Is school reform progressive?
At its core, to be "progressive" is to fight for the niggling guy against powerful forces of self-involvement.
Whether the little guy was a Kansas farmer whose earnings were manipulated past commodities traders in Chicago, a woman denied the right to vote, an underpaid working man seeking union representation, blacks oppressed by segregation, or a depression-level civil servant forced to pay homage to a powerful political machine, progressives made them their crusade.
In teaching, the little guy was historically the instructor and over the years, many progressive reforms were adopted to serve and protect teachers: higher pay, health intendance and retirement benefits, tenure, seniority and professional person development.
Related: Black kids lose when Autonomous ed reformers act like Republicans
Along the style, however, we too realized there was an fifty-fifty littler guy than the teacher in demand of protection – the student. The Supreme Court recognized this in 1954 and ruled that segregated schools are unconstitutional.
Congress recognized it in the 1960's by passing a law providing federal funds to counter inequitable state and local funding for low-income students. Congress went further in the 1970's when they passed a law to protect students with disabilities.
Past the 1990's at that place was a serious call for college standards and more than ambitious accomplishment goals. And then in the 2000's we passed a constabulary mandating accountability – all to protect the littlest guy of all – the student.
Today, that law, for all its flaws, still stands. It'south been amended by the electric current assistants through executive activeness, but the essence remains: accountability to protect the lilliputian guy.
Related: Next generation of activists confronts Mississippi'south violent past on Freedom Summer anniversary
Recently, pedagogy professor Andre Perry suggested that some reforms are at odds with the progressive traditions of the Democratic Party. Citing outcomes from the contempo midterm elections, he writes, "No Democrat owes a victory to pedagogy reform."
Perhaps, though several pro-reform Democrats will keep or occupy governor's mansions in January, including John Hickenlooper in Colorado, Andrew Cuomo in New York, Gina Raimondo in Rhode Isle, and Dannel Malloy in Connecticut.
"… parents won't wait forever for improve schools and the party that delivers them has a promising future."
Meanwhile, Democratic losses in traditionally blue states of Illinois, Massachusetts, and Maryland can hardly be blamed on their support for educational activity reform.
In whatever case, Perry'due south argument is that the reform agenda – public lease schools, accountability and competitive grant programs – is essentially a Republican agenda that puts the Autonomous political party at state of war with its base – specifically teacher unions.
Commencement of all, this argument overlooks obvious areas of agreement among reformers and unions. For example, near reformers join teachers in supporting more funding.
Related: Confronting tenure? Here's why you might want to make an exception for your child'due south teacher
It's worth remembering that the pro-reform Obama assistants provided nearly $60 billion to save some 400,000 education jobs during the recession. This money came with no strings attached and dwarfed the assistants's "reform" initiatives.
Both national unions support higher standards. Both national teacher unions and some state and local affiliates also embraced competitive grant reforms they now oppose, including teacher evaluations based in role on pupil achievement, and interventions for depression-performing schools. Fifty-fifty on issues like merit pay, some unions agreed to pilot programs that cistron performance into compensation.
That is not to propose unions are hypocrites for changing their positions just but to bespeak out that unions and reformers were not always at odds on these issues and neither are monolithic in their views.
Perry likewise singles out the tenure consequence as an instance where unions and reformers differ, but it warrants a little nuance. Some people conflate reforming and abolishing tenure, but well-nigh reformers, including the people behind the lawsuits in California and New York, are simply for raising the bar on tenure, not eliminating it.
And then the real open up question is, who are the real progressives?
Are they the ones protecting educational jobs for teachers or the ones trying to ameliorate educational outcomes for children? Are they the ones insisting that better education cannot overcome the effects of poverty or the ones insisting that it must?
Are they the ones insisting that traditional public schools are the only option for kids or the ones fighting to give low-income parents more than options?
Polls prove strong back up for choice among minorities and Perry concedes as much, citing a survey from the Blackness Alliance for Educational Options (BAEO).
Perry then takes to task the teacher unions for resisting selection but so inexplicably criticizes Democrats because, "They have non articulated how they tin can create more quality, public options."
This is especially baffling, given that he credits the Obama administration for expanding charter schools. He could review New York Governor Cuomo's speech in Albany final winter earlier a crowd of thousands of pro-charter parents. There are countless other examples of pro-charter Democrats at every level of regime.
Related: Obama sells Race to Superlative, early-childhood education in State of the Union
Perry goes on to say that, "Democratic reformers' stand against labor is simply bad long-term strategy for the Party. Virtually importantly, it'due south non progressive."
Given that Education Mail service'south parent poll shows broad back up for loftier standards, accountability and choice among minorities who at present brand up the majority of public schoolhouse students, I argue that reformers' stands against unions are less the problem for Democrats than the unions' stand up against reform.
Insofar every bit it'south students – the littlest guys of all – who are nearly at risk from low standards, weak accountability and the lack of better educational options, knee-jerk opposition to reform is definitely not progressive.
Whether Democrats can marry the reform calendar to its traditional labor base depends both on whether reformers can rein in some of their excesses like over-testing and low-quality charters and whether teacher unions are willing to change from an industrial-style union to a self-regulating professional person organization.
Either way, parents won't wait forever for ameliorate schools and the political party that delivers them has a promising future.
Peter Cunningham is the Executive Director of Education Post, a Chicago-based non-profit supporting individuals and organizations working to amend public instruction, and a onetime Assistant Secretary in the U.Southward. Department of Education (2009-2012).
cawkerfacquirling.blogspot.com
Source: https://hechingerreport.org/school-reform-progressive/
0 Response to "Is school reform progressive?"
Post a Comment