While I’m still digesting the papers and footage from the recent day-long Rethinking Education Governance for the 21st Century symposium (sponsored by Fordham and the Center for American Progress), I want to call your attention to some intriguing outlier governance events and stories.
First, on NPR recently, CNN host Fareed Zakaria said that the Founders were so “obsessed with the problem of absolute power” that they created an unworkable government. “The system in Washington is so unwieldy that in order to get everybody to agree, [it] would seem to take a miracle and would perhaps take decades.” Is that good or bad? (Checker and Mike suggest that, as far as education governance goes, we’ve got to return more powers to the states.) On the same NPR show, former Congressman Mickey Edwards argued that the problem is not the Constitution – and the governance structure it created – but the party system. Sure, you can create an efficient government, like China, said Edwards, “the people just get in the way.” He continued: “Well I think that’s nonsense. We don’t need to change to a system that gives more power to the top…What you want is more power in the people. You have to figure out what’s denying them that power, whether it’s the political primary system [or] whether it’s the redistricting system; figure out what the problems are and solve the problems.”
Second, at yesterday’s Manhattan Institute symposium celebrating Marcus Winters’ new book – Teachers Matter: Rethinking How Public Schools Identify, Reward, and Retain Great Teachers – guests were treated to some provocative governance proposals about the profession – and not just from Marcus, who suggests that “how we structure government to get the best out of our teachers” is one of education’s highest priorities. Chris Cerf, acting Commissioner of Education in New Jersey, and a panelist at the event, repeated some of what he said at the TBFI/CAP conference; i.e. that the hardest thing now is getting the political will to change the policies that prevent successful education. “We’ve got to become radicals,” he told the Harvard Club audience of what seemed to be mostly reform sympathizers. Encouraging “a thought exercise,” Cerf asked the audience what the chances were of state legislators choosing “sound public policy” over “political interests.” “Five percent?” one audience member suggested. “That’s optimistic,” said Cerf to much laughter. He suggested that reformers have to create a climate in which sound public policy is, in fact, in a policymaker’s political interest.
Evan Stone, co-founder of Educators 4 Excellence, made a plea that teachers “have a say in governance questions.” (Teacher unions were variously characterized as “the elephant in every room,” “necessary evil,” and “not meaningful partners” by speakers. Stone suggested that the unions aren’t really representing the voices of active teachers, but rather retirees and non-active teachers, which comprise some 70 percent of union membership.) Seth Andrew, superintendent of Democracy Prep charter schools, echoed the sentiments of the other panelists when he said that there were too many “barriers to entry” for folks who might make good teachers. He also pointed out that the parent voice is all too often left out. “We’re called Democracy Prep, not Generic Prep,” he pointed out. Finally, Joel Klein, the keynoter, said that he now believes that the key leverage point for education reform is choice. “Kids with the greatest need,” he said, “have no choice.” Klein made several references to his favorite baseball team. “Can you imagine the Yankees with LIFO?” he asked, referring to the Last In First Out system of dismissing teachers. “They would have had an even worse season.”
Finally, I’ll highlight the recent AARP Bulletin just for the cover headline: “How air conditioning, cable news and Thomas Jefferson created the mess in Washington.” It’s worth getting old just to see this one.
