9486 in the collection  

Commentary: A reform-minded education secretary?

Ohanian Comment: Just
when I hoped I would be posting no more stories
about Duncan as Secretary of Education-to-be,
here's one with the right-wing take on
"reform."

By Dan Lips

Would Chicago Public School CEO Arne Duncan
make a good secretary of education? There are
reasons to wonder if President-elect Barack
Obama's nominee is the right candidate for the
job. But there are other signs that he may
indeed make the grade.

Duncan is one of several innovative, reform-
minded, big-city school chiefs. He recognizes
the need for local leadership and innovation.
And he supports amending federal policy to
grant states greater flexibility and autonomy.

Yet given his support for sharp federal
spending increases, it's unclear how well
Duncan would translate local lessons to the
federal level.

What is clear is that Duncan's past work has
earned applause from school reformers. He
supports charter schools, public school choice,
and merit pay for teachers and school leaders.
Duncan also supports holding schools
accountable for results and maintaining
transparency about school performance through
public reporting.

In his words, Duncan's mission has been to make
Chicago "the premier urban school system in
America." And his leadership appears to be
making a difference, with Chicago students
making gains on a number of outcome measures.

Of course, the big question is what the next
education secretary thinks about No Child Left
Behind and the federal government's role in
education.

Duncan supports NCLB. But as the leader of the
nation's third-largest school district, he also
has dealt with the challenges of implementing
that law. Those of us who are skeptical that
Washington can fix our nation's public-school
problem should be encouraged by Duncan's
support for providing states and school
districts with greater flexibility and
autonomy.

Testifying before the House Education and
Workforce Committee in 2006, Duncan spoke
approvingly of NCLB's accountability framework.
But he noted that Chicago's success depended
largely on the opportunity to innovate in how
federal goals are met:

"Congress should maintain NCLB's framework of
high expectations and accountability. But it
should also amend the law to give schools,
districts and states the maximum amount of
flexibility possible - particularly districts
like ours with a strong track record of
academic achievement and tough accountability."

This suggests that Duncan may be open to the
proposals like the A-PLUS Acts, which grant
states greater autonomy and flexibility in how
funds are used if states agree to maintain
academic accountability and transparency.

As the leader of a big-city school system,
Duncan surely appreciates that it takes
leadership on the ground to improve a public-
school system. It would be a breath of fresh
air if the next secretary recognized the limits
of federal power and worked to reform NCLB to
empower local leadership.

Duncan's experience in Illinois should also
cause him to recognize some of the dangers of
federally driven accountability. NCLB's
arbitrary deadline that all students be scoring
"proficient" on state tests by 2014 has created
a perverse incentive for states to weaken state
standards to demonstrate artificial progress on
state tests. The Land of Lincoln appears to be
a leader in the so-called "race to the bottom."

Researchers Paul Peterson and Rick Hess have
been tracking national trends in state
standards since 2005. They report that
Illinois' standards have weakened between 2003
and 2007. Only 8 states had weaker standards
than Illinois. Ending perverse federal
incentives to lower standards should be a
priority for any NCLB reauthorization.

In one key area, Duncan appears to be singing
the traditional liberal tune: He supports sharp
increases in federal funding for education. In
his 2006 congressional testimony, he urged
Congress to double funding for NCLB over five
years, calling it "the best long-term
investment Congress can make."

Unfortunately, the data show that Duncan
deserves a failing grade here. Decades of
increased federal expenditures have yielded
little improvement in student performance.
After adjusting for inflation, federal spending
per pupil has tripled since the 1970s. But
long-term test scores have remained relatively
flat.

Since spending on NCLB has already grown by
nearly 50 percent since 2001, the next
education secretary may have difficulty
explaining why pouring another $24 billion into
the nation's school systems will provide the
answer - especially in the context of the
ballooning budget deficit.

In the days ahead, we will be learning a lot
more about Arne Duncan's views on education
policy. But it's encouraging that he has
demonstrated leadership in local school reform
and supports giving states and school districts
greater flexibility from federal regulation to
encourage innovation.

If he successfully pushes that, he could wind
up getting a solid report card from parents
across the country.

ABOUT THE WRITERS

Dan Lips is senior policy analyst at The
Heritage Foundation. Readers may write to the
author in care of The Heritage Foundation, 214
Massachusetts Avenue NE, Washington, D.C.
20002; Web site: www.heritage.org. Information
about Heritage's funding may be found at
http://www.heritage.org/about/reports.cfm.

This essay is available to McClatchy-Tribune
News Service subscribers. McClatchy-Tribune did
not subsidize the writing of this column; the
opinions are those of the writer and do not
necessarily represent the views of McClatchy-
Tribune or its editors.


— Dan Lips, Heritage Foundation
McClatchy -Tribune News Service
2008-12-22


---

INDEX OF OUTRAGES

Pages: 380   
[1] 2 3 4 5 6  Next >>    Last >>