Educational Politics Starting Points

In the wake of the election and the opportunity afforded by upcoming legislative sessions, I posted these thoughts earlier, about a very different direction for American education. Many of the ideas that were mentioned have been percolating in my head for weeks, if not months. The item that really started to crystallize my thoughts was this piece by Eugene Hickok, in which he wrote:

A new vision of education in America should embrace the principles on which America is supposed to be based: freedom, equality, opportunity, responsibility and ownership. The status quo lacks freedom, and the façade of equality has allowed an achievement gap to haunt the nation. Millions are denied a real opportunity. Newly minted accountability systems have school administrators gagging and leave too many parents confused, resulting in too many failing to take responsibility for the future of our children.

As for ownership, our public schools have become institutions of government, serving bureaucracies rather than the public. It's as though the system owns us rather than we owning the system.

Imagine what education in America could look like with these new principles in place. With freedom, families could decide how best to educate their children. Equality would be measured in terms of the education children receive and each student's achievement, rather than merely in dollars spent per student. Responsibility would begin at home; parents would have the power to determine whether their children are receiving a quality education. This more robust notion of accountability would enable people to determine how much their investment yields in terms of a child's education.

Gradually, families might begin to take back ownership of their children's education. Ownership is essential, giving a sense of authority that could drive ongoing improvement in education. The relationship of family, child and education is direct and tangible, rather than distorted by the demands of a system.

My ideas, particularly as they relate to matters like an absolute right for parents to choose the school their children will attend (based in part on the New Zealand model) are somewhat radical when compared to current practices. But if we are truly looking to build a school system and educational environment for our children, we have to stop mucking around on the edges and find a way to make real advances.

If the principle behind No Child Left Behind is accountability, why, as Hickok asks, are we attempting to graft a very different form of accountability onto a system that traditionally has had none?

That question really is the foundational point of my argument for some radical ideas in education. I believe that the curricula that have been developed are adequate, sometimes they are watered down, but curricula can be made more stringent in a much easier fashion than altering the operation structure of a school system. By shaking up the foundational assumptions of how schools are built and run, we can shake up the educational bureaucracy.

Of course, those who will be reading my ideas will probably think that I have some utopian view of the politics of education. On the contrary, most of the ideas that I espouse I know will encounter massive resistance from entrenched interests. But the current failures of American schools to serve the poor, the minority and those who are otherwised disadvantaged have not escaped the electorate and certain groups of voters are seeking an accounting and will force one upon us if we are not improving our schools.

For decades, American policy makers have listened to all sorts of people about how to improve education, from the ivory tower academics whose own children attended private school, to the conflicted teachers unions, to demogogues and fear-mongerers. It is time to fall back on basic American principles; "freedom, equality, opportunity, responsibility and ownership." It is these traits that made America great and it is these traits that will make American education great.