Time for a Reboot
Ed reform is dead. Long live ed reform. Chester E. Finn, Jr.
Ed reform is dead. Long live ed reform. Chester E. Finn, Jr.
On the whole, the new guidance from the U.S.
There’s a lot of talk about disruptive innovation these days. It seems hardly a month goes by that we don’t see some sort of exciting new innovation that changes an industry. Sometimes it happens over and over again in the same space. First we had paper maps that were replaced by custom driving directions we could print out from MapQuest (remember those?).
Over the last month or so, there’ve been a number of notable stories highlighting the passing of the torch from urban districts to urban chartering. The former continue their long, slow decline while the latter experiences the exhilaration and growing pains of emerging adulthood.
With the release last month of the latest round test scores, Success Academy founder and CEO Eva Moskowitz is now a bona fide national-education-reform celebrity. She is also the latest in a line of educator-activists—like Michelle Rhee or Diane Ravitch—who embody, for supporters and opponents alike, one “side” of the education-reform debate.
On September 3, I participated in a launch event for Mike McShane’s new book, Education and Opportunity, a publication of AEI’s
Being an education reformer is often frustrating. No matter how zealously we push an idea or how smart we think it is, sometimes nothing changes. Or—the Common Core is a recent example—we make fast, bold gains at the outset, only to see our efforts watered down, neutered, or repudiated outright...
Back in May, Fordham published Expanding the Education Universe: A Fifty-State Strategy for Course Choice, where we explained the idea of “cour
Marc Tucker is the author of an important new report: Fixing Our National Accountability System. Although Marc and I disagree on the promise of Relinquishment (most specifically on charter schools), I agree with much of this thinking. But, in this report, Marc makes a strategic mistake in dismissing choice-based reforms. To put it another way: if there is a grand bargain to be made that significantly increases student achievement in the United States, it could look like this: Reduce testing frequency and increase testing rigor Improve the quality of the teaching force Increase charter schools and choice
I’ll have what she’s having.
A look at the most-recent evaluation of Florida's Tax Credit Scholarship Program shows some surprising findings with regard to math and reading scores.
As a huge fan of both school choice and the NFL, I love the idea of a major star leading a great school and becoming a voice for school reform. Successful athletes who take time to give back, work with young athletes, and ensure kids get a great education should be commended, right?
David Kirp had a piece in The New York Times on Sunday: Teaching is not a Business. You should check it out. My take on his piece:
A new Mathematica study persuasively puts to rest a common charge leveled at KIPP charter schools: that their test score gains are largely attributable to the attrition of their lowest-performing students. The authors compare nineteen KIPP middle schools to district schools and find no meaningful difference among those who walk in the door of each type of school.
Peet’s Coffee and Tea: We hardly knew you. According to the Columbus Dispatch, Peet’s coffee shop in downtown Columbus will close after less than a year of operation.
Competition is healthy in many areas of American life, including education.
How can cities with copious educational choices make those options work better for families?
Three recent news stories you might have missed.
It feels like there are two very different charter-school conversations going on. The first is about policy and practice; the other is about philosophy and politics. Both have their place. But a recent collection of events and articles demonstrate why it’s important to understand the difference between the two.
We take a look at the results of a recent survey of the public's attitudes toward the state of education in America.
Bravo to Fordham’s original gadfly!The National Alliance for Public Charter Schools yesterday inducted Fordham president Chester E. Finn, Jr. into its Charter School Hall of Fame—established to honor pioneers in the development, growth, and innovation of charter schools.
School choice is a done deal in this one place, and we could learn a lot from it.
Fordham has long been a supporter of results-based accountability for private-school choice programs.
Over the past three weeks, Fordham’s Flypaper blog hosted the charter school wonk-a-thon, an exercise in punditry and policy analysis that exceeded all expectations.
Ladies and gentlemen, the voters have spoken and the wisest wonk in the land is…Joe Siedlecki of the Michael and Susan Dell Foundation, edging out Michael Goldstein of Match Education, 35 to 27 percent. It’s the biggest upset since Brat beat Cantor! (Granted, that just happened Tuesday.)
A common gripe among choice kvetchers is that private schools that participate in voucher and tax-credit scholarship programs “cherry pick” the best students. This research by University of California professor Cassandra Hart finds evidence to the contrary.
While proponents of school choice often base their case on student achievement—contending that choice-based accountability leads to school improvement and stronger pupil attainments—opponents seem likelier to argue against choice on the grounds that it fractures communities and undermines democratic values.
Back in college, one of my political science professors wanted to make a point to a lecture hall full of know-it-all freshman.He asked all of us to think back to when we were first getting interested in politics and developing positions on major issues. For most of us at this inside-the-beltway university, that was early.
Over the course of thirteen days, Flypaper’s Charter School Wonk-a-Thon produced eleven posts jam-packed with sound analysis on charter school policy today. But who was the wisest, wonkiest wonk of all?