Too Many Carrots, Too Many Sticks: Four Fallacies in Federal Policies for Low-Achieving Schools

[Catshrink]

Too Many Carrots, Too Many Sticks:Four Fallacies in Federal Policies for Low-Achieving Schools

By Arthur H. Camins

Under the leadership of U.S. Secretary Arne Duncan, the federal Department of Education has achieved a remarkably high level of policy consistency. From its application guidelines for Race to the Top, Investing in Innovation, Teacher Incentive Fund, and Title I School Improvement grants, to the proposed blueprint for the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the department has chosen to address the challenge of improving persistently low-achieving schools by means of externally imposed competition, rewards for success, and prescriptive dictates to correct insufficient progress.

Unfortunately, these strategies constitute superficial and short-term approaches to complex and enduring problems. Gaps in student performance associated with race and socioeconomic status have persisted for decades precisely because they do not respond to simple solutions. Therefore, we should cease funding “get smart quick” proposals. Instead, we need to invest in cultivating the capacity of educators in each school. To do so, we need to develop the content-specific pedagogical knowledge of our teachers and principals. We need to help them create school-based learning communities that build common commitment to continuous long-term improvement and provide time for professional collaboration and growth, drawing upon the best expertise and latest research. We need to rethink and restructure teacher preparation and teacher induction. We need to comprehensively support students’ social and emotional needs and the provision of health services. That would be money well spent.

Regrettably, the Education Department’s spirit of urgency to address seemingly intractable problems is undermined by the fallacious reasoning behind its current policies. The issue is not that the department’s leaders in any way oppose the principles behind these more complex solutions. It is that they do not recognize that their unswerving reliance on carrot-and-stick responses actually undermines more nuanced approaches.

<This article is by subscription but the above excerpt is at the link. >

http://www.edweek.org/login.html?source=http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2010/06/23/36camins.h29.html&destination=http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2010/06/23/36camins.h29.html&levelId=2100

[msongs]

1. giving english language tests to kids with no english - race to the top indeed nt

[Catshrink]

2. I'll be able to access the whole article on Tuesday

at the university library when my class starts. I'm not technically enrolled until then. :(

[proud2BlibKansan]

3. We need Community Schools. Steney Hoyer had a bill.

Don't know if he is still pushing it.

Until we met the needs of the whole child, especially in our schools serving our lowest income kids, we won't make a bit of progress towards increasing achievement. Every teacher knows that. It's time our elected officials figured it out.