We offer the following suggestions for the President in his second term:
READ MORE

If nothing else, Education Secretary Arne Duncan has made waves. In the last four years, he has brought about incredible changes in education policy, no thanks to Congress. That’s a point that education writer Richard Colvin (a contributor to this blog) makes in a recent column in Kappan magazine. “The breakdown of the legislative process hasn’t prevented the U.S. Department of Education from pursuing what may well be one of the most far-reaching education reform agendas ever,” Colvin writes. Duncan shepherded $4 billion for Race to the Top competitive grants and created No Child Left Behind waiver program for states. Let’s not forget also that the Common Core State standards are now…well…common.

This has not made everyone happy, particularly conservatives who don’t want to see new education policies put in place by fiat. Fordham Institute Executive Vice President Mike Petrilli (whose boss Chester Finn is also a contributor on this blog) argued in reaction to Colvin’s article that the White House could have pushed for legislation instead of the NCLB waivers, even if it didn’t like where Congress was going. “Both the Senate and House passed reauthorization bills out of their respective committees, and had the administration wanted to get them across the finish line, it could have pushed for it, and I think achieved it,” Petrelli said in an e-mail. Had that happened, NCLB would have been more or less dead. But it would have been a sound legislative process.

It is debatable whether Congress would have been able to pass any bill reauthorizing the complex elementary and secondary education system. It is also worth asking whether the administration did the responsible thing in responding to the gridlock, which had real consequences for states, with its “We Can’t Wait” waiver program. But it is beyond question that everyone involved in the debate has been shocked at how difficult it is to accomplish anything. Everyone involved in the talks agrees with 90 percent of the changes that are on the table. Colvin quotes one Capitol Hill aide who quit out of frustration. I have met staffers who say that Congress has regressed more than 10 years in its thinking on education.

In spite of all this, Duncan broke through these barriers and instituted programs that education researchers will be studying for the next decade. If President Obama wins reelection, Duncan will stick around, but his impact probably won’t be as large as he continues the programs he started. He won’t have $48.6 billion in economic stimulus money to play with, and he will instead have to focus on where he can cut to meet budget constraints.

It doesn’t matter because Duncan has already made his mark.

What lessons can we learn from the Education Department under Arne Duncan? What is his legacy? How important is the waiver program in considering next steps for NCLB–i.e., assessments, testing, disaggregation? How important is Race to the Top in encouraging state innovations? Are there other, better ways that an agency can deal with an intransigent Congress? What did Arne do for us in Obama’s first term?

 
Response: We Need More Than Charm
by Jeanne Allen
National Journal
November 1, 2012

Education Secretary Arne Duncan is engaging personally and professionally. As a superintendent, he honed his communication skills, so whether he was talking to a teacher, the union president or a parent, they all equally think he’s on their side and committed to doing the right thing. He can shoot hoops with anyone, on or off the court. And he’s received praise far and wide for being so, well, so good and so reform-minded. But having listened and watched him carefully now for four years, I’m seeing a pattern. It’s the pattern of a disciplined player that knows how to get in the game, stay competitive, and never look like he’s going to miss.

Duncan’s basic formula is this: Speak to a group and mention all the things you know they are interested in; quality, charters, collaboration, we have to fix our schools, we can make them better, investment, accountability, choice, parents, engagement…. And in the process, we confuse activity with action, and policymaking with reform.

Duncan scores lots of points for reminding the nation that we have a problem and that there are many ways to solve the problem. A+ on that. And he’s tenacious in going places, meeting with people, speaking to people — keeping the issue alive. Great moves, all of it. But when it comes to his efforts resulting in substantive change that impacts student achievement, I’m not seeing any. In fact, Duncan has created a perverse incentive system where states and districts now know that in order to get money, all they have to do is promise to play ball for whatever policy prescription is on the table. Common core, teacher evaluation, turn-arounds/turn-overs/collaborative-reinvestment-engagement schemes, charter schools (though it need not matter what kind of policy one is recommending and whether it works)… The average state or local grant writer knows that once the money comes, they can have the meetings, convene stakeholders, make plans and try to do what they said they’d do, and whether or how quickly new processes and plans and goals and outcomes are sketched, they’ll keep getting paid for students based on archaic formulas that have little to do with whether children are learning.

Meanwhile, the states that have accomplished the most with reform are those where teacher tenure was significantly reformed or removed, where educators have more flexibility, where schools are turned over without account for union collaboration and where schools are scored and parents have choices. Our top ten states for Parent Power provide a key to why some states are doing better than others, if you need more context. It’s no secret why Indiana comes out number 1.

To be fair, Education Secretary Duncan’s positive, affable rhetoric and embrace of change has helped keep education hot amidst a sea of other important issues, and has allowed more Democrats to embrace changes they may have never have endorsed if it were only the Rs who were in power. He’s used the Bully Pulpit well, and that’s a clear score. But inside and outside the Ed Department, Duncan has indeed confused caused many to think they’ve already achieved significant gains because of the policies they’ve embraced. It all sounds the same, and whether or not one did performance evaluations right doesn’t matter as long as they did them, period. That means they’ll probably not push more on that, or closing failing schools, or taking on the unions, or charters or tenure, or adopt new innovations like widespread online learning or real school choice! They can claim credit and move on to another issue, which tends to be the attitude of a lawmaker not particularly engaged in education reform once they’ve done something, anything others praise. And that, I’m afraid, may be the extent of the legacy Arne Duncan leaves.

So how do these bills relate to No Child Left Behind?

The Student Success Act (HR 3989) eliminates federally mandated NCLB interventions for failing schools and replaces Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) with state-determined accountability systems. It does, however, maintain that states and districts release annual report cards with disaggregated data, meaning subgroup accountability doesn’t fall by the wayside. “Maintenance of effort” requirements that stipulate that districts will forfeit federal funding if their expenditures are less than 90% of the previous year’s expenditures is also wiped out according to this act. One can only hope this means the practice of spending frivolously just to reach certain levels will slow down, if not end. Finally, HR 3989 also eliminates “highly qualified teacher” requirements. Effective teachers make a tremendous difference in students’ lives, but the means by which “highly qualified teachers” were identified and distinguished, along with mandating they appear in classrooms, is why this measure failed to live up to original expectations. Not to mention the increased scrutiny on teacher preparation programs and colleges of education for failing to prepare teachers as best they should.

Perhaps it is because of this that the Encouraging Innovation and Effective Teachers Act (HR 3990) shifts focus to how teachers are doing in the classroom. HR 3990 requires teacher evaluation systems to be locally developed and implemented to include student achievement, incorporate multiple factors, and include feedback from all stakeholders. It suggests states and districts pursue value-added evaluation systems, meaning teachers are evaluated based on students’ learning gains rather than cut scores. Perhaps more to do with the “encouraging innovation” aspect of the Encouraging Innovation and Effective Teachers Act, numerous existing K-12 funding streams would be consolidated into a Local Academic Flexible Grant (LAFG). LAFG provides funding to states and districts to support policies that promote achievement. 10% of LAFG funds are reserved for programs outside of traditional public school systems, like tutoring or scholarship programs.

Whether these bills will get the support they need to revamp the contested federal education policy, however, remains a big question mark thanks to a partisan divide on what rewrite legislation should look like.

Twenty-six more states asked to be excused from key requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act, an exemption that would curb the education law’s impact considerably.

The states, from Washington to Mississippi to New York, were joined by the District of Columbia. Last month, the Obama administration granted waivers for all 11 states that applied in the first round. If it grants waivers to all the new applicants, three quarters of the states would be exempt.

Signed into law with bipartisan support in 2002, No Child Left Behind is now reviled by Republicans, who say it gets the federal government too involved in education, and by Democrats, who complain that its rigid definitions of performance have seen almost half the nation’s schools listed as failures. But Congress has been unable to agree on an overhaul. In response, the administration decided to let states get around central tenets of the law, such as ensuring that 100% of students pass reading and math exams by 2014.

Republicans have complained that the exemptions usurp congressional authority. On Tuesday, Republicans on the House Committee on Education and the Workforce approved two bills that Chairman John Kline (R., Minn.) said aim to “shrink federal intrusion in classrooms and return responsibility for student success to states and school districts.”

States seeking waivers have to adopt education policies favored by the administration, such as linking teacher evaluations to student test scores and adopting college- and career-ready standards. In exchange, they can create their own targets for annual student achievement and craft their own policies to help the lowest-performing schools.

“The best ideas to meet the needs of individual students are going to come from the local level,” Secretary of Education Arne Duncan said in a statement. These applications will “give states the freedom to implement reforms that improve student achievement.”

The other states that applied for a waiver in the latest round are Arkansas, Arizona, Connecticut, Delaware, Iowa, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, North Carolina, Nevada, Ohio, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, Virginia and Wisconsin.

The Department of Education said it plans to make a formal decision on the latest requests in the spring. The administration has set a Sept. 6 deadline for additional states to apply for relief from the law.

CER Press Release
Washington, DC
February 9, 2012

Jeanne Allen, President of The Center for Education Reform, released the following statement regarding today’s announcement that ten states have been granted waivers from ‘No Child Left Behind’ requirements:

“Imperfect as NCLB may be, its value to our schools and the country lies in the long-term spotlight it has thrown on the persistent failure of the system to provide even an adequate education for our children.

“Many are uncomfortable with this continuous revelation, and they should be. That’s the point.

“For decades, the actual state of student achievement was masked behind a school or district’s averaged results. Muddled with a commonly held belief – by the public and policymakers alike – that ‘good schools’ had money while ‘bad schools’ were impoverished, sweeping generalizations regarding the efficacy of the public school system belied the granular truth. NCLB’s data-demands unearthed a different reality and have allowed us to remove the comfortable excuses that helped prolong a damaging achievement gap.

“Since it’s inception, NCLB has been the target of relentless opposition from districts and Superintendents whose voices only grew louder as mandates for data collection revealed little improvement and, in too many instances, continuous failure.

“Now, ten states have been granted a waiver from the requirements of the law. These states actually believe they will succeed where so many others had failed for decades, as if commitment, passion or resolve will fix our problems. In reality, they may just turn the clock back to the decade when we were ‘A Nation at Risk’ and neither carrots nor sticks had a place in our schools. To understand that, one must truly understand the history of reform. Our newest leaders on the scene have not taken the time to look back.

“Providing states money and flexibility in monitoring school district progress without firm consequences is not reform. If school district power were the answer to our education woes, our nation would be soaring high above the rest of the world in achievement. It is not, and it will not, until our leaders – just as the people they serve – face both rewards and sanctions for the education systems they govern.”

A funny thing happened on the way to reauthorizing the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the sweeping school-reform law better known as No Child Left Behind (NCLB): The debate over reauthorization has spawned a political alliance between the tea party and the teachers unions. These strange bedfellows have teamed up to push for turning teacher-evaluation standards over to the states—in other words, to turn back the clock on educational accountability.

On the right are tea party activists who want the federal government out of everything, including establishing teacher standards. On the left are teachers unions who bridle at the notion of anyone establishing enforceable teacher standards. And in the middle is another generation of American kids who are falling further and further behind their European and Asian counterparts.

Numbers released last year by the Programme for International Student Assessment showed that out of the 34 countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the U.S. ranked 14th in reading, 17th in science and 25th in math. U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan called the numbers an “absolute wakeup call for America” and urged that we face the “brutal truth” of our children’s ability to compete in the global arena.

Yet Washington deals continue to ensure that the people who stand in front of our nation’s classrooms never have to answer for their students’ performance.

Earlier this year, Mr. Duncan told Congress that four out of five schools would fail to meet their goals under NCLB as currently written, so he pushed for the law to be overhauled with waiver packages that allowed states to circumvent the law’s strict provisions on standards. When President Obama also went on record criticizing NCLB’s “one size fits all” school requirements for the nation, the stage was set for a showdown.

After months of jockeying over waivers and what constitutes “adequate yearly progress” toward the goals laid out in the original legislation, we are now left with a legislative monstrosity that would make Rube Goldberg proud.

The species of monster with the best chance of passage is the so-called Enzi-Harkin bill, which passed the Senate Education Committee last month. It removes from existing law the requirement that states set annual goals tied to the academic performance of children—indeed it sets not a single goal or guideline for academic performance. Instead, it has vague provisions about bullying and parent engagement. These provisions are fine on their own, but are they appropriate in our most important education law that otherwise makes no mention of academic standards?

Teacher accountability and parent choice are the most important aspects of any education reform legislation. They are critical to determining what success should look like and to creating a mechanism for remediation when those standards aren’t met. There is not nearly enough within this new bill to ensure that schools are made to answer for their performance. Nor is there enough to ensure that parents have the ability to protest a failing school with their feet.

To begin fixing this, all of the current law’s language regarding teacher accountability should be reintroduced into Enzi-Harkin. In addition, the reauthorization bill could buttress the “parent trigger” efforts that allow parents in several states to forcibly transform failing schools through petition drives.

But in an election year, it seems unlikely that Congress or the White House will exert the necessary effort. Instead, Washington’s expedient right-left alliance will guarantee one thing: Schools can continue to fail our children—particularly our poorest and most vulnerable children—with impunity. Last month, American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten stated how “glad” she was that her union had found “common cause” with Republicans. If this is what bipartisanship looks like, we’re better off with gridlock.
Mr. Chavous is chairman of the Black Alliance for Educational Options.

Subject: Eugene Hickok: When a “Wavier” is an Unconstitutional, Illegal, and Immoral Mandate

Dear Colleagues,

Two weeks ago, President Obama announced his plan to grant “waivers,” from No Child Left Behind (NCLB). The plan, however, is a misnomer. The “waivers” plan does not give states more freedom. Rather, the plan forces states to comply with nearly 40 new government mandates. This is the nationalization of education policy. It would deny parent-driven tutoring to hundreds of thousands of low-income students trapped in failing schools. And it would force school choice and parental empowerment from cornerstones of education reform to afterthoughts.

In short, waivers are Unconstitutional, Illegal, and Immoral.

In undermining Congress’ role in legislation, waivers are unconstitutional. See a letter from Senator Marco Rubio to Secretary of Education Arne Duncan making that case here.

In undermining parental participation and involvement, waivers are illegal. NCLB expressly denies the Secretary of Education the right to waive the parental participation and involvement it contains. In other words, the Secretary cannot waive school choice policies, and he cannot waive common sense tutoring provisions which encourage parental engagement. By explicitly waiving these policies, the Secretary is exceeding his authority under the law. The United Farmworkers of America made this compelling case directly to the Secretary of Education.

Finally, in kicking 650,000 low-income children trapped in failing schools out of parent-driven tutoring, waivers are immoral. As Secretary Duncan has said, “children only get one chance at an education.” We already know that schools are failing to teach these low-income students. Without tutoring and school choice, they are condemned to a poor education. When we waive tutoring, we are “waiving” these children’s one chance at an education.

As advocates for school choice, parental empowerment, and state control of education, we must make our voices heard. Please blog about the issue, work with your membership and local organizations to get the word out, and contact your members of Congress to let them know you stand against waivers. Neal Urwitz, copied on this email, has all of the details, and will be happy to help.

We need to defeat the unconstitutional, illegal, and immoral waivers that will nationalize education policy. With your help, we can.

Sincerely,
Eugene Hickok
Former Deputy Secretary of Education

After the tap on the shoulder from his chief of staff, the news people interrupted and the rest, as they say, is history. Weeks later, Bush would begin anew with the late Senator Edward Kennedy, House education chair John Boehner, house education ranking member George Miller and others as they forged a new consensus that money without strings, and without a requirement for student results, would no longer be the way our government conducted business.

As No Child Left Behind took hold over many contentious days and nights of negotiation, eventually, and in large part owing to the new found camaraderie that sprang out of the tragedy of 9/11, a new law was born.

Despite its many detractors and some flaws, NCLB then, as now, continues to shine sun on an outrage that should upset the American public at its core, on a regular basis. That outrage — that fewer than half of ALL of U.S. children are not proficient in basic, needed elements of education, and that children of color lag by another 30 percent — is something that we should approach not much differently than as if a foreign power was attacking us right here on our own soil.

In the aftermath of 9/11, we were reminded that generations of students lack a fundamental understanding of history. Evil acts aside, most Americans did not understand why anyone might find our country distasteful, why we are different, and how other nations and communities have not had the benefit of the freedoms that our founders fought to provide. From that day sprang important lessons that should be taught to generations of students across the country.

Today, while U.S. students continue to struggle in geography, civics, and American and international history, the events of 9/11 continue to offer students a chance to put history and world culture in context.

Two documents are critical to that context. The first, from a woman of much history in education herself, author and historian Diane Ravitch offered this just one year after the attacks: “U.S. public schools must reclaim their vital role preparing students to become informed citizens who will preserve and protect democracy.” She offered seven important lessons, from, “It’s OK to be patriotic” to the importance of students learning U.S. and world history. The second is from the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation and is their newly published, “Teaching about 9/11 in 2011: What Our Children Need to Know.”

“Those who do not know history are destined to repeat the past.” Today as we prepare for a weekend of commemorations and recollections over the loss of life, innocence and yes, some of our cherished freedom, we need to both learn and remember the values and the facts that make our country great, and yes, even superior.

That is a role for not only our families, but also all our institutions and most of all our schools. Without a solid proficiency in all core subjects, we cannot understand, nor fight against, the causes and results of 9/11.

After the tap on the shoulder from his chief of staff, the news people interrupted and the rest, as they say, is history. Weeks later, Bush would begin anew with the late Senator Edward Kennedy, House education chair John Boehner, house education ranking member George Miller and others as they forged a new consensus that money without strings, and without a requirement for student results, would no longer be the way our government conducted business.

As No Child Left Behind took hold over many contentious days and nights of negotiation, eventually, and in large part owing to the new found camaraderie that sprang out of the tragedy of 9/11, a new law was born.

Despite its many detractors and some flaws, NCLB then, as now, continues to shine sun on an outrage that should upset the American public at its core, on a regular basis. That outrage — that fewer than half of ALL of U.S. children are not proficient in basic, needed elements of education, and that children of color lag by another 30 percent — is something that we should approach not much differently than as if a foreign power was attacking us right here on our own soil.

In the aftermath of 9/11, we were reminded that generations of students lack a fundamental understanding of history. Evil acts aside, most Americans did not understand why anyone might find our country distasteful, why we are different, and how other nations and communities have not had the benefit of the freedoms that our founders fought to provide. From that day sprang important lessons that should be taught to generations of students across the country.

Today, while U.S. students continue to struggle in geography, civics, and American and international history, the events of 9/11 continue to offer students a chance to put history and world culture in context.

Two documents are critical to that context. The first, from a woman of much history in education herself, author and historian Diane Ravitch offered this just one year after the attacks: “U.S. public schools must reclaim their vital role preparing students to become informed citizens who will preserve and protect democracy.” She offered seven important lessons, from, “It’s OK to be patriotic” to the importance of students learning U.S. and world history. The second is from the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation and is their newly published, “Teaching about 9/11 in 2011: What Our Children Need to Know.”

“Those who do not know history are destined to repeat the past.” Today as we prepare for a weekend of commemorations and recollections over the loss of life, innocence and yes, some of our cherished freedom, we need to both learn and remember the values and the facts that make our country great, and yes, even superior.

That is a role for not only our families, but also all our institutions and most of all our schools. Without a solid proficiency in all core subjects, we cannot understand, nor fight against, the causes and results of 9/11.

Secretary Duncan granting personal waivers.

Sure, NCLB is not perfect, and Congress and the past president made lots of mistakes. But the fact is that without NCLB, we simply don’t have a clue how schools or students are performing. We can argue some bars are lower and some higher, that some schools that get labeled do so unfairly. For the most part, however, it works. It shines sun on the dirty little secret of even the best schools that neglect their neediest students. And it captured our attention and put the establishment on the defensive. Most important, it gave parents a tool to use as a lever for change.

I’m not sure 82 percent of schools are really failing or that Duncan believes that. I think he wants his own lever, and Congress isn’t playing. Duncan wants to give well-meaning states and districts flexibility away from NCLB mandates. It’s too punitive, not flexible enough, he says. This from the man that wants national standards, which are hardly flexible!

Perhaps this is just a way to fulfill pre-election promises. The president did tell the unions that he’d fix NCLB. We have never quite understood how, but money was mentioned, as was more flexibility.

Republicans in Congress agree that NCLB is rigid. Congressman John Kline (R-Minn.) has been clear that he wants to fight the right balance of carrot and stick. They have bought some of the school board arguments about fairness and funding, but they also understand that throwing out the baby with the bath water gives the establishment a pass. So they are taking their time — months so far, not years — to figure out what is the best formula for both ensuring accountability for funding one receives while at the same time, giving them more leeway to respond to the pressure.

The public needs to know what we’re getting for the money we spend. Waivers don’t make parents’ jobs easier – they make school administrators’ loads lighter. I’m not for that as long as more than half of all school kids still can’t do most subjects proficiently. Let’s stop worrying about lightening loads and focus on getting kids into successful schools, punitive-feeling or not.