gap is fixed at an early age, imagine what can be done with collaborative work, self-directed learning, project-based learning and experiential learning from grades 4 to 12? One of the reasons high performing charter schools have such basic pedagogy is because they don't get kids until middle-school, at which point 4 years need to be dedicated to close the achievement gap and send these kids off to good high schools. It will be fascinating to see what happens if charter elementary schools start to take off, and we have a generation of low-income minority students who have never known the achievement gap.

Thanks for the dialog =) Take care!

dgodon · 10 days

The tests are wrong, just like the policy that elevated them. This is known.

This is really interesting to talk about. Allow me to play devil's advocate for a second here.

I personally believe that the good old USA is one of the better countries out there with respect to prosperity. Our GDP per capita is pretty high - and while the distribution hasn't been vary fair in the last few decades - we're still better off than the majority of countries out there. Moreover, I believe that we have a pretty solid higher-education system that's been responsible for a lot of our prosperity - those with a college degree tend to earn a lot more over the course of their lifetimes than those without. So if the higher ed system is working out, what's wrong with the primary and secondary system?

In other words, what aspects of the primary and secondary education system failing? To actually get to the higher education system, and to do well there, young adults need a toolkit of skills. Some skills include

The ability to work with others (teams, small groups)
The ability to self-direct one's learning without clear guidelines.
The ability to work through a project to a successful completion.
The ability to manage one's time effectively.
The ability to do math up to at least a pre-calculus level.
The ability to read and write at a college level.
A passion for learning.

It's hard to rank these skills because they're all important, but what we do know is that "good" public schools, those that serve affluent (and primarily white and asian) students give their kids at least the reading and math skills. Many good schools also give the other skills, but math and reading tend to be something of a foundation. As long as math, reading and writing are there, students can at least get in the door to college - many of the other things can be learned at college with maturity.

We also know that underperforming public schools, those that serve primarily low-income (and typically african american and hispanic) students don't give their students any of these skills. The fact that low-income students aren't being taught math, reading and writing is, in my opinion, much more critical than the fact that they also aren't being taught teamwork and project based learning.

Moreover, math and reading skills can be approximated through assessment. The tests are far from perfect, but they tell us roughly how well a student can read (with respect to reading fluency, not comprehension), how much a student can comprehend of what they've read, and what math skills they do and do not have. A kid that consistently gets a 450 on the SAT Math is probably less advanced in their math proficiency than a kid that consistently gets a 750 on the SAT Math. A kid that gets a 2 on the AP Calculus test is probably less proficient at calculus than a kid that gets a 5 on the same test.

If we had to triage (and it is truly a tragedy that we have to triage), shouldn't we be focusing on math, reading and writing first, and once those are locked down, get to everything else? Should we really be having a conversation about project-based learning when low-income kids are leaving our schools illiterate and unable to do basic computation?

dgodon · 10 days

Alright then, a good place to start is here:

http://educatenow.net/2011/05/24/2011-test-scores-are-in-and-we-rock-again/

http://www.intellectualtakeout.org/library/chart-graph/new-orleans-eighth-graders-close-achievement-gap

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/rick_hess_straight_up/2012/01/the_proof_is_in_the_etouffe_75_of_rigorously_studied_urban_charter_markets_work.html

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-08-26-new-orleans-charter-schools_N.htm

I want to acknowledge that the title and tone of the articles is clearly biased. The data, however, is solid - if you really doubt the actual data (it would take some pretty big balls for everyone to just lie about it) I can go hunt for additional sources from the state or something. But for now, lets take the data to be accurate.

In 2003, the state of Louisiana passed education reform legislation that created the Recovery School District, giving the state tremendous power to take over New Orleans Parish schools and cover them to charter schools. From 2003 to 2005, RSD took over a number of schools and converted them to charger - since Katrina, it has continued to take over schools and convert them to charter year after year.

The state standards and testing may or may not have changed during the last 10 years - honestly, I have no idea - but I don't think it matters. State standards affect the entire state, not just New Orleans - if they have changed, then it would impact all students and wouldn't impact the achievement gap between New Orleans and the rest of the state. The data strongly suggests that New Orleans has made tremendous progress, not just on absolute terms, but relative to the rest of the state, making this point a little moot.

The demographic data, of course, has changed pre and post Katrina. You are free to claim that all of the New Orleans results in the last 7 years since Katrina are just the results of demographics changing - and I would have no way of proving that false because the demographic data is hard to collect. The USAToday article does have some data on the population that suggests that it has been stable since 2007, but not enough to conclude anything.

However, the 2004 pre-Katrina achievement data, 2005 Katrina achievement data, and 2006 post-Katrina achievement data is fairly stable. It's from 2007 to 2011 that New Orleans sees a huge increase in academic achievement - and the increase happens ever year, it's not a sudden jolt. Logically speaking, is there a good reason to believe that New Orleans demographics have continued to radically change from 2006, a year after Katrina, to 2011?

dgodon · 10 days

I actually own Dr. Ravitch's book and I think it's quite good. She doesn't question the reformers intentions' in her book - but she does so frequently in her various online publishings. There is certainly a hint of it in the post that started this conversation. I'm nitpicking though, and you're right, discussing Dr. Ravitch herself is not very important to this discussion.

What I find a little frustrating is that, when criticizing education reform, many people tend to individual examples of reform that have failed rather than looking at the big picture of what drives reform and what's actually being accomplished. Consider the bolded KIPP example you brought up.

The "culling" factor is not overstated. When SRI studied the Bay Area KIPP operation in 2008, they found a 60% attrition rate for middle school. Other researchers noted that students who leave KIPP are lower performers, and often perform lower than when they entered. And there are restrictions on refilling those students.

I think it's great that you're focusing on KIPP - KIPP is indeed a high-profile "high-performing" charter and they deserve to be carefully scrutinized. It's just frustrating that you are fixating on KIPP's weakness and acting as if it represents KIPP nationally. KIPP is over 100 schools now. Of course, KIPP is going to have outliers. In the KIPP family, KIPP's West-Coast operations are a negative outlier.

For example, in most regions that KIPP operates, KIPP strives to use the same per-pupil funding that the district schools use. In California, because the state provides such comically low per-pupil funding, KIPP abandoned this principle and decided to fundraise to the extent that they have more per-pupil funding than district schools. Thus, if you take the average of all KIPP schools, it appears that KIPP schools have higher per-pupil funding than surrounding schools - even though this is only true of California.

Another example is the attrition. KIPP Bay Area (and LA if I remember correctly) have really high attrition. Those schools just aren't run as well as other KIPP schools. The attrition is so high, it pulls the national average down. Does that mean that KIPP's model is a failure? I would argue that it doesn't - it just means that it isn't currently working in California. Just as there are negative outliers, there are also positive ones. KIPP Houston, for example, has tremendous academic performance that dwarfs other KIPP schools in the network. Some variance should be expected.

You are right that KIPP doesn't allow for replacement of students. KIPP doesn't exactly hide this fact - it's well known that the schools only accept students at entry years. This emulates what many private schools do, and because of it, it's not fair to compare KIPP schools to peer public schools because district public schools have to accept kids at every grade level. At the same time, it's not fair to take this one fact and throw everything that KIPP has done out the window. The fact that KIPP's high schools don't accept 10th, 11th and 12th graders alone doesn't explain KIPP's astoundingly high graduation and college matriculation rates - it's part of the explanation, but there's so much more to it than that that shouldn't be dismissed.

A lot of people interpreted "Waiting for Superman" as an attack on teachers and unions and celebration of charter schools. It's been a few years since I've seen it - but that's not the message I got from it. Consider the title - "Waiting for Superman" - the implication is that, for decades, we've been waiting for some hero to come in and fix our underperforming school systems rather than trying to do it ourselves. Every player in education, from parents to students to teachers to admin, has gotten complacent and accepted the achievement gap as some inevitable fact of life. The point is that there is no hero and we don't need a hero - we can fix the achievement gap ourselves and there are leaders out there that are tackling the gap and starting to show progress.

What's the point of this clip? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1VX1apvagA

There is no attack of unions in that clip. There is no celebration of charter schools. Yet that's the 2-min clip that I think summarizes up the movie. The point is, as a society, we are not investing enough in our education system - we've been starving it of resources and this needs to change. What is the tragedy behind Waiting for Superman? We see kids and parents fill a school cafeteria and see most of them lose the lottery? Is the tragedy that there aren't enough of these "Superman" charter schools for these kids to go to? That misses the point - the KIPPs and Harlem Success Academies are NOT "Superman" coming in to save everybody. The tragedy is that our public schools aren't providing low-income kids an excellent education. The point of the movie is that we need to believe that it can be fixed, and work together to fix it, not wait for "superman" (charter schools) to come in and fix it for us, because that's a myth that's never going to happen.

If the central idea is to learn from the highest performing charters, what are we learning from them, other than that they perform poorly on average?

Once again, I have to default back to the pharma example. If 249 out of 250 drug compounds fail in testing, is it not worth it to research drug compounds to find the 1 in 250 that works? On average, we've seen underperformance, but we've learned quite a bit more than that.

What have we learned about instruction and teacher preparation, other than that the teacher churn at KIPP means more new teachers who are in that 3-year period of learning in which they are less effective than more experienced teachers?

Teaching as Leadership (now codified in book form) is a pretty good start - at its core is a framework has come from years of research into the performance of Teach for America teachers. Also, are you familiar with Teacher U? Several years ago, frustrated at the low-quality of teacher education, KIPP, Achievement First, and Uncommon Schools got together to make their own graduate school, now called the Relay Graduate School of Education, which passes on best-practices to a greater body of teachers.

I also find your assumption here interesting, by the way. Many KIPP schools have high teacher turnover - yet many KIPP schools also tend to perform pretty well. It doesn't necessarily follow that KIPP's high teacher turnover is resulting in ineffective teaching. KIPP's success actually challenges the assumption that only career teachers can teach effectively and creates an alternative model where teaching is a stepping-stone for those who want to enter education leadership. If your logic holds, KIPP schools should be categorically underperforming peer schools.

And why can't we learn most of those sane things from high performing public schools? Or any public schools?

We can learn all kinds of great things from high performing public schools! Nobody is saying both things can't co-exist with each other - they can and they should, and everybody would benefit from greater sharing of information.

The caveat is that education reform is focused on closing the achievement gap, which means finding best practices that work for low-income (and typically high-minority) communities and with underfunded schools. There are plenty of high performing public schools - but they tend to get excellent funding and serve a predominantly affluent, white (and asian) population. High performing non-charter public schools that teach predominantly low-income and minority students ... to be honest, I can't even think of one off the top of my head. Yet I can name almost a dozen networks of high-performing charter schools that serve a low-income high-minority population.

dgodon · 10 days

I dedicated 5 paragraphs to responding, the least you could do is actually engage me instead of throwing out a one-liner.

dgodon · 10 days

Rather than ask me, you should ask the children who attend these schools, and the parents of the children who attend these "high-performing" charter schools. You can find some testimonials here:

Alternatively, you should also ask the countless parents who applied for the lottery and were denied access to these schools because there aren't enough of these excellent schools around. Clearly many of (but not all of) the KIPPs, YesPreps, IDEA Academies, Achievement First Schools, Uncommon Schools, Green Dot Schools, etc are doing something right. Something that makes parents gather up in auditoriums and pray that their kids have the opportunity to attend.

The "culling" of the student population that you speak of is comically over-exaggerated. Even in the schools with the highest turnover, KIPP still keeps 85% of its students from year to year. Lets assume none of the 15% that leave are moving somewhere - that all 15% were kicked out (a comical assumption in and of itself). Are you suggesting, then, that 85% of the students in the low-income communities that KIPP serves are the cream, and just 15% are the crop? If that's the case, shouldn't KIPP's outcomes be nearly identical to local public schools anyway? If 85% of all students are cream, there shouldn't be a noticeable difference between KIPPs and surrounding schools. Yet there is a HUGE difference in outcomes.

Also, as you suggest in your post, if KIPP is creaming the community and getting the best kids, then the local public school test scores should be depressed. Shouldn't there be an explosive collapse in local public school performance that matches the explosive increase in KIPP student performance? Yet there is no research (that I know of, anyway) that shows that communities where a KIPP school pops up start to see decreasing test scores (or any measure of academic success). If your theory is right, that KIPP is taking the best kids, then the schools next to KIPP should start to see all their success numbers fall as they get the "rejects." I would love to see some proof of this.

In any case, it's interesting that KIPP is able to demonstrate the same excellence it does in Houston and New York in New Orleans. In New Orleans, another interesting experiment, some 80% of students are in charter schools - a number that continues to grow as it approaches 100%. When 80% of kids are in charter schools, how are charter schools supposed to cull the cream from the crop? Yet the performance of New Orleans students has been increasing dramatically year over year for each of the 7 years since Katrina. It just doesn't add up.

dgodon · 10 days

There is research on both sides of charter schools. See the Mathematica Study if you're curious.

Mathematica Policy Research, a nonpartisan research firm, provides a full range of research and data collection services, including program evaluation and policy research, survey design and data collection, research assessment and interpretation, and program performance/data management, to improve public well-being.

"The positive impacts in KIPP schools are compelling in their consistency and size across diverse states and students served,” said Christina Clark Tuttle, researcher at Mathematica and co-author of the report.

And the research doesn't explain the very sudden and passionate nature of Dr. Ravitch's switching of sides. She isn't just skeptical of reform, she categorically opposes all reform and frequently questions the intentions of the reformers rather than the effectiveness of the reforms themselves. I prefer to read the work of Dr. Linda Darling-Hammond, who was critical of Teach for America 'before it was cool.' and who is actually supportive of charter schools, having started one herself.

dgodon · 10 days

What's laughable about it? Dr. Ravitch is well known for her support of charter schools and No Child Left Behind - but after she had a falling out with Joel Klein (who had let go of some of her friends who worked for the NYC DOE) she turned her back on the reform movement altogether. Perhaps due to her personal grudges, it seems that she may have forgotten that the education reform movement is about children, not adults. I think visiting some schools would do her some good.

Also, I don't recall saying that charter schools, on average, perform better than other public schools. It's well known that, on average, they perform worse, and I'm not disputing it. Charter schools aren't a panacea, they're something akin to research and development to figure out ways to close the achievement gap and improve education. Their average underperformance is expected and can be traced to a multitude of causes.

Many of these schools are in their first few years of operation. It's a little much to expect a school in its first, second or third year to perform at the same level as a school that's been around for 20 or 30 years.
Charters tend to get lower per-pupil funding, and don't get the free facilities that non-charter public schools enjoy. As a result, their admins have to spend time (that would otherwise have been used improving instruction) on finding facilities and on fundraising to close the funding gap.
The charter system in most states is not sufficiently regulated - the process of opening up a charter school is too easy, and the process of closing a failing charter school is too difficult.

Moreover, by virtue of the fact that charter schools are testing hypotheses, it's not surprising that you're going to see a lot of schools underperform as they learn more about what works and doesn't work. Once again, they're supposed to be something like the R&D arm of the education industry - they aren't supposed to be the perfect schools, their purpose is to try different things and see what works that can be adapted for all schools.

Notice that I repeatedly mention "high performing charter schools", not charter schools in general. There is a subset of states where charter schools perform exceptionally well (Massachusetts being the best example), and a subset of charter schools nationally that perform exceptionally well (KIPP, IDEA and YESPrep come to mind). What makes these schools interesting is that they serve a low-income, high-minority population - yet are still able to provide an excellent education to their students. Some of the things they are doing are working for this population of students - this should be examined and replicated.

To use an analogy, consider the failure rate in the pharmaceutical industry. For every 250 drug compounds that make it to lab-testing, only 1 drug compound actually makes it through FDA testing to human use. The other 249 compounds fail in the testing stage. That's what R&D looks like - you try many different things, and replicate the things that work. If we were to say "249 of these compounds fail - that means the system is failing and we should stop testing altogether" then we wouldn't have medicine.

http://www.pharmafocusasia.com/strategy/images/Picture49.jpg in case you're curious about the pharma pipeline.

dgodon · 10 days

Rather than yelling at the kid, wouldn't it be better to give him a hammer and let him try his wrist-based approach? By your logic, the kid has no idea what he's doing and will fail almost immediately. After having a go at it and failing, he'll probably be more open to what the experienced construction workers have to say. But what if he's right - what if his method is actually effective at hammering in nails?

There are two curious things about education reform. The first is that some reformers have actually been successful at providing low-income, minority students with a solid education. Many schools in the KIPP, IDEA, YESPrep, Uncommon, Achievement First and Green Dot networks have shown tremendous success, putting kids on a path to academic achievement and college that they otherwise wouldn't have had access to. Most people, including the parents in the communities these schools exist in, tend to celebrate these successes. If these reformers truly are like the kid who knows nothing about construction, then shouldn't all the reformers' experiments be failing?

The other curious thing is the recent shift in teacher attitudes - a shift from being open to experimentation to being hostile towards it. In the past, education reform was very niche and the economy was pretty strong, so there was very little issue taken with TFA or the charter school movement. Certainly there were many failures as both of these things were quite new, but prior to 2008, you didn't see a lot of criticism of either TFA or charter schools.

When the economy collapsed, education funding collapsed with it, and all of a sudden teachers felt threatened. Education reform in 2006 is very similar to education reform in 2012, but teacher attitudes towards education reform have shifted tremendously. The volume of criticism of TFA and charters schools exploded after 2008, even though TFA still makes up less than 0.5% of all teachers, and charter schools only educate about 5% of all kids.

All of a sudden, there is a loud and unified criticism of TFA and charter schools - a criticism that is, in my opinion, driven primarily by the recession. That's not to say that criticism is bad - it's actually great. For example, Dr. Linda Darling-Hammond's critique of TFA was the driving force behind TFA's movement to measure the academic outcomes driven by its teachers (prior to the criticism, TFA didn't care to measure these outcomes). Still, I have a hypothesis of my own - once the recession passes (knock on wood that it does), criticism of the education reform movement will also taper off.

dgodon · 10 days

On a related note, I tried posting this comment in response to Dr. Ravitch's blog post, but apparently comments have to be approved before they are made public. I guess this explains why the comments posted were so one-sided. Who knows, she just might approve it...

dgodon · 10 days

This is actually pretty easy...

Does anyone know what the reformers’ end game is?

Yes

What do they think will happen to students and schools and the quality of education if they achieve their goals?

The quality of education overall will go up, and our primary and secondary educational system will once again be competitive in the global arena. Just as importantly, the difference in the quality of education provided to students of affluent families and students of low-income poverties will become negligible. Every child, regardless of race or income level, will have the opportunity to attain an excellent education.

How will education get better if teachers live in fear of termination without cause?

Teachers will live with the same fear of termination without cause that lawyers, engineers, doctors, computer scientists, managers and all other professionals currently live with. In other words, as is the case with all other professionals, termination without cause will not actually be a concern for good teachers, and the ability to terminate teachers will have a net positive impact on the quality of education.

How will education get better if standardized tests are the sole measure of success?

Standardized tests are not the sole measure of success for education reformers. Standardized tests are only one of many measures that can be used by educators to help inform and refine their instructional planning. Education will get better when teachers teach beyond the test.

Will the “best and brightest” flock to teach if they will be rated by the test scores of their students?

Yes, but rating teachers by their students' test scores is not the goal of education reform. The "best and brightest" did not flock to teach when there was no rating system, no measure of success, no recognition of excellence and absolute job security for all teachers regardless of talent or effort. In fact, the opposite happened - teachers came from uncompetitive colleges, had uncompetitive GPAs, and half left within the first five years. To attract the best and brightest, and keep them in education, it's important to recognize and reward those teachers that are successful, and provide additional support for (or eventually counsel out) those teachers that are not successful. Treating everyone the same regardless of effort or performance discourages those who excel from entering or staying in education.

Will the “best and brightest” stay in education more than a year or two if teachers are treated with disrespect?

Honoring and respecting teachers is the cornerstone of education reform. Teachers have long been disrespected before education reform began, and the criticism is largely driven by the fact that all teachers are treated the same regardless of effort or performance. It's important to note that college-educated professionals don't typically have lifetime employment or lockstep compensation - both of these things are typically reserved for high-school educated blue-collar employees.

Will education improve if teaching is no longer a profession but an at-will job?

Virtually all professions are at-will jobs, with teaching being one of very, very few exceptions. It would certainly be a stretch to say that lawyers, computer scientists, engineers, pharmacists, managers and executives are not engaging in a "profession but an at-will job," yet all of these professionals are hired on at at-will basis.

Can anyone name any nation in the world that rates teachers by the test scores of their students? I can’t.

The reformers puzzle me.

I hope this clears things up then. I strongly encourage you to go visit some charter schools and talk to some education reformers to better understand where their passion is coming from. If you're truly puzzled by education reform and want to learn more, the best way to start isn't by demonizing the reformers, but rather by meeting them, asking questions, and listening to the answers.

They seem to know so little about children or motivation or schools or education, yet they are so certain they are right.

Once again, I strongly encourage you to go visit some high-performing charter schools and engage in actual conversation with education reformers, rather than just demonizing them. You'll see that education reform is driven by a deep concern about the quality of education and the achievement gap in this great nation. What happens to low-income and minority children in this country is nothing short of a crime, and reformers are working their tails off to try to fix it so that as many children as possible have access to an excellent education.

If you care about children, or schools or education, it would be wonderful if you could present your ideas for how to close the achievement gaps - both the gap between low-income/minority students and affluent/white students, and the gap between the United States and the 25 some nations that outrank it in educational outcomes.

Education reform is largely a trial-and-error process - reformers have hypothesis on what will work in improving educational outcomes for kids, put those hypothesis into action (typically in the form of legislation or charter schools), and replicate the reforms that are successful while cutting back on the reforms that aren't (see Gates Foundation funding for small-schools over time).

The problem with hypothesis-testing is that sometimes things don't work out. It's easy to throw stones when something isn't working on the first trial, but if everyone gave up the first time a good idea didn't work, we'd never have things like aviation and computer technology. It's also easy to question the motivations of those who are trying their hardest to alleviate the achievement gap without taking the time to get to know them, but if you put in the effort, you'll soon realize that, for the most part, reformers' care deeply about children and schools and are driven by a strong passion to do the right thing.

Does anyone know what their end game is?

Yes.

harsh2k5 · 11 days

Explore's response to the article: http://us1.campaign-archive1.com/?u=e99c0fb8f7a2b057ff2eb45db&id=e4068e6087&e=4eb9f1fc7b

missiontodenmark · 20 days

Agreed. As depressing as it has been to see the city and state fight back and forth for control over the school district, it's time to acknowledge that the system is broken. It's about time somebody puts a bullet in it.

adiamante · 21 days

Thank you!

duke_solaris

TROPHY CASE

duke_solaris

TROPHY CASE

you'll need to login or register to do that

create a new account

login