Tuesday, December 02, 2008

Generalizability

The Michelle Rhee story continues to percolate ever-upward through layers of media, landing on the cover of Time this week. While there are many sound policy-based reasons for supporting her reform efforts, I have to admit one of the things I like is that she talks the way I talk. Not just about education, but in general. Which isn't surprising; we're the same age and both graduated from upstate New York universities in the same year, 1992. (Mine, SUNY-Binghamton, was where people tended to enroll when they couldn't get into hers, Cornell). To wit: "What I'm finding is that our principals are ridiculously--like ridiculously--conflict-averse," Rhee says. When I was in high school one English teacher went on at length about how the ubiquitous improper use of the word "like" as a means of emphasis was a clear sign of the linguistic apocalypse. Now famous Ivy League-educated Time-cover-gracing people talk this way. (Although there's still some loss in translation--I suspect the second "ridiculously" should have been italicized.)

The story is well-written and worth reading. My biggest qualm--and it's amazing how often this happens--is on the magazine cover. Inside, the piece is titled "Rhee tackles classrooom challenge," which is fair enough. But the cover title is "How to Fix America's Schools." And that's wrong. It would be a mistake to over-generalize about the lessons of DCPS, which is (thankfully) unusual. Most school districts haven't been systematically degraded by three decades of often corrupt one-party rule. Most districts don't employ significant numbers of truly incompetent teachers. Most districts are not unequivocally the worst in the nation when compared to similar districts. Most districts get much less funding per student. Most high-poverty districts aren't funded at levels similar to the surrounding wealthier suburbs. And so on. 

The educational challenges in DC are unusual and, compared to most districts, extreme. The needed changes are of commensurate severity. Seeing DC as the definitive proving ground for larger questions about tenure, management style, etc. is not going to serve anyone's interests in the long run. The issues themselves will become over-politicized and thus harder to solve. And inferences drawn about what makes sense for other districts will be distorted by the differences with DC. 

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

I came here to comment on how DCPS isn't as Unique as your column suggested, but decided upon reading it that anyone who lays the blame where it belongs is alright by me:

After gentrification, the unbelievable incompetence of Mayor Barry political hires in DCPS has been exposed to people qualified to judge bad teachers. The major problem in DCPS was not, as everyone expected, an incompetent central administration, but in fact a majority of employees in teaching positions who had no qualifications (either soft "personality" qualifications or hard certifications).

Michelle Rhee will need to fire, at a minimum, half of DCPS teachers. This is going to cause a huge problem, but it's entirely necessary. At a school one of my kids attended double digits of teachers were fired for non-certification- some of whom were NEVER EVER certified.

My kid's very first teacher was kicked out of the school system altogether and his secondary teacher (all DCPS elementary schools have two full-time teachers per class) was fired after failing Praxis for the second time.