[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

new study on CA school reform


In today's Sacramento Bee.

Here's a link to the studies:
http://irepp.stanford.edu/projects/cafinance.htm

*********************************************************************************************************************************************************************

State education report gets rapid assessment
New research is likely to influence how funds flow to schools.
By Laurel Rosenhall - Bee Staff Writer
 Thursday, March 15, 2007
http://www.sacbee.com/293/story/138393.html
Virtually every interest group in California had something to say about a package of 22 education reports that was unveiled Wednesday and continues to roll out today.
The massive, much-anticipated study -- conducted by Stanford researchers at the request of the state's political leadership -- says California's education system is fundamentally broken and additional funding alone won't assure that all students learn the skills they should.
In response, business leaders said schools need to focus more on work ethics and personal responsibility before they would support additional funding. Civil rights groups said the state needs to target more money at schools serving the poor. A coalition of parents and school board members called for more communication on how money for schools is spent.
And the president of the state's teachers union said change is welcome -- as long as it comes with more money. 

Seeing a trend?
Tension between policy reform and school funding is likely to be the most contentious aspect lawmakers confront as they turn the report's findings into reality -- something they pledged to do.
"These studies confirm what I have been saying all along: that even though we are making all of these great investments in our kids, it's the system itself that needs to be fixed," Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said in a news conference with Stanford researchers and political leaders.
"We can't talk about additional spending without talking about those serious reforms."
Reform being one of the governor's favorite themes, he declared that 2008 would be the "year of education reform" in California, using the Stanford studies as a basis for change.
But education changes have not been easy for Schwarzenegger so far. And one change the study calls for would likely rekindle his 2005 conflict with the politically powerful teachers union over tenure -- how much time it takes for teachers to gain permanent employment status.
Many terms of teacher employment need a major overhaul, researchers found. The report criticized their rigid salary structure, the short amount of time it takes for them to earn tenure, arbitrary requirements in teacher training and a lack of flexibility for principals to hire and fire their staff.
"It is excessively difficult to dismiss weak, ineffective teachers," said Susanna Loeb, a Stanford education professor who led the research project.
"Principals rank the ability to dismiss ineffective teachers ahead of additional resources on their list of priorities."
Barbara Kerr, president of the California Teachers Association, dismissed many of those ideas.
"This little piecemeal approach of, 'Oh let's fire a couple teachers,' ... that's not going to work," Kerr said. 

"We need to look at change in education, adequately funding it."

There's that word again.
The studies released Wednesday did not touch on how much more money should be spent on California schools. Those findings will be released today and are expected to amount to tens of billions of dollars. That's on top of the $66 billion the state now spends on schools.
The studies Wednesday focused on how schools are governed and how effective they are. Among the major findings:
? The current funding system is "complex and irrational" and based on outdated funding formulas. The flow of money from the state to the schools is uneven.
? Schools are overly regulated and mired in paperwork. An abundance of laws and rigid policies keep principals from concentrating on student learning.
? Data collection is a mess. No one -- legislators, principals, nor parents -- has the information necessary to make good decisions because the state's data system is incomplete.
Researchers said that a good data system would follow students and teachers over time, linking them together and to the programs they participate in. That would allow educators to know which practices -- and which teachers -- effectively help students learn.
But the idea of a data system that links individual teachers with student performance is typically unpopular with unions. 

"We're not interested in a grading system," Kerr said.
"That does exactly the opposite of what you want to see. You want to see teachers willing and able to go into our most difficult schools and help those kids improve."
Even though the studies were requested by a bipartisan group -- the Republican governor along with Democrats Fabian Núñez, speaker of the Assembly; Don Perata, leader of the Senate; and Jack O'Connell, superintendent of schools -- they are sure to generate political debate beyond policies on teachers.
Schwarzenegger reiterated Wednesday that he has no interest in increasing school funding until the broken governance system is fixed.
But O'Connell said the reports show the need for two more R's in education: Reform and resources. Núñez echoed the message, calling for "reformas y recursos" as he addressed Spanish-language media.
David Gordon, superintendent of schools for Sacramento County, sits on the Governor's Committee on Excellence in Education, which will use the Stanford studies to develop an agenda to improve schools.
If school funding increases, Gordon said, "would you spend it on more time -- a much longer school day or school year? Would you spend it on reducing class sizes? Or some combination of those two? I think there will be major debate on those issues."
The 22 studies amount to more than 1,000 pages of research and cost $3 million. Four philanthropic groups paid for the studies: the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the James Irvine Foundation and the Stuart Foundation.
Marshall Smith, of the Hewlett Foundation, said the purpose of the project "was to carve out common ground for a serious and substantive conversation that will lead to meaningful reform." 

And perhaps more money.