The everyman

Education polls

[You can view the PDF here.]

Each year, for thirty-eight years, Phi Delta Kappa, an education journal and Gallup, a pollster, have sought to capture a “continuing analysis of public opinion in American education” since its first poll in 1968. The findings offer a unique perspective on education and the everyman.[1] An analysis:

No problem here
One of the most striking results is the disparity between the perception of local schools and the nation. Forty-nine percent of parents give their local schools a rating of an A or B, but nationally only twenty-one percent of parents concur. The national majority of fifty-one percent is inclined heavily towards a C. Parents attribute the largest problem facing public schools to a lack of funding (24%), trailed by overcrowded schools (13%), and lack of discipline (11%).

The conclusion, captured by Time, is that more than 55% of the public is dissatisfied with the nation’s schools; a sobering 61% believe schools are in crisis – with 52% believing that schools are worse than they were twenty years ago.[2] When asked where the United States ranks internationally, the response was uncharacteristically unsettled (see chart).

The achievement gap
A resounding 88% of respondents agree that closing the minority achievement gap is very or somewhat important, and 81% agree that the gap can be narrowed “substantially” while keeping high standards in place. Fifty-seven percent of respondents believe that it is the responsibility of public schools to close the achievement gap. The results on this front are rather disconcerting: only 49% of public school parents agree whereas 60% of adults with no children in school do. Among parents with children in school, those who believe that it is the responsibility of schools to close the gap, their 49% is nearly balanced by the 46% of parents who disagree.
Who’s the boss, boss?

Fifty-eight percent of respondents believe that the local school board should have the greatest influence, followed by 26% in favor of state, and 14% in favor of the federal government. Incidentally, when asked of the biggest impetus for teachers leaving their profession: 96% believe that the lack of parental support is very or somewhat important, a sentiment shared by teachers in Joel Spring’s analysis of American education.[3]

Teaching and testing
In terms of curriculum, 58% of respondents (a 31% increase over 44% in 1979) believe that a wide variety of courses should be available. Respondents are nearly split, by 47-44% in believing that the curriculum needs to be changed to meet “today’s needs” and those who believe it already meets those needs respectively. The percentage who agree that the school curriculum needs to be changed, has increased a striking 51% from 31% in 1970.

When asked of testing, 39% of respondents believed that there was too much emphasis on achievement testing in public schools, an emphasis that 67% of those who agree believe will encourage teachers to teach to the test, of which 75% believe is a bad thing. All the same, 63% of respondents are in favor of a mandatory high-school exit exam.

Thinking about reform
Revealingly, Time respondents split evenly on the effect of the No Child Left Behind Act – 35% each viewing the law’s impact as positive or minimal. Twenty-three percent viewed the act’s impact negatively. Phi Delta Kappa’s findings on school reform are rather ambiguous: 71% of respondents support reforming the existing education system, whereas 24% support finding an “alternative” system. The distinction between “reform” and “alternative” is distressingly unclear to draw any decisive conclusions. Kansas would describe its proposal as reform within the existing system – preserving the ideal of empowering public schooling by reforming the means by which it is realized through enhanced autonomy.

All the same, it would appear to be a difficult argument to make: 60% of PDK respondents oppose voucher programs, and only a slim majority of 53% support charter schooling. Kansas stresses that the opposition is directed towards a two-tier system of public and private schooling, an opposition that is shared by this paper. Kansas stridently defines public education as free – in cost and autonomy, meritocratic, and equal. These ideals are the heart of the paper’s proposals. The apparent hostility to reform is nonexistent and muddled inferences irrelevant.

Doing something
Forty-nine percent of respondents agree that preschool programs for children from low-income and poverty-level households would do a great deal of benefit. Crucially, sixty-six percent would agree to more taxes to such programs, a sentiment that is echoed broadly in Time’s general measure of support by a margin of 59-38 percent.

Some fifty-seven and 73% of respondents believe that elementary and high school students are not working hard enough. Forty-nine versus 48% oppose increasing the amount of the school day. Of those who support increasing the school day, 66% over 31% support increasing the school year over the school day, but 67% would support increasing the school day by one hour.

[1] PDK/Gallup Polls of the Public’s Attitudes Toward the Public Schools. http://www.pdkintl.org/kappan/kpollpdf.htm.
[2] Time-Oprah Winfrey Show Poll. March 2006. http://www.oprah.com/tows/pastshows/200604/tows_past_20060411_c.jhtml
[3] The Rewards of Teaching. The Profession of Teaching. American Education. Joel Spring. Tenth Edition. McGrawHill. 2002. Page 40.

Getting there

The path to reform
[You can view the PDF here.]

The path to privatization will require significant effort and resources centered around three pillars: achieving progressive standards, preparing the infrastructure, and assisting parents, teachers, and administrators through the process.

Getting the infrastructure in place

2.1 The first objective will be to establish a national basic schools curriculum for subjects and types of schools. This basic curriculum is exclusively an articulation of expected competencies. A transition from town-halls to drafting an actual curriculum will allow input to be secured from parents and teachers.

2.2 The committee responsible for national education is appointed by the president and approved by Congress. The committee includes teachers, scholars, and international officials from prominent countries.

2.3 Concurrently, means for distributing national assessments will also be sought ideally, a digital, on-demand system would be implemented.
2.4 The curriculum would be approved by each state—similar to a constitutional amendment—and would be updated regularly by the commission.

The progressive agenda
Progressivism is based around the continual increase of standards of efficiency and optimum operability with minimal political or bureaucratic influence. The standards ensure that the systems in place that serve as the basis for the institution’s operations—taxation, construction,
standards, etc.—are pegged to the necessities of each school.

Loosening the binds
The most typical standards would encompass school funding— allowing tax rates to float in accordance with needs and economic conditions. By these means, schools would not be forced to reign in programs or governments need to reallocate resources and assume debt.

Another critical standard would be teacher to student ratios in the aim of preventing overcrowding. Drawing on demographic forecasts, districts would be held accountable by law to build new schools to accommodate population growth.

Metrics themselves would be subject to continual, progressive increases. In some cases, such as the metric for ideal classroom size, the metric would decrease over time.

The essence is to remove the often polarizing political influence from affecting—and as is
typically the case, hindering—the systems that enable the institution’s operations. Politicization decays the institution’s ability to respond to external developments.

2.5 This period of transition would also enable districts and states to optimize their operational structure: building new schools to meet population standards, reconfiguring taxation policies, etc.
2.6 Districts at this time would be responsible for soliciting contracts for or designing the structure of its schools with intensive parental involvement.

Educating the folks

2.7 In addition to the town halls and other formats, districts will be expected to take the lead in informing parents of their new liberties and the enhanced measures of accountability in place for students.

Getting there first

2.8 The federal government will offer substantial monetary incentives for districts that manage the process to privatization fastest while achieving progressive standards. There should be no reason—or exception—for districts that fail to privatize within the five-year period.

Dropouts

2.9 States will be encouraged to adopt dropout policies that limit the opportunities for work and drivers’ licensing in the absence of reasonable allowances. It is consistent with this paper’s philosophy that through school incentives and the opportunity for engaging, flexible schooling, the amount of dropouts will ultimately decrease.

In a 2006 Time Magazine–Oprah Winfrey Show poll, 89% of respondents acknowledged the school dropout rate to be an “extremely” or “somewhat” serious problem. Respondents reacted strongest in support of increasing parental involvement (87% viewed the initiative as likely very or somewhat effective), followed by strengthening truancy enforcement.

Respondents fiercely opposed lowering academic standards (78% not very or at all effective). Broad disagreements arose over outlawing dropping out of school under the age of eighteen and even more so in regard to penalizing the parents of students that fail to finish high school (see chart). Sixty-five percent of respondents supported denying drop-outs a drivers license until they turn eighteen. Only 33% supported denying work permits – with 64% disapproving.[1]

[1] Time-Oprah Winfrey Show Poll. March 2006.
http://www.oprah.com/tows/pastshows/200604/tows_past_20060411_c.jhtml