George Bush’s vow to be the education president has so far consisted of more talk than action. School reformers say his midterm grade is, at best, a solid C. This week Bush will get a chance to pull up that grade when he releases what is being billed as a far-reaching–and perhaps even revolutionary–education plan. With the public increasingly angry and anxious about schools, the president is under pressure to deliver. There’s a political subtext as well. Bush’s advisers hope a well-received education program will insulate the president from persistent charges that he has virtually no domestic policy.
But finding a workable formula won’t be easy–especially since Bush won’t put any significant amount of new federal money into schools. “No matter what he stands for, there are going to be voices that say,“If he doesn’t stand for billions and billions of new money for education, then he doesn’t deserve to be called the education president’,” says John Chubb of the Brookings Institution. “But I’d argue that if he’s willing to speak out loudly and clearly for the evaluation of schools by performance, if he’s willing to speak out strongly that academic excellence is the most important goal of the schools, if he’s willing to take to task the existing system as the source of failure, then he deserves to be regarded as a serious player.”
To some extent, Bush can spotlight educational initiatives just by showing up. “If reform works, we’ll get some of the credit,” says one administration official. In what may be a preview of many photo opportunities to come, the president last week flew to West Virginia to present the national Teacher of the Year Award. With his new education secretary, former Tennessee governor Lamar Alexander, at his side (following story), he promised to “spark a nationwide movement that touches every school and every student in America.”
Publicity alone won’t accomplish that ambitious goal. Although the White House is keeping the specifics of Bush’s program quiet until the public announcement, a cornerstone will probably be expanded national testing. Many reformers feel that the current federal test , the national Assessment of Educational Progress, given every four years, is too broad and too infrequent. At the same time, most local districts give tests of their own– few of them comparable with one another. Virtually anyone can claim to be above average. “We need a way to tell if we’ve made any progress, instead of just talking about it,” says Albert Shanker, president of the American Federation of Teachers. “If that’s done intelligently, that will be a revolutionary move.”
The president is also expected to put education higher on the corporate agenda by challenging private industry to fund a national competition to “reinvent” the public school. Companies would then set them up a network of six model schools around the country. There’s no guarantee that business would sign up, but even if they do, educators say the model schools will have to be pretty spectacular–and easily replicated. “We’ve always been able to produce wonderful demonstration schools,” says Linda Darling-Hammond, a professor of education at Columbia University. “You can always get terrific teachers in one school, but we’re not doing enough to address the fact that we’re not producing enough terrific teachers for all schools.”
The Bush proposal will push parents to become activists. The president has long been a backer of school choice and vouchers. He’s expected to support choice in some form, although his advisors won’t say whether their plan will include the more radical use of publicly funded vouchers to send kids to private schools or will simply promote choice among public schools. Bush may also propose revamping Chapter I, the mammoth, federally funded remedial-education program.
Given that there has been little educational leadership from Washington for more than a decade, any comprehensive plan from the White House would be revolutionary. But Bush is only playing catch-up with the rest of the country. In despair over high dropout rates and low scores, districts nationwide are implementing reforms that would have been called outrageous even two years ago. “Not only did the reforms of the ’80s not work,” says Chester Finn of Vanderbilt University, “they can’t work. They were not bold enough to succeed, to overcome the restraints on our schools.”
Now educators think about swinging a wrecking ball against the building, not just sprucing up with paint. Earlier this year in Detroit, two school-board members even proposed admitting private schools into the public system. About 19,000 Detroit students attend private schools, which means about $60 million less in state aid for the public system. Under the plan, the private schools would no longer charge tuition-they’d get money from a central office–but they’d be otherwise free to structure their curriculum. No one expects this proposal to go into effect any time soon, but the fact that it has even been considered is a measure of educators’ frustration.
Critics say too much change, too soon, is dangerous. William Honig, California’s superintendent of public instruction, favors the gradual reforms introduced in his state over the last decade. “It is the French Revolution where everyone tries to outrace the last person in moving further to the left?” asks Honig. “Well, that ended with everybody killing each other. The real issue we face is how to teach more demanding curricula to a greater number of kids.”
The “radicals” say that’s exactly what they are doing. Here’s a sampling of some innovative programs around the country:
Boarding school has always been a privilege of the rich. But in the south Bronx, educators realized that classroom reforms weren’t enough. With 10 percent of the 350 students at Bronx Regional High School homeless, school officials decided to build a dormitory amid the decay of their neighborhood. Joining forces with a nonprofit community group, they purchased an abandoned city-owned tenement that had been a crack house.
Work on the site began last year, with a $1 million budget from the state and city, and is scheduled for completion in the fall of 1992. Students have done much of the work, earning course credits and learning job skills. “It makes you feel good because you’re doing something good,” says Carlos Marrero, 20. Inspiring pride is crucial, says principal Mark Weiss. He jokes that he might call the building “Phillip Bronx Academy.” In fact, there’s no decision on the name yet. “We’ll think about that when the ivy starts to grow,” he says.
Although school districts in 30 states are now experimenting with some form of school choice, Milwaukee is the first city to try vouchers. Last year Wisconsin agreed to pay about $2,500 of the tuition for up to 1,000 public-school students who wanted to attend private schools, and in September 341 pupils signed up at seven private schools. There has been considerable opposition. Herbert Grover, the state school superintendent , calls it “educational Darwinism.” But Polly Williams, a state legislator, calls Milwaukee a “model for the nation.”
The first year has been rocky. The Juanita Virgil Academy, which has taken 63 students, abandoned the program in January after a dispute between the full-tuition parents and the state. The parents wanted religion classes–forbidden in the voucher program. When the school withdrew, most of the voucher students were back in public schools. But there have been successes, too. At the Urban Day School, some 90 percent of the voucher students are expected to return next year.
In a run-down west Baltimore neighborhood, there are 27 third-grade boys who love school. They’re learning the three R’s–and “how to behave like a man,” says their principal, Leah Hasty. Hasty established the all-boy class at Matthew Henson Elementary School, headed by teacher Richard Boynton, in order to give the boys, all black, a positive male role model. Most live with single mothers. “I thought having a male teacher might raise these boys’ self-esteem, help them aspire, realize what they can be,” says Hasty. The two-year-old program has been so successful (discipline problems are down, attendance and reading scores are up) that the class and teacher moved from second to third grade together. Hasty said she recently decided to send them to fourth grade as well. Says Boynton: “It’s almost like having 27 sons.”
When Colorado Gov. Roy Romer decided in January that the only way to end the bitter wrangling between the Denver teachers’ union and the city school board was to rewrite the contract from scratch, there could have been lawsuits or a strike. Instead teachers, administrators, parents and business leaders joined Romer for nine days of hearings to find a better way to run the city’s troubled schools. They may have found it.
The new contract, which teachers are expected to ratify this week, calls for a complete shake-up. Schools will not be run by the central office but by a committee of teachers, parents, the principal and a business leader. The committee will determine staffing, salaries and the structure and philosophy of the school. The district will set goals and provide administrative services. The contract was accepted, Romer says, because everyone was ready for a dramatic change. No one knows yet whether it will be successful, but, says Romer, “now I think everyone feels they have an oar.”
The loftily named Corporate/Community Schools of America consists of one recycled Roman Catholic school in a neighborhood on the West Side of Chicago where 84 percent of the children are born to single mothers. Financed by a long list of Chicago-based corporations, the three-year-old school currently enrolls 250 students, ages 2 through 11. Parents get help, too. A staff member aggressively guides them through the maze of public-health and welfare agencies.
Founder Joseph Kellman, the owner of a glass and mirror company, says the school spends no more than most big-city districts. Current costs: about $5,400 per pupil per year. There’s no tuition. The children are chosen by lottery because the school didn’t want to be accused of taking only promising youngsters.
The school operates year-round with a solid curriculum. Graduates will speak French, Spanish, Japanese–and the language of business. For example, Elaine Mosley’s full title is principal and CEO. Teachers have broader authority and responsibilities than in most schools, functioning as de facto middle managers. No report cards are sent home; instead, parents must come to school a minimum of four times a year to receive written evaluations. There is, says music teacher Beverly Westergren, “an expectation of excellence. You will succeed.” That’s a good bottom line for any school.
Bush’s education package may never inspire such radical change on a wide scale. But educators say they’re hungry for any leadership from the White House. “We’ve gone through the Paul Revere stage of hollering about the problem,” says Denis Doyle, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and coauthor of “Winning the Brain Race.” “Now we’re entering the serious action stage. It’s become clear that success can’t be achieved without a heroic effort.” This is one war Bush—-and the country—can’t afford to lose.
