More Truth

Hey Folks -

Education is a mess for many reasons, but the real reasons are almost never mentioned.

A wise person has said: "Every system is perfectly designed to give you exactly what it gives." If we want something different, we need to change the system. If we want to improve education, we will have to improve the standard of living for the poor and working classes.

That would cost too much; so we keep the old system and - besides scapegoating teachers and their unions - dress up what we have in shiny clothes and promise miracles that lead to nothing but new shiny promises.

This is a fact many teachers have observed over their professional lives, but in my 63 years of life, I've never seen it argued in the public media. Good for Professor Stephens!!

Below is, first, my letter to the professor and then his column.


- Uke Man


Dear Professor Stephens,

Thank you for speaking a long-suppressed reality. As a retired teacher (31 years) I can attest to the accuracy of your analysis regarding the revolving door of educational panaceas.

Parents' desire to have "all the children above average," businesses' demand that all highschool graduates perform at college-graduate levels for highschool-graduate wages, and the political desire to spend as little as possible on education all combine to create an interminable parade of shiny but empty promises.

I doubt that your excellent suggestions for addressing this self-delusion will be heeded, but I am, nevertheless, gratified that someone has publicly made the point - at last.

Thanks - Tom Harker



Charter schools need more oversight
Saturday, March 15, 2008
By Thomas M. Stephens

The history of public education is punctuated here and there by silver bullets that claimed to raise intelligence, cure learning problems, teach infants to read and normalize emotionally disturbed children.

These and other dubious promises reappear in ever more sophisticated wrappings, much like the spiels of the snake-oil salesmen of yore. They are promoted as tests, methods, materials, special diets and organizational schemes ranging from special schools to modified groupings, often giving false hope to parents, educators and lawmakers alike.

Amazing claims appear first in the popular media, inspiring distraught parents through anecdotal tales, hopes and questionable research. Later, after the sizzle fizzles, evidence of their failures is hidden in obscure professional journals, where they are read, if at all, only by those who tried to warn us early on.

Under the comforting umbrella of charter schools, called community schools in Ohio, we are offered panaceas for intractable education and social problems. I do not suggest that charter schools are unscrupulous and are making false claims. But the way they are created, promoted, funded and monitored in Ohio makes them open to questionable promises and practices. At stake are a lot of money and the education of thousands of students.

Ohio's share of the federal Public Charter School Program since 2001 is $161 million. The average award to a charter school is $450,000 over three years. In addition, Ohio taxpayers provide $5,565 annually for each student from local school funds. School districts are required to transport students at no cost to charters. Last year, Ohio's 310 charters enrolled about 77,000 students and received $532 million in state funds transferred from local school districts.

Of the 611 school districts in Ohio, 607 have students in charters. So, what quality does Ohio get from charter schools? Last year, 57 percent of charters were in academic watch or academic emergency. Eighteen percent of those sponsored by school districts were rated excellent, compared with 8 percent sponsored by other entities.

Charter proponents argue that such a comparison is unfair because they enroll more "at-risk" students. But only 19 percent of public schools in the eight urban areas that enroll most such students are in academic emergency, compared with 38 percent of charters in these same districts.

Ingredients that help create quality schools often are lacking in charters: seasoned teachers, experienced leaders, comprehensive offerings and good physical facilities. These and other important factors are not even evaluated directly by the state.

Oversight, when it occurs, is merely a written report made by the sponsor of each charter, much like a meatpacking plant without on-site inspectors.

Charters are supposed to provide quality educational options. Yet, the few studies that have been done don't show any significant improvements over public schools and often suggest that they are inferior.

More accountability is needed to continue charters with public funds. Ohio should have experimented with a few charter schools over several years before funding so many of them. Instead of educationally sound options, we have questionable quality.

Thousands of students and their parents rely on charters without assurance that what they are getting is better or even as good as they would have received had they remained in their home schools.

How can this situation be improved? First, place a moratorium on charter schools until a research-based system is in place. Then create an oversight body free of politics, with teeth, which has specific standards based on empirical evidence. Provide on-site inspections through the Ohio Department of Education under the direction of the independent group. Require schools that are out of compliance to make corrections before funding is resumed. And don't lift the moratorium until evidence shows that the existing ones are at least as good as traditional programs.

Public funds will be well-spent only when the state is willing to provide educational options with sufficient rigor. Otherwise, another silver bullet will ricochet into history.

Thomas M. Stephens is professor emeritus, College of Education and Human Ecology, Ohio State University, and executive director emeritus, School Study Council of Ohio.
etstephens@copper.net