PATHS

Experience has taught Texans over the years to depend on certain immutables of life: there’s a radar trap lying ahead whenever a driver decides to make up lost time; farmers get either too little rain or too much; and school teachers need a raise. Or hadn’t you noticed?
In the latter case – the teacher pay raise case – Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, among others, has noticed plenty. Indeed he will be noticing until Kingdom Come or the next election, whichever arrives first. The teachers are riled but good.
Out of the school finance/school reform exercise, they seek $3,000 more per year Dewhurst and the Senate are proposing $1.4 billion in new education spending, half of which would finance $2,000 across-the-board raises for teachers. The education establishment is unhappy not to get the full $3,000. Nor does it like a proposal for taking back from non-classroom employees a $500 subsidy for health insurance. That last idea the Texas Federation of Teachers describes as “heartless.” As for the $2,000 raise, it “isn’t meaningful,” according to a spokesman for the Texas State Teachers Association.
Over the background sound of violins sobbing with anguish, you can hear the whirr of knives being sharpened – political knives. The raise already is an issue for ’06. None other than Texas’ leading granny, Carole Keeton McClellan Rylander Strayhorn, a onetime teacher herself, as well as school board president, has declared in favor of the full $3,000. Guess whom the teacher unions will be backing for govenor this year.
Money, money, money. For some reason it’s all one ever hears about – from the education bureaucracy’s side – when the topic is schools. It’s like rain in that half of the farmers’ never-get-enough equation. What we never figure out is just how much new money for schools would be enough.
Caroline Hoxby, the Harvard economist and education expert, notes in a recap of events since the “Nation at Risk” study called attention to our educational problems almost 25 years ago, that the study called forth “the largest spending growth in recent American history.
“Between 1982 and 1992, real (inflation-adjusted) per-pupil spending grew from $5,930 to $8,008. This is an increase of 35 percent in 10 years, in excess of inflation. Although spending did not rise as quickly in the next eight years, it reached $9,230 in 2000. In short, from A Nation at Risk until today, per-pupil spending has risen by 60 percent.” Largely, says Hoxby, this is because of “a substantial decrease in the pupil-teacher ratio, which fell from 18.6 percent in 1982 to 15.0 in 1999.”
To what end? Well, er, not much of an end, if you want the truth. Writes Terry M. Moe of Stanford, in the same recap (Our Schools and Our Future: Hoover Press, 2003), “...[A]fter untold billions of dollars and lofty reform packages too numerous to list, very little has actually been achieved.” Moe’s observation tallies with virtually other current assessment of American education, notwithstanding hints – hints only – that the No Child Left Behind regime is at least increasing test-taking proficiency.
Why no substantial progress since the Nation at Risk study kicked off the education reform movement? Because, explains Moe, “With rare exceptions, the only reforms that make it through the political process are those that are acceptable to the established interests and that leave the fundamentals – and the problems – of the current system intact. Most of what passes for reform...is really just more of the same and can’t possibly provide the significant improvement people are looking for.”
Meanwhile Peter Brimelow, in The Worm in the Apple: How the Teacher Unions are Destroying American Education, takes aim at “the Teacher Trust” that runs education – the same trust whose members, no matter how wretched the schools, perpetually want more taxpayer money to run them. “The Teacher Trust,” writes Brimelow, “as it has evolved over the last 40 years, is essentially a parasite. Its effect is to weaken and deform the government school system – which is aleady quite weak and deformed enough.”
Mr. Brimelow, meet Gov Dewhurst, who seems to be learning a lot these days about the biology of parasites. If Dewhurst, as he says, is “disappointed” by the harsh reception the unions gave his plan for a $2,000 teacher raise, he might benefit from recognizing that anything less than the unions ask for is automatically too little.
We could cut some corners by just delegating to the Teacher Trust full responsibility for setting pay levels; but, besides being expensive, that would just entrench the unions in their disdain for lawmakers, not to mention the taxpayers who are putting up the money in the first place.
How long, O Lord, before we catch on to what goes on with public, ah, education? Until you we do, the taxpayer is well-advised to keep hand firmly attached to wallet.
Distributed by www.lonestarreport.org
Small schools changing shape of nation's largest school system

NEW YORK — Five years ago, Sharis Wingfield couldn't have imagined attending a high school that emphasizes sports vocations and teaches kids math using batting averages. She also couldn't have envisioned a scenario where her high school would be smaller than her junior high.

But, through various twists of fate, she landed at the Academy for Careers in Sports — enrollment 306. She is now convinced a smaller school is better.

"Size is actually the most important factor," said Wingfield, an 18-year-old senior. "The attention you get from the teachers, just that individual time you spend with them ... In a bigger school there's no way I'd be doing as well."

In the last few years, New York's embrace of the small schools model has dramatically reshaped the nation's largest public school system. The city is among scores of districts — others include Chicago, San Diego and Milwaukee — that are betting smaller settings will yield higher attendance and graduation rates than mammoth high schools.

The small schools in New York are often highly specialized, with themes ranging from human rights to aerospace. There is the High School for Violin and Dance. The Peace and Diversity Academy. The Food and Finance High School. The schools generally have fewer than 600 students as well as outside partners, such as non-profit groups.

In 2001, the New York City system, which has 1.1 million students, had fewer than 1,250 schools. The addition of new small schools, which primarily serve grades 6 through 12, will swell that figure to nearly 1,450 this fall.

Some education observers say New York is forming too many small schools too quickly. They worry the schools lack a broad enough curriculum, and they question how long interest in this latest school reform movement will last.

"The problem with the current small school movement is that some people think it's a panacea, the silver bullet," said Leon Botstein, president of Bard College, a partner to one of the city's small high schools.

Education administrators say the city's school system, with a graduation rate of 54% (others put it even lower) needs emergency surgery, not more therapy. This year, a key group of small schools will graduate their first classes, and officials are betting the rates will top the citywide average.

Small schools aren't a new phenomenon to New York, but this latest wave is much larger, more centrally supported, and more closely monitored than previous versions. It's accompanied by a the phasing out of large, failing high schools — 20 in seven years — whose campuses are being handed over to small schools.

The new wave is also better-funded, thanks largely to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The foundation has poured hundreds of millions of dollars into districts and schools nationwide to promote school reform, including $130 million in New York over the last five years.

Wingfield's school, the Academy for Careers in Sports, is one result.

The school began taking students in 2002, and it is now one of three small schools that shares the campus of what used to be South Bronx High School. Students said the size was the best part because they have better relationships with teachers. Most said they liked the sports theme. The most common complaint was that there weren't enough girls.

Principal Felice Lepore boasts of solid test results and high attendance rates. Yet, space is very tight. The 11th graders use portable facilities outside the main building. The school's courses are largely basic — it doesn't offer Advanced Placement classes — with heavy emphasis on standardized exams.

David Bloomfield, who heads an education program at Brooklyn College, said the rush to create small schools has resulted in space crunches. He said some schools end up getting overcrowded because nearby facilities are being converted to campuses of small schools.

The Citywide Council on High Schools recently asked the education department to delay small-school creation until it resolves space and academic questions. The group also posited that the schools may be drawing the best, most motivated students away from other schools.

Garth Harries, head of the Office of New Schools, said space lessons have long been learned, and that newer small schools are being located in underused facilities. Future school construction — aided by $11.2 billion in funds promised by the state — could include sites specifically for small schools.

Diane Ravitch, an education historian who has often criticized the school system since it came under the control of the mayor in 2002, said the schools may be too small to adequately prepare students for top jobs or rigorous colleges.

"Since they have a small faculty, they don't have depth of staff in subjects like math, science, can't offer advanced courses, also don't have the range of electives or extracurricular activities, or a choice of foreign languages, or such things as debate club, chorus, etc.," Ravitch wrote in an e-mail.

Education leaders say that when so many students aren't performing at grade level, the basics are the top priority.

"By the same token, the alternative for those kids would be a high school that had a 30% graduation rate," schools Chancellor Joel Klein said. "For them, I don't think you're creating it remotely too fast."

The city education department says attendance and promotion rates at the new small schools are higher than citywide averages. The numbers also show the small schools serve a higher rate of minority and academically struggling students. But the new schools are still young. Many don't even have 11th or 12th graders yet.

Gates Foundation representatives say they've seen a range of results in small school efforts nationwide. San Diego and New York are considered successful so far, but other places, such as Oakland, are having a harder time.

In New York, no one is willing to predict exactly when the reshaping will end. Klein said there could be up to 25 new small schools started each of the next three years. Others said a quarter to one-third of the city's high schoolers may eventually learn in small settings. About 14% of the city's freshmen enrolled in a small school in 2005.

In the next few months, 15 small schools that started taking students in 2002 will graduate their first classes. These schools are considered models for the dozens created since under Klein's watch. Just how many students will cross the stage is something officials will monitor closely.

Wingfield is among those students slated to graduate. She's headed to Kentucky State University, a much bigger environment. That worries her a little, but not too much.

"I think there should be as many small schools as possible," she said.

A California judge suspended the state's high school exit exam as a graduation requirement Friday, saying California public schools don't fairly prepare all students -- a decision that calls into question whether the state can enforce a test of basic math and English competency for a diploma.

The ruling could allow thousands of seniors who haven't passed the controversial exam to receive diplomas in the coming weeks. But they can't be sure: State Superintendent Jack O'Connell said he will appeal quickly and seek a court order to keep the exam requirement in force until the legal battle is resolved. And for educators, students and parents, the decision deepens uncertainty about the exam's future.

The same judge could rule as soon as next week on another lawsuit that challenges whether the test can be required for graduation this year. If the exit exam is blocked in that case, the state may have to develop an alternative test -- probably allowing students to graduate without passing an exit exam for at least a year.

``Obviously there are going to be some relieved students. For them there's an immediate personal benefit,'' said Ken Schlaff, associate principal at Milpitas High School. But in terms of holding schools and students accountable for meeting a minimum standard, ``I think it's a setback,'' he said.

Ruling in this case, which was brought by 10 students who had not passed the exam, Alameda County Superior Court Judge Robert Freedman agreed that many students have not had the opportunity to learn what is on the test because of inequities in the California educational system. Nearly 90 percent of the state's seniors have passed the test -- but that rate falls to 83 percent among poor students and 71 percent of students still learning English.

``There is evidence in the record that students in economically challenged communities have not had an equal opportunity to learn the materials,'' Freedman wrote. He found that the scarcity of educational resources ``continues to fall disproportionately on English language learners,'' especially when it comes to not having qualified teachers. He also noted that the $20 million the state set aside to help seniors pass the test ran out before 166 schools districts could get funding.

O'Connell, who as a legislator first proposed the exit exam, called the ruling ``a personal disappointment'' and ``a setback for students and hard-fought accountability in our state.''

But Arturo Gonzalez, the Morrison & Foerster attorney who prevailed Friday, called the test a waste of money that could be better used to improve California schools. ``We want these kids to walk the stage and get their diplomas,'' he said.

O'Connell said Friday that it's premature to consider whether to take some interim compromise steps that might settle the lawsuits. Among options that have been suggested before: handing out ``dual diplomas'' that indicate whether or not a student has passed the exit exam, or phasing in the exit exam as individual schools demonstrate they are providing students with adequate educational opportunities to succeed.

Had those things happened, the state might not be facing two exit exam challenges today, said John Affeldt, managing attorney with Public Advocates, the San Francisco public-interest law firm that filed the second exit exam lawsuit on behalf of Californians for Justice. It raises a narrower question of whether the state adequately considered alternative ways for students to show they know the material on the test, as required by state law.

Even if he loses this round, O'Connell said he hopes the exam will be a requirement for the class of 2007.

Reaction to Friday's ruling ran the gamut.

O'Connell predicted that there would be chaos throughout the state, as school districts tried to figure out which diplomas to print and whether to schedule remedial exit-exam summer courses, and as students pondered how to plan for the future.

But Karen Fuqua, a media representative for the San Jose Unified School District, said Friday that she detected no chaos yet. ``Diplomas are really easy to print,'' she said. And only about 32 more of the district's seniors would become eligible to graduate if the exam is not required.

Upon learning of the ruling, Mayra Ibañez, a senior at Richmond High and a plaintiff in the lawsuit, said she wept with joy. ``No one will be hurt if we get our diplomas,'' Ibañez said.

Russlyn Ali, director of the Education Trust-West, a group that advocates for better schools in poor and minority communities, called the ruling ``a huge step backward for California's schools and students'' because the exam has helped spur achievement in troubled schools.

Other educators are watching the court battle closely.

``It is by no means fatal to the California accountability system if this gets postponed for another year,'' said Williamson Evers, a scholar at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. But if it is delayed for many more years, he said, ``that will break down the reform effort. If we keep postponing it, no one will take it seriously.''

Affeldt, the attorney in Monday's exit-exam case, predicted that eventually the state will come up with an exit exam process that student advocates will consider fair. But it could take several years.

``I'd like us to get there, but we're pretty far yet from being able to say with confidence that we've given every kid an opportunity to learn what's on the test.''

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contact Becky Bartindale at bbartindale@mercurynews. com or (408) 920-5459. Contact Luis Zaragoza at lzaragoza@ mercurynews.com or (408) 920-5803. 

PHOENIX—Today the Arizona legislature issued a draft budget for next year and a key sticking point in the budget negotiations is expected to be funding for all-day kindergarten. Governor Napolitano requested $105 million for all-day kindergarten funding. Rather than setting aside the funding specifically for all-day kindergarten, the legislature proposed giving this amount to school districts to spend however they see fit. A new report shows all-day kindergarten funding is unlikely to raise Arizona's poor academic achievement.

The Los Angeles-based Reason Foundation has updated and released the 2005 Goldwater Institute policy report, Assessing Proposals for Preschool and Kindergarten: Essential Information for Parents, Taxpayers and Policymakers. The new report is co-authored by Goldwater Institute President Darcy Olsen and Reason Foundation Education Director Lisa Snell.

"As the all-day k funding debate rages in Arizona, policymakers and taxpayers need facts to know if these programs are worth the investment," says Darcy Olsen, president of the Goldwater Institute.

Two states have implemented universal preschool in the last ten years, Oklahoma and Georgia. The latest National Assessment of Educational Progress test scores show that while fourth-grade reading scores have trended modestly upward nationwide, the scores of students in Georgia and Oklahoma are falling.

New findings by researchers at Stanford University and University of California, Berkeley show that preschool can hinder social development and encourage poor social behavior, such as bullying and aggression, and children who attend preschool often demonstrate a lack of motivation to participate in classroom activity. There is no widely available information on the long-term impact of preschool on these behaviors.     

Olsen continued, "Parents need to know that preschool and kindergarten can be helpful to children, but it can also be harmful. There is no evidence that children who attend preschool or all-day kindergarten perform better in school, or life. Sometimes being home with mom and dad is the best thing for a child."  

Read the updated version of Assessing Proposals for Preschool and Kindergarten: Essential Information for Parents, Taxpayers and Policymakers.

Contacts:

Starlee Rhoades, Director of Communications, Goldwater Institute, (602) 712-1257, srhoades@goldwaterinstitute.org.

Darcy Olsen, President, Goldwater Institute, (602) 462-5000 x 234, dolsen@goldwaterinstitute.org.

STANFORD, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--May 9, 2006--With Newark poised to elect its first new mayor in two decades, attention is turning to front-runner Cory Booker's promises to fix the city's troubled schools. Booker, a Democrat, has called for comprehensive reform measures that cross party lines, including mayoral control and strict financial accountability for schools. He is also a supporter of vouchers and has called for the city to partner with charter schools.

A new Education Next article by David Skinner outlines Booker's plans for an education revolution in Newark. Read "Home Is Where the Heart Is: Can Cory Booker save Newark's schools?" online today at www.EducationNext.org.

In an extensive interview with Education Next about his education plans, Booker says his first priority for the troubled district will be to make the schools safe. He wants to expand tutoring and after-school programs and create more linkages between students and potential future employers. After the State returns control of the schools to Newark in 2007, however, Booker, a critic of school boards, will pursue mayoral control of the system.

Booker has called for strict financial accountability by the district, and has suggested reforms such as extending the school day and implementing weekend and summer programs. Booker wants the city to partner with charter schools, helping them find facilities in order to build upon the success of those like the KIPP Academy and Northstar Academy.

He has held up vouchers out as an important tool to be utilized, as well. In public statements he has voiced his unequivocal support for "any kind of choice programs that are targeted toward poor children who are trapped in failing schools." It's "morally wrong," he said, for "the connected, the elected, the privileged" who send their kids to private schools "to not favor a system that creates options for parents that are now being enjoyed by those privileged elites in urban communities around our nation."

Booker is associated with several prominent school choice organizations including the Newark-based E-3. He also serves on the boards of Clint Bollick's Alliance for School Choice and the Black Alliance of Educational Options.

The dire state of Newark's schools will likely require that Booker use all the tools at his disposal. The district is a classic example of well-funded failure, writes Skinner. The city's public school district spent $17,949 per pupil compared to a state average of $12,981, while lagging far behind the state average in proficiency. Fifty-three and forty-three percent of Newark's fourth graders are proficient or better in language and math at the fourth grade level, while in those categories state boasts proficiency percentages of 78 and 68. For eighth grade students, the numbers are even worse. For Newark's high school students, the situation is dismal. In 2005, more than 60 percent of 11th graders failed the state math test. In 2003, 28 percent of seniors failed to graduate, while 42 percent graduated with only an alternative diploma. And all this is after being under state control for ten years.

Read about Cory Booker's plans to save Newark's schools at Education Next online.

David Skinner is an assistant managing editor at The Weekly Standard and editor of Doublethink magazine.

Education Next is a scholarly journal published by the Hoover Institution that is committed to looking at hard facts about school reform. Other sponsoring institutions are the Harvard Program on Education Policy and Governance and the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation.

GREENER PASTURES. A new study by KidsOhio.org, a Columbus-based group that studies children's issues, showed that 58 percent of Columbus Public School parents want to or are open to taking their children out of the city's conventional public schools. The study found that of the 601 households polled, a majority is looking to charter schools or magnet schools due to what is seen as the failings of the school district. Overall, the parents gave the school district a grade of C, citing problems such as safety, lack of one-on-one attention, and lack of communication between teachers and parents. "They better get it together or they will be losing more and more kids," said one parent. "It doesn't appear this [enrollment decline] is really going to slow down unless there is a concerted effort by the district," said director of Kids-Ohio Mark Real. The mass migration from conventional public schools to charter schools is not exclusive to Ohio. In Connecticut, an added interest in charter schools has led to a new state budget with a focus on charter schools. Per pupil funding in the Constitution State will rise from $7,625 to $8,000, money will be allotted for two new charter schools, and a new state law will also allow some charter schools to have up to 85 students per grade.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you want to be better informed about the best ways to reform our schools, you ought to study the history of American education. A good place to start might be William J. Reese's informative book, America's Public Schools: From the Common School to "No Child Left Behind (Johns Hopkins, $21.95, 333 pages).
    Mr. Reese, an education historian at the University of Wisconsin at Madison, has set out to tell the entire history of our schools in a book. As he notes in the appendix, "single-volume interpretations of the broad sweep of American education are rare." After all, the history of our schools is complicated, and most historians these days gain tenure not by writing surveys, but by producing tiny, specialized studies of little interest to anyone outside the academy.
    Mr. Reese, however, is good at showing the ways that our schools have alternated between having "progressive" educators in charge who want to make the curriculum less intellectual and more practical, and "traditionalists" who wish to purge the classes of frills and get back to teaching reading, writing and arithmetic.
    "America's Public Schools" is a fair and judicious book but has two major flaws. The publisher decided to save money by replacing footnotes with an extended essay at the end. As a result, readers who are curious about where Mr. Reese obtained an interesting quotation are unable to check his sources.
    Second, the author is relatively objective until his regrettable conclusion. He argues, among other things, that school choice is bad because it is supported by corporations, which he believes are always up to no good.
    Except for this final chapter, "America's Public Schools" does a good job in limning the main currents of American education history. Mr. Reese's book is a very good introductory survey for anyone who wants to learn more about American education, and even readers who know the subject well will find that the book provides fresh information about familiar topics.
    
    I was once asked what books on school reform someone should read if they wanted to study the best. I provided a list of four: "Charles Glenn's "The Rise of the Common School," Frederick Hess' "Common Sense School Reform and Revolution at the Margins," Diane Ravitch's "Left Back and The Language Police," and Joseph Viteritti's "Choosing Equality." Those who read these books will sharpen their understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of American education.
    Of these scholars, Mr. Hess, a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, is the youngest and has the broadest range. His recent articles are collected in Tough Love for Schools: Essays on Competition, Accountability and Excellence (AEI Press, $25, 243 pages).
    Mr. Hess has written extensively on subjects most education scholars ignore. For example, his "Retooling K-12 Giving," first published in Philanthropy in 2004, is a thorough analysis of which foundations are giving money for elementary education and high schools, and whether or not these grants are doing any good. Several essays also look at the messy ways in which teachers are given their teaching credentials, and whether or not these licenses actually show that teachers are capable of doing a good job in the classroom.
     It should be noted, however, that about half of the articles in this book aren't based on original research, but are op-eds and short articles written for a general audience. These articles have dated badly. Moreover, there's a great deal of repetition in this book, including several articles each about vouchers, charter schools, and teacher licenses and schools of education. Mr. Hess' opinions are always interesting -- except when one has read them for the fourth or fifth time.
    "Tough Love for Schools" is a below-par book by one of our best education writers. Readers who are curious about what Mr. Hess has to say should read one of his other books, such as "Common Sense School Reform."
    
    The debates over school choice have changed in the past five years. Nearly everyone now accepts that having more choices for students and parents is a good idea. The debate is now about whether or not these choices should include just public schools or private ones as well.
    In Getting Choice Right: Ensuring Equity and Efficiency in Education Policy (Brookings, $19.95, 244 pages), 12 education scholars look at various aspects of school choice. The book, edited by Julian R. Betts, an economist at the University of California at San Diego, and Tom Loveless, a Brookings fellow, presents the findings of a commission funded by the Gates and Annie E. Casey foundations. The commission's task was to look at school choice and see ways it can be improved.
    What most of the scholars show is how little we really know about how school choice affects student achievement. In one chapter, for example, a Rand researcher named Laura S. Hamilton and Kacey Guin of the University of Washington conclude that we really don't know, after all these years, why families choose one school over another.
    Two papers stand out. A research team led by Dan Goldhaber of the Urban Institute concludes in one paper that the canard that children will suffer if parents don't choose a school is probably wrong; in fact, such children do slightly better than children in districts without any school choice.
     And Mr. Betts suggests that a market could be established in high-achieving students comparable to markets that have been established for selling broadcast spectrum or the right to pollute with certain chemicals. Suburban schools with lots of top achievers, Mr. Betts argues, could pay for the rights to educate these students, giving the funds to inner-city schools with few top achievers. The inner city schools could then use the funds to make improvements such as better textbooks and more teacher aides.
    "Getting Choice Right" doesn't break any new ground. But it does remind us that educational researchers would be more productive if they spent less time theorizing about school choice and more time in the field, looking at the ways that increased choice has changed schools.
    
    Martin Morse Wooster is the author of "Angry Classrooms, Vacant Minds."

American schools are failing to teach our children to read intelligently, and "The Knowledge Deficit" explains why. You cannot be a successful reader, E.D. Hirsch reminds us, unless you understand the context in which the author is working. Competent readers depend on a store of shared knowledge that our children must learn -- but are not being taught.

Our schools are trapped instead in a nightmare of vacuous bullet-points and double-talk; teachers present "comprehension strategies" ("predicting, summarizing, questioning, clarifying") in place of plain, nourishing information. Students are shown again and again how to "classify, draw conclusions, make inferences, predict outcomes." But they still can't read intelligently. No author can possibly spell out the implied context of every sentence he writes. Children must learn to fill in those blanks -- but our schools refuse to teach them.

No wonder "children perform relatively worse on international comparisons the longer they stay in our schools," as Mr. Hirsch writes. And no wonder a 2004 National Endowment for the Arts survey ("Reading at Risk") found "literary reading" in decline across the nation and doing worst among the youngest category of reader.

Mr. Hirsch is a former English professor whose "Cultural Literacy" (1987) was a milestone in the nation's growing disgust with its misbegotten schools. In the years since, he has founded the Core Knowledge Foundation and promoted the teaching of America's "common culture." "The Knowledge Deficit" presents a perfect illustration of why it all matters: Students who don't master the common culture can't possibly become intelligent readers.

"The Knowledge Deficit" is a short but repetitive book. A scant 125 pages are enough for Mr. Hirsch to restate his argument so many times, hardly anyone could miss it. But that is exactly Mr. Hirsch's point. He is talking pure common sense; no one but a professional educator could fail to understand.

First, the good news. Most schools have finally gotten back to teaching young children to sound out words syllable by syllable -- after a long, dismal fling with "whole word" techniques in which new readers were supposed to ingest entire words at a time, like gulping a hamburger in one bite. Word-gulping has proved to be a bad way to master basic reading.

Then Mr. Hirsch gets down to business: Every educated citizen must understand America's "standard language." Children of less well-educated parents are least likely to speak this language at home -- so they must learn it at school. The author suggests that children deliver impromptu classroom talks regularly. Learning to speak well -- to organize words into cogent sentences on the fly -- helps students learn to write, which helps them learn to read.

Mr. Hirsch explains in detail why children must learn facts and not just abstract "reading techniques." Why they must read substantial, interesting pieces and not the trivial tripe modern schools prefer. Why teachers must stick to the point and not veer aimlessly from topic to topic. He argues that local control of schools and curricula is an American tradition that is no longer worth having; better for the nation as a whole to agree in detail on what all students should know. Anyway, Mr. Hirsch argues, allowing each school district to go its own way is unfair to students in a country where families are constantly on the move.

"The Knowledge Deficit" is indispensable, but it can be a chore to read. The writing is awkward. "American teachers now take it as a matter of course," writes Mr. Hirsch, "that in the same classroom they must teach students who have gained and who have not gained the most basic knowledge they need to understand what is to be taught."

And even though the author sees the problem clearly, he has strange ideas about the cause. Mainly he blames "the curse of romantic ideas." That's swinging a pretty broad sword. True, romantic thinkers of the 18th and 19th centuries went in for "natural" vs. man-made education. But a Goethe or a Heine, a Blake or a Wordsworth, assumed that his readers would sail effortlessly on a deep sea of literary and historical allusion. "Light-winged Dryad of the trees," Keats calls his nightingale, and famously compares himself to Ruth amid the alien corn. Don't blame America's crackpot ed-school theories on these fellows.

So who is responsible? Mr. Hirsch "was disappointed to discover," he writes in all innocence, that his ideas have been opposed "not only by the powerful anticontent traditions of the education schools but also by many university intellectuals."

Ever since left-leaning intellectuals took over academia in the 1950s and '60s, the intelligentsia's viewpoint and the U.S. School Establishment's have been identical. Today's deep academic thinkers want to soar into abstract, theoretical realms, not bog down in the concrete and the merely factual. Educators want to follow right behind. And American schoolchildren continue to pay the price.

Mr. Gelernter is a professor at Yale and a national fellow of the American Enterprise Institute.

Over the past decade, champions of bold K-12 education reform, ourselves included, have often termed charter schools the most promising innovation, and indeed they are. If chartering is embraced and replicated by the traditional public-education system, the impact will be profound. So it’s fitting that this week—National Charter Schools Week—educators, reformers, and policymakers are examining where the charter movement stands and where it’s headed.

We’ve noticed three main trends.  First, charter schools are educationally diverse (though they can be grouped into useful categories). Second, they face severe obstacles, both financial (see “Charter School Finance: Inequity’s Next Frontier”) and political (here’s one such example). Third, and perhaps most importantly, authorization—that is, the act of chartering or licensing these schools—is the most important factor in creating high-quality charter schools (see our new report by researcher Rebecca Gau, Trends in Charter School Authorizing).

To be sure, there’s little you can find in charter schools that doesn’t also exist somewhere in the vast and varied world of public and private schools. But the practice of authorizing new public schools—allowing them to open, overseeing their progress, even shutting them down if necessary, but not actually running them as traditional public schools are—is entirely new. This different approach to school regulation points to a promising “third way” between the laissez-faire approach of most voucher programs and the crippling red tape of the traditional school system. Getting the balance right is hard, but this is essential if charter schools are to thrive, and if the charter movement is to fulfill its great promise.

How many of today’s charter “authorizers” are doing it right? To find out, we surveyed all of them and asked how they tackled their jobs. The results are illuminating.

We learned, for example, that when authorizers don’t renew a charter school’s contract, it’s usually for academic reasons. This is how it’s supposed to be, but it flies in the face of conventional wisdom. Charter friends and critics alike have complained in recent years that authorizers don’t take strong enough action to terminate academically failing schools. Yet our data indicate that’s exactly what they’re doing. A good thing, too—the charter movement’s credibility depends on bad schools not continuing.

As for closing schools before their contracts are up, authorizers typically act not because of low test scores, but because schools are self-destructing financially or organizationally.  This, too, is appropriate. Raising student achievement takes time, and, except in unusual circumstances, new schools deserve the three to five years of their contracts to prove that they can do this. But if a school is falling apart or children are in harm’s way, patience is not in order.

Authorizers are also becoming choosier on the front end, deciding less frequently to grant new charters. Over the past two years, they’ve become significantly more selective, lowering the national approval rate from 70 percent in 2003 to approximately 50 percent today. Contrary to what we expected to find, state-mandated caps on the creation of new schools turn out not to be the main reason for this; authorizers in states both with and without caps have reduced their approval rates similarly.

This is healthy. It’s hard to run a successful charter school, and, while authorizers should remain open to promising but unproven approaches, they are right to be skeptical about half-baked ideas or wannabe school leaders who lack the educational or business acumen to get the job done. It’s important that authorizers feel comfortable saying no.

This study’s other major finding is less surprising and less welcome: almost half of all authorizers practice limited oversight of their schools, demonstrating scant concern either for school quality (e.g., not screening applicants rigorously and not holding schools accountable for student achievement, etc.) or for compliance (by ensuring fiduciary responsibility, enforcing federal laws, etc.). At the other end of the spectrum, 31 percent of authorizers are aggressive about both quality and compliance.

Only one in ten authorizers practices the “tight-loose” model upon which the original charter concept rests: a strong focus on quality and results coupled with a more laid back approach towards compliance and procedure. What happened to the mantra, “Accountability in return for autonomy”?

What happened was that reality hit hard. Experience authorizing charter schools in Ohio speedily revealed that we needed to be as concerned about the niggling details of finance and regulation as about achievement and accountability. After all, if a school is accused of fiscal malfeasance or procedural missteps, the political reaction can be swift and severe. Thus, authorizers committed to quality education soon learn to be attentive to compliance issues. 

The least enthusiastic and most numerous authorizers are traditional school districts. Only a handful of them are serious about quality and compliance, and practically none would recognize the “tight-loose” model if it landed in their laps. Lawmakers need to understand this, since the public-education establishment ceaselessly presses them to restrict authorizing to local school systems. 

Who takes authorizing more seriously? After reviewing all seven types of authorizers, we conclude that nonprofit organizations and independent chartering boards—like the one Congress created in the District of Columbia—show the greatest promise. They engage in chartering by choice, not coercion, have ample resources to draw from (financial and human), and can skillfully navigate the treacherous politics of charter authorizing. As more of them jump into the chartering fray, let us hope they continue to succeed at scale.

Now that we know that many authorizers neglect their fundamental oversight duties, it is clear that legislators should give this weighty responsibility to organizations that want it and take it seriously. We wouldn’t force educators to start a charter school against their will; the same rule should apply to authorizers. That’s the best way to make sure that the charter-school movement grows in quality and quantity in the years to come—and that National Charter Schools Week is worth celebrating.

—Chester E. Finn, Jr. and Michael J. Petrilli are president and vice-president, respectively, of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute

As Newswire and thousands of charter school advocates across the country use National Charter Schools Week to shine the spotlight on charter school success, Newsweek's latest Top 1,000 High Schools feature is giving the movement some added illumination. Set to hit the newsstands on Monday, Newsweek named 11 charter schools to this year's list. BASIS Charter in Tucson, Arizona was the highest ranked charter school, earning the number three spot. Looking at schools' ability to prepare students for college, Newsweek divided the number of Advanced Placement (AP) and International Baccalaureate (IB) classes taken at a school by the number of graduating seniors to rank the schools. BASIS Charter boasts 100 percent of graduating seniors with at least one passing grade on an AP or IB test. While charter schools make up 4 percent of the nation's public schools, 6 percent of the Top 100 schools were charter schools. The schools named in the Top 1,000 list, in order, were: BASIS Charter (3); North Hills (12); Raleigh Charter (53); Signature School (54); Black River (55); YES College Prep Southeast (87); Charter School of Wilmington (124); Walton (177); Palisades Charter (242); Chamblee Charter (268); Gateway (935).

CHARTERS ARE AWESOME. Education Secretary Margaret Spellings took the podium at the opening session of her department's charter school showcase Monday and gave high praise to charter schools, telling the more than 350 education luminaries assembled that charters are just "awesome." But even more on target was her statement that showed the idiocy of artificial caps: "It just doesn't seem right that in this great country of ours, winning the lottery is what it takes to make sure that your child gets a good education," said Spellings.

 
Washington, D.C., May 2, 2006 – Charter school students are outperforming conventional public school students in cities across the country. More than a million students who were stuck in our nation's failing public schools have found new life in charter schools. To recognize the innovation, accountability, and achievement of these new public schools, The Center for Education Reform (CER) is proud to announce the creation of the National Charter School of the Year Award. The year-long review process will culminate in a gala event during the 2007 National Charter Schools Week. The winning school will receive $10,000, a trophy, and will be featured in CER's National Charter School of the Year program.

"There are more than 3,600 charter schools across the country providing innovative opportunities for children who have been overlooked by the conventional public school system," said CER founder and president Jeanne Allen. "It's about time these schools were given the national recognition they deserve."

Using several criteria, including test results, graduation rates, and other successes, every participating charter school will be reviewed and ranked by a blue-ribbon panel of education providers, experts, and researchers. All of the nation's charter schools will receive a National Charter School of the Year Award survey before the end of the summer. Schools will have until December 1, 2006 to complete their survey and present the appropriate data online or through the mail to be considered for the award.

Charter schools are innovative, public schools designed by educators, parents or civic leaders that are open by choice, accountable for results, and free from most rules and regulations governing conventional public schools. Today, more than 3,600 charter schools serve more than a million children in forty states and the District of Columbia.

Following the presentation of the award during next year's National Charter Schools Week, CER will release the National Charter School of the Year program with an in-depth cover story on the winning school, followed by data on the top 100 charter schools in the nation. To ensure that this award is recognized by the President, CER will seek the assistance of the Department of Education and the White House.

"Our polling over the last two years has shown that the public is still uninformed on the issue of charter schools," said Allen. "We hope that this program will shine the spotlight on these innovative schools and will provide CER with more comprehensive data to promote education reform across the country."

Check www.edreform.com in the coming weeks for more information about the National Charter School of the Year Award, or email cer@edreform.com.
 

When the first charter school opened its doors in 1992, even the most optimistic education reformer could not have predicted the success and growth these innovative public schools have seen in the last 15 years. Charter schools have experience double-digit annual growth since the mid 1990s. Currently more than 3,600 schools serve over a million students in 40 states and the District of Columbia, with thousands of students on waiting lists.

But as charter schools grow and demand swells, the public remains uninformed about these innovative and accountable public schools. After two years of nationwide polling, The Center for Education Reform has discovered that only 20 percent of those surveyed can correctly identify a charter school as a public school. However, support grows with knowledge. Once charter schools are identified as accountable, independent public schools designed by educators, parents and others, 92 percent of respondents said they support the concept.

With support for charter schools from all political parties - Republicans (87%), Democrats (74%), and Independents (70%) - it is the charter school community's job to get the word out to the public. This National Charter Schools Week, reach out to a friend, relative, or neighbor and tell them to Visit a Charter School Today. 

Spreading Success One Charter at a Time

The obstacles charter schools face on a daily basis can be daunting. From hostile school districts and teachers unions to weak charter school laws, starting and operating a charter school is not for the faint of heart. But all across the country charter schools are overcoming the hurdles to provide a better education for all children. Here are some examples of these charter school successes:

GOING PLACES. Why travel the world if you can get a global experience at your school? The students of Charter Conservatory for Liberal Arts and Technology are learning about the world with hands-on experiences every day. From meeting foreign college students and talking with them about their home countries to raising $1,200 in the Relay for Life to save acres of rain forest, the students get an education that allows them to look beyond Statesboro, Georgia. With the help of a Learn and Serve Grant, the students used all of their global knowledge for their "Walk Around the World" project, which featured each area of the school as a different continent. Over 300 visitors were treated to a rainforest, sushi, an Italian gondola ride, and a visit to a Native American village. With all of the places these children have gone with their imagination and the school's innovative curriculum, there is no doubt they will be going places when they graduate.

DRIVING EXCELLENCE. Not everyone can see the link between the automobile industry and charter schools, but a businessman certainly can. And that's what brought Denso Corp., an affiliate of Toyota, to the town of Osceola, Arkansas. Denso saw that the town's educational system was improving with the help of Osceola Academic Center of Excellence and moved in with the hopes of recruiting some of the next generation of well-educated charter school students. Like good businessmen, they looked at the data. They saw that 6th graders at Osceola Academic Center of Excellence were scoring more than 10 points above students in conventional Arkansas public schools in standardized math tests. The future looks bright for those 6th graders and for the companies lucky enough to scoop up these bright students.

BEING HEARD. With the help of a grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation "What Kids Can Do" program, Jenny Williams, Alex Jacobson and Aaron Klein of Minnesota North Star Academy are making dining out a little bit easier for deaf patrons across the country. A charter school for the deaf and hard-of-hearing, Minnesota North Star Academy teaches students with American Sign Language and English and encourages school projects. Jenny, Alex, and Aaron took the project to the national level, working with T.G.I. Friday's to create a training video and campaign to help restaurants better accommodate deaf patrons. The program is being picked up by the nation's more than 500 T.G.I. Friday's restaurants.

THEY'RE CRAFTY. Four Rivers Charter Public School, a 7-12 grade charter school in Greenfield, Massachusetts was built around the importance of craftsmanship. The school looks at craftsmanship as anything from writing, reading, and revising a paper to making sure the font and heading is correct. It is that meticulous attention to detail without stifling creativity that has allowed the eighth graders to accomplish what nobody would expect of children their age. The students have written and published a collection of original fables accompanied by their own artwork and illustrations. The creativity and hard work of the current students attracted a waiting list of more than 100 children in the school's admissions lottery on February 28.

MUSIC CITY MODEL. Nashville's first charter school, Smithson-Craighead Academy, has set the bar high for charter schools in the city. The school's TCAP scores jumped 28 percent in reading, 24 percent in math, 19.7 percent in science, and 20 percent in social studies in 2005. As a school chartered to help students previously enrolled in low performing schools, it seems Smithson-Craighead Academy has figured out how to help the children perform.

DID YOU KNOW? … The nation's first charter school, City Academy in St. Paul, Minnesota, opened in 1992. Today, the school is still going strong, serving more than 100 at-risk students in a low-income neighborhood. According to the Minnesota Department of Education, City Academy has a 97 percent graduation rate.