Many years ago, I worked for a major Milwaukee corporation which became the subject of a criminal investigation of its sales practices. The company eventually went out of business--not primarily due to the fines it paid but because the years of investigation took a huge toll in creativity and decisiveness.
One conversation early in the investigation still haunts me. Two of my colleagues agreed that there was a tacit agreement between management and the sales people. The sales people understood that they should do whatever was required to gain an account, while protecting management's deniability. When pressed, management needed to be able to deny it knew how the sales were made. Several recent events recall that conversation--including prisoner abuse in Iraq, the recent firing of police officers in Milwaukee, and cheating on standardized tests in schools.
The basic characteristic of the deniability culture is a wide gap between the official rules of conduct and the implicit rules. The assumption is that the official rules are useful for public consumption but that anyone following them will be at an advantage. In this view, scruples are for losers. Changing this culture can be very difficult even if management desires to do so; it is assumed that management will loudly proclaim its adherence to the highest principles even while benefitting from corner-cutting within the organization.
In the recent Jude beating case, by firing not only those officers who took part in the beating but also those who refused to report their fellow officers, the Milwaukee police chief does seem to be making a major effort to change the culture. How successful she will be may depend in large part on whether officers view it as simply an attempt by the chief to burnish her image. In a culture of deniability, the boss is expected to express outrage when the facts come out.
There has been a deal written recently about the attempts by lawyers in the Bush administration to exempt the United States from the Geneva convention and to relax the strictures against torture. Most discussion, however, has concentrated on the validity of the legal arguments. What is surprising is that there appears to have been little concern by those involved in the changes about the signal that was being sent to people in the field. The clear message was that scrutiny and oversight would be lessened and that many of the old rules would no longer apply.
If education is to improve, accurate assessment of learning is a prerequiste. Otherwise, schools will continue to invest money and effort into programs that are not effective. Yet there is a culture that accepts efforts to artificially inflate test results. Despite teachers' interest in discouraging cheating by students, some forms of cheating by teachers are obvious to students, such as signaling to the student that an answer is wrong or preparing lessons based on advanced knowledge of the tests.
Other kinds of cheating, such as erasing and correcting students' answer sheets, are not done in front of students. But it is possible to develop measures that detect many of these kinds of cheating, including looking for sudden growth in student scores followed by declines in later years or students getting the hard questions right and the easy questions wrong.
Every superintendent will denounce cheating by teachers. But is this simply part of the deniability culture? That such detection measures are not more widely used suggest that it is. Superintendents' talk about test scores as an end in themselves rather than a measure of learning reinforces the idea that any means of increasing the scores is desirable.
Monday, May 30, 2005
Monday, May 16, 2005
Is Milwaukee creating or losing wealth--or both?
Recently, the Public Policy Forum issued a report comparing the income of people moving into counties with those leaving and those staying. In particular, the average income of people moving out of Milwaukee County was higher than that of either those moving in or those staying.
While not particularly surprising, it is not clear what one should make of these results, or their policy implications. One interpretation is that Milwaukee County is on the way down, as wealthier people continue to abandon it. This seems to be the view of the people the Journal Sentinel found to comment on the study. Why, then, are we seeing the rapid rise in property values, particularly in the poorest sections of Milwaukee?
Another interpretation is that, despite all its trials, Milwaukee continues to play the classic role of the American city over the last two centuries. People with little come to the city because that is where the opportunity is. As they become successful in the city, they move elsewhere to spend their money.
The question about education, then, is which model is it promoting, one of opportunity or one of loss.
While not particularly surprising, it is not clear what one should make of these results, or their policy implications. One interpretation is that Milwaukee County is on the way down, as wealthier people continue to abandon it. This seems to be the view of the people the Journal Sentinel found to comment on the study. Why, then, are we seeing the rapid rise in property values, particularly in the poorest sections of Milwaukee?
Another interpretation is that, despite all its trials, Milwaukee continues to play the classic role of the American city over the last two centuries. People with little come to the city because that is where the opportunity is. As they become successful in the city, they move elsewhere to spend their money.
The question about education, then, is which model is it promoting, one of opportunity or one of loss.
Is 4k child care?
On Sunday, the Journal Sentinel published an article about the battle in the state legislature about the battle over whether to extend funding for four year olds. One legislator expressed the fear that four year old kindergarten was "subsidized day care for certain children."
If the legislator was questioning the need for the four year old program--particularly for low-income children--his remarks missed the target. The typical low-income child enters school with substantial disadvantages compared to a typical middle-class student from a well-educated family. There have been several studies, for instance, documenting the strikings differences in the number of vocabulary words recognized.
If the need is clear, it is less clear how well the schools are meeting this need. The usual antipathy among the educational establishment towards measurement is even stronger when it comes to very young children. Systematic testing does not start until third grade. In the absence of data, my guess is that some schools do a good job while at others it really is just "child care." Unfortunately, this legislator seems to have missed the opportunity to push educators to say how they would measure results.
If the legislator was questioning the need for the four year old program--particularly for low-income children--his remarks missed the target. The typical low-income child enters school with substantial disadvantages compared to a typical middle-class student from a well-educated family. There have been several studies, for instance, documenting the strikings differences in the number of vocabulary words recognized.
If the need is clear, it is less clear how well the schools are meeting this need. The usual antipathy among the educational establishment towards measurement is even stronger when it comes to very young children. Systematic testing does not start until third grade. In the absence of data, my guess is that some schools do a good job while at others it really is just "child care." Unfortunately, this legislator seems to have missed the opportunity to push educators to say how they would measure results.
Friday, May 13, 2005
Property values and schools
Recently I advanced the thesis that changes in Milwaukee education are behind much of the recent surge in property values. In essence, by giving families far more choices--within MPS, with charter schools, and with the choice program--homes in Milwaukee become increasingly valuable. Even if many schools remain unsatisfactory, in this hypothesis, the property value effect could still take place since the families most concerned about education will be precisely those most likely to take advantage of the increased options. From the family viewpoint, the question is not how MPS is doing as a whole but how the school their children attend is doing. By being able to pick the school, the family is likely to be far more satisfied than if the school were imposed on them.
I would be the first to admit the thesis is untested. There are a variety of other possible hypotheses that might explain part or all of the increase in property values, such as:
I would be the first to admit the thesis is untested. There are a variety of other possible hypotheses that might explain part or all of the increase in property values, such as:
- That it is simply part of a national movement back to the cities.
- That having been down so long, these neighborhoods could go nowhere but up.
- That other local effects explain the results, such as welfare reform.
- That while it appears the poorest districts are taking the lead in the rise, the jumps mainly represent gentrification on the fringes of these districts.
- Comparisons of property value trends in Milwaukee with those in cities that are similar except that control of schools remains centralized.
- Micro analysis of the property values. How did homes attractive to families perform compared to others?
- A history of property values over more years and broken down into smaller geographical areas.
- Comparison of trends in the MPS census data and geographical enrollment data with those in property values. For example, what was the relationship between the number of children and property values, as well as the type of schools they attended and whether the schools were nearby?
School board budget hearing
I dropped by Thursday's public hearing on the MPS budget at Madison high school. Compared to previous hearings, where hundreds turned out to denounce the school board, this was a real yawner. There were about as many people on stage as in the audience. Only two members of the public spoke--someone who speaks at almost every meeting and a retired principal--and both left the board puzzled as to what point they were trying to make.
The proposed budget, with less than a 1% tax increase, seems like good news. But that good news is hugely dependent on decisions by others. It assumes both that the state legislature will agree to restore two-thirds funding and that MPS will win the current arbitration on its contract with the union to reduce health care costs.
Director Tom Balistreri (who seems perpetually angry, about what is not clear) threatened to vote against the 1% tax increase. In effect this would be a vote to permanently reduce MPS funding, since revenue caps reflect the previous year's spending. This raises the question: where are organizations like MICAH and the Institute for Wisconsin's Future? For years, these organizations have criticized the school board for not convincing the legislature to increase funding. Yet when a school board member threatens to cut funding, they are strangely silent. For that matter, where is the Milwaukee Teachers' Education Association?
The proposed budget, with less than a 1% tax increase, seems like good news. But that good news is hugely dependent on decisions by others. It assumes both that the state legislature will agree to restore two-thirds funding and that MPS will win the current arbitration on its contract with the union to reduce health care costs.
Director Tom Balistreri (who seems perpetually angry, about what is not clear) threatened to vote against the 1% tax increase. In effect this would be a vote to permanently reduce MPS funding, since revenue caps reflect the previous year's spending. This raises the question: where are organizations like MICAH and the Institute for Wisconsin's Future? For years, these organizations have criticized the school board for not convincing the legislature to increase funding. Yet when a school board member threatens to cut funding, they are strangely silent. For that matter, where is the Milwaukee Teachers' Education Association?
Sunday, May 08, 2005
Schools and property values
This morning's Journal Sentinel reports on a dramatic rise in Milwaukee property values. This is the most convincing evidence yet that the Milwaukee education reforms are working.
For the past few years Milwaukee has experienced a surprisingly robust boom in condo construction, in areas like the Beer Line and the Third Ward. However, the connection with education reform has been easy to dismiss because the majority of condo purchasers seem to be people with little direct concern about the schools--empty nesters, young professionals, single people, gays.
Yet the growth in property values is quite different. The poorest areas experienced by far the highest percentage increases in property values. (See the graph in the post below.) These are areas with a great many children. Concern about education should have a much greater effect on property values in these areas. Here is my hypothesis about what happened:
The Milwaukee reforms were aimed at empowering parents by giving them choices over their children's education. In recent years, the number of real choices for Milwaukee parents have vastly increased. These include the school choice program (and recall that most residents of the areas with the biggest jumps in property values would qualify for this program), a wide and growing variety of charter schools, and continuing efforts by MPS to restructure its schools to make them more attractive (such as the move from middle schools to K-8s).
All of these changes would have the greatest impact on the areas with the most children and the lowest incomes, precisely the districts seeing the greatest percentage increases in property values. So families that in the past might have struggled to buy a house in the suburbs for better schools now find more opportunities in Milwaukee.
For the past few years Milwaukee has experienced a surprisingly robust boom in condo construction, in areas like the Beer Line and the Third Ward. However, the connection with education reform has been easy to dismiss because the majority of condo purchasers seem to be people with little direct concern about the schools--empty nesters, young professionals, single people, gays.
Yet the growth in property values is quite different. The poorest areas experienced by far the highest percentage increases in property values. (See the graph in the post below.) These are areas with a great many children. Concern about education should have a much greater effect on property values in these areas. Here is my hypothesis about what happened:
The Milwaukee reforms were aimed at empowering parents by giving them choices over their children's education. In recent years, the number of real choices for Milwaukee parents have vastly increased. These include the school choice program (and recall that most residents of the areas with the biggest jumps in property values would qualify for this program), a wide and growing variety of charter schools, and continuing efforts by MPS to restructure its schools to make them more attractive (such as the move from middle schools to K-8s).
All of these changes would have the greatest impact on the areas with the most children and the lowest incomes, precisely the districts seeing the greatest percentage increases in property values. So families that in the past might have struggled to buy a house in the suburbs for better schools now find more opportunities in Milwaukee.
Friday, May 06, 2005
Senate restricts special elections
An article in this morning's Journal Sentinel reports that Wisconsin's senate voted to restrict local school boards' power to call special elections to exceed the spending caps. From a strictly MPS point of view, this measure is a moderately good thing. For a number of reasons, particularly the increasing disconnect between voters and MPS, all informed opinion agrees that a proposal to exceed the spending cap has no chance of passing in Milwaukee. Thus the ability of other districts to (sometimes) get voters to agree to raise their spending limits has the effect of increasing the financial gap between MPS and its neighbors. This in turn makes it more difficult for MPS in the competition for teachers.
That said, the vote is a sad one for what it says about the growing willingness of conservatives and Republicans to violate their own most basic principles. One of the most cogent critiques Republicans have made over the years is that Democrats are too eager to centralize authority when they don't like what local government does. Yet in this vote the Republicans show the same disdain for local government. As more decisions move to Madison, it will be increasingly difficult to interest capable people in serving on school boards or to interest citizens in what school boards do.
That said, the vote is a sad one for what it says about the growing willingness of conservatives and Republicans to violate their own most basic principles. One of the most cogent critiques Republicans have made over the years is that Democrats are too eager to centralize authority when they don't like what local government does. Yet in this vote the Republicans show the same disdain for local government. As more decisions move to Madison, it will be increasingly difficult to interest capable people in serving on school boards or to interest citizens in what school boards do.
Thursday, May 05, 2005
In praise of partisanship
Tomorrow's Journal Sentinel has an article by Sarah Carr, "School Board president denies posts to opponents," noting that Ken Johnson did not appoint any of the four Defenders on the board to committee chairmanships. Carr clearly disapproves, predicting the board will "grow more polarized and combative."
Another interpretation is that the appointments represent a determination to make significant progress on improving MPS in the next two years. Reforming large urban schools systems is immensely difficult under the best of circumstances. Putting in place committee chairs prepared to obstruct reform would seem to be a recipe for futility.
Another interpretation is that the appointments represent a determination to make significant progress on improving MPS in the next two years. Reforming large urban schools systems is immensely difficult under the best of circumstances. Putting in place committee chairs prepared to obstruct reform would seem to be a recipe for futility.
Sunday, May 01, 2005
One size fits all students
There are intriguing parallels between Joel Klein, the New York City public schools chancellor, and Alan Bersin, the recently-departed San Diego schools chief (who was just appointed by Arnold Schwarzenegger to be education secretary and member of the California school board). Both were federal prosecutors who depended on high-profile educators to pick their instructional programs. Both centralized authority.
Fundamental to their approach is the belief that there is one right model of education that works for all students. Many of their critics believe that Klein, Bersin, and their educational mentors chose the wrong math and reading programs. But even many of these critics believe the same fundamental idea--that there is one model that is right for every student, just not the ones chosen for New York and San Diego.
A contrasting concept is that there is no one right model that will fit every student. This was the central organizing idea behind the Milwaukee educational reforms. In this view as much decisionmaking as possible should be moved to the schools and to parents. As parents search and find schools that work for their children, successful schools will expand or be replicated; unsuccessful schools will change or close. Almost all of the reforms--admissions standards, school councils, neighborhood schools, letting schools choose principals, changing the way principals were chosen and trained, per pupil funding, charter schools, annual testing, and even support of vouchers--can be viewed as tools to make decentralization work.
The challenge for the school board over the next two years is to determine how to make these tools more effective and what additional tools are needed.
Fundamental to their approach is the belief that there is one right model of education that works for all students. Many of their critics believe that Klein, Bersin, and their educational mentors chose the wrong math and reading programs. But even many of these critics believe the same fundamental idea--that there is one model that is right for every student, just not the ones chosen for New York and San Diego.
A contrasting concept is that there is no one right model that will fit every student. This was the central organizing idea behind the Milwaukee educational reforms. In this view as much decisionmaking as possible should be moved to the schools and to parents. As parents search and find schools that work for their children, successful schools will expand or be replicated; unsuccessful schools will change or close. Almost all of the reforms--admissions standards, school councils, neighborhood schools, letting schools choose principals, changing the way principals were chosen and trained, per pupil funding, charter schools, annual testing, and even support of vouchers--can be viewed as tools to make decentralization work.
The challenge for the school board over the next two years is to determine how to make these tools more effective and what additional tools are needed.
Saturday, April 30, 2005
New Joe Williams book
Connoisseurs of MPS board fights will recall that Joe Williams covered MPS for the Journal Sentinel over several years before moving on to the New York Daily News. He had a singular knack for making the often arcane board controversies into matters of high drama. I received a note that he has a new book coming out October 7 titled: Cheating Our Kids: How Politics and Greed Ruin Education. He promises that Milwaukee, "figures prominently in several chapters." As a former greedy politician myself, I look forward to reading it. It can be pre-ordered from Amazon.
Monday, April 25, 2005
New MPS Leadership
The annual organization meeting of the MPS board holds a strange attraction--offering drama, bitterness, and surprises. Tonight's meeting made it abundantly clear that the board is split along party lines. Even the opening role call underlined this division, with Reformers answering "here" to the Defenders' "present." I leave it to a better psychologist than I to figure out whether the difference simply reflects group identification or a difference in views as to how active a board member should be (voting "present" on an issue is to obstain, after all).
An early mini-drama was played out over a Morales proposal to change the voting procedure. Although it was unclear exactly what she had in mind, apparently it involved being able to argue the merits of the candidates. Not necessarily a bad idea, I think, but it appeared to be a last minute idea that had neither been fully developed nor discussed with anyone in the Reform group. The proposal was defeated 5-4 along party lines.
The board then elected officers in its traditional fashion, with each member announcing their preference in turn. Ken Johnson was elected president by the five Reformers, with all but one of the Defenders voting for Peter Blewett. (Morales voted for Joe Dannecker, but this seemed a tactical move, since she did not support Dannecker for vice president.)
Again voting along party lines, the board elected Dannecker as vice president on a 5-4 vote.
Not at all surprisingly, the board voted not to increase its own pay.
Overall, I got the impression that several of the Defenders were quite bitter about their current minority role. This does not bode well for collegiality but may be good for reform.
An early mini-drama was played out over a Morales proposal to change the voting procedure. Although it was unclear exactly what she had in mind, apparently it involved being able to argue the merits of the candidates. Not necessarily a bad idea, I think, but it appeared to be a last minute idea that had neither been fully developed nor discussed with anyone in the Reform group. The proposal was defeated 5-4 along party lines.
The board then elected officers in its traditional fashion, with each member announcing their preference in turn. Ken Johnson was elected president by the five Reformers, with all but one of the Defenders voting for Peter Blewett. (Morales voted for Joe Dannecker, but this seemed a tactical move, since she did not support Dannecker for vice president.)
Again voting along party lines, the board elected Dannecker as vice president on a 5-4 vote.
Not at all surprisingly, the board voted not to increase its own pay.
Overall, I got the impression that several of the Defenders were quite bitter about their current minority role. This does not bode well for collegiality but may be good for reform.
Thursday, April 14, 2005
Time ripe for MPS reform?
The headline for an editorial this morning expresses the hope and expectations for the new board: "Time ripe for MPS reform." But will MPS be noticeably more effective in two years than today? Will the public perception that MPS is irrelevant to the daily lives of Milwaukeeans--reflected in the miserable voter turnout--start to reverse?
The challenge for the reformers is to develop a few priorities that will start to reconnect MPS to its communities. Their danger is that they heed the calls to build a consensus with the defenders, resulting in little reform, poorly implemented.
The challenge for the reformers is to develop a few priorities that will start to reconnect MPS to its communities. Their danger is that they heed the calls to build a consensus with the defenders, resulting in little reform, poorly implemented.
Monday, April 11, 2005
End free busing!
One of the most important challenges faced by the administration and new board is to make the Neighborhood Schools Initiative work. Kids have to get off buses and move into neighborhood schools. This has a number of advantages, especially in encouraging schools once again to play a role in creating strong neighborhoods. But without stronger measures, it seems unlikely there will be a significant reduction in busing or a significant increase in attendence at the neighborhood school.
One approach is simply to end busing. Denver, for example, ended busing when the state subsidies stopped and reassigned all students to schools in their neighborhoods. Probably the strongest argument against such a drastic measure is fear that it would kill the citywide specialty schools--the Montessori, arts, gifted and talented, language immersion, and others that attract students from all over the city because of the strength of their programs. From a business sense it hardly seems intelligent to kill the most successful products. Thus MPS has arrived at a standoff: it needs to drastically reduce busing but not at the expense of killing the specialty schools.
There is a solution that could achieve both aims: keep busing but charge parents for it. Thus, parents who found busing beneficial because it allowed their child to attend a specialty school could continue to do so if that was high on their priority list. Those parents who chose busing as a form of free day care might take another look at real day care.
If parents paid the cost of busing there would no longer be reasons for the rules aimed at reducing the number of children eligible for busing but also forming an incentive to send kids to distant schools so they would qualify for free busing. For example, when my daughter was five, I found she did not qualify for a bus ride because her day care was too near the school. If we had moved her to a center across the city she would have qualified for a free trip. Because of the MPS rules, I was unable to get her on the bus even if I paid for it.
An immediate criticism of this proposal is that it is unfair because low income parents will find it harder to pay for busing than middle class parents. One solution might be to set up a fund to subsidize busing on a sliding scale based on income. But if MPS has the money for such a fund, is busing the best use for it? One can think of many uses that might better benefit low-income students: subsidized tutoring after school, a longer school day, or books for the student's home, for example.
One approach is simply to end busing. Denver, for example, ended busing when the state subsidies stopped and reassigned all students to schools in their neighborhoods. Probably the strongest argument against such a drastic measure is fear that it would kill the citywide specialty schools--the Montessori, arts, gifted and talented, language immersion, and others that attract students from all over the city because of the strength of their programs. From a business sense it hardly seems intelligent to kill the most successful products. Thus MPS has arrived at a standoff: it needs to drastically reduce busing but not at the expense of killing the specialty schools.
There is a solution that could achieve both aims: keep busing but charge parents for it. Thus, parents who found busing beneficial because it allowed their child to attend a specialty school could continue to do so if that was high on their priority list. Those parents who chose busing as a form of free day care might take another look at real day care.
If parents paid the cost of busing there would no longer be reasons for the rules aimed at reducing the number of children eligible for busing but also forming an incentive to send kids to distant schools so they would qualify for free busing. For example, when my daughter was five, I found she did not qualify for a bus ride because her day care was too near the school. If we had moved her to a center across the city she would have qualified for a free trip. Because of the MPS rules, I was unable to get her on the bus even if I paid for it.
An immediate criticism of this proposal is that it is unfair because low income parents will find it harder to pay for busing than middle class parents. One solution might be to set up a fund to subsidize busing on a sliding scale based on income. But if MPS has the money for such a fund, is busing the best use for it? One can think of many uses that might better benefit low-income students: subsidized tutoring after school, a longer school day, or books for the student's home, for example.
Andrekopoulis the election winner?
In an interesting article in this morning's Journal Sentinel, Alan Borsuk points out that the superintendent is a "significant winner" of the election. This is both because control by the reform group on the board would give the Andrekopoulis more support in pursuing his agenda and also because Danny Goldberg's opponent would likely have joined Tom Balistreri as a strident critic of Andrekopoulis. I encourage everyone to read this article.
I note that the Journal continues to have trouble figuring out how to identify the two groups--or "factions" in Journalese--on the board. Borsuk identifies the reform group through indirection: that it has been on the short-end of the 5-4 split on the board over the past two years and that none of its members were endorsed by the union. I continue to think my terms of "reformers" and "defenders" are both far more succinct and recognize that the differences are not superficial personality clashes but instead reflect very different views on the role of the board.
I note that the Journal continues to have trouble figuring out how to identify the two groups--or "factions" in Journalese--on the board. Borsuk identifies the reform group through indirection: that it has been on the short-end of the 5-4 split on the board over the past two years and that none of its members were endorsed by the union. I continue to think my terms of "reformers" and "defenders" are both far more succinct and recognize that the differences are not superficial personality clashes but instead reflect very different views on the role of the board.
Saturday, April 09, 2005
Reformers and Defenders
With the recent school board election the balance on the board has shifted from five to four in favor of one group to five to four in favor of the other. But what should each of these groups be called? Despite the many years of this divide, even the members of these groups have trouble agreeing on labels. In its report on the election results the Journal Sentinel reverted to the practice of identifying each group with an organization that supported it: “candidates backed by the teacher’s union and those backed by the school choice community.”
But both these designations are problematic as well as cumbersome. Teacher union backing only helps explain behavior on the minority of issues of concern to the union; on most issues the union is indifferent. The use of school choice as the defining issue is even more problematic since the school board has no say in the school choice program and the school choice community sat out the last election.
In an effort to come up with better terms, I took a look at how the supporters of the two groups described their favored candidates. Specifically, I looked at what terms the endorsement editorials in the Journal Sentinel and the Shepherd Express used to praise the candidates the endorsed and to criticize their opponents.
There is no question about the Journal’s favorite term. In a fairly short editorial, I count it using “reform” or “reformers” nine time. But, one may ask, doesn't everyone want to be considered a reformer? Does also claim the mantle of reform? Not at all. In a much longer series of endorsement editorials, the Shepherd does not once mention reform.
Instead of reform, the Shepherd wants strong loyalty to MPS from its board members. One candidate is described as a “defender of public schools.” A second is an “advocate for public schools.” A third a “passionate advocate of public education.”
What form does this defense of public education take? In the Shepherd’s view it largely consists of opposition to anything that might compete with conventional public schools. The only word I found shared by both editorials was “charter.” But the attitude towards charter schools were diametrically opposed. While the Journal praised candidates’ involvement charter schools as reflecting a willingness to innovate, the Shepherd found such involvement showed alarming disloyalty to MPS.
Thus the reformers and defenders–and their supporters–have very different philosophies as to the proper role for board members. Reformers want the board to push for improvement while defenders see it as protecting MPS from its enemies.
But both these designations are problematic as well as cumbersome. Teacher union backing only helps explain behavior on the minority of issues of concern to the union; on most issues the union is indifferent. The use of school choice as the defining issue is even more problematic since the school board has no say in the school choice program and the school choice community sat out the last election.
In an effort to come up with better terms, I took a look at how the supporters of the two groups described their favored candidates. Specifically, I looked at what terms the endorsement editorials in the Journal Sentinel and the Shepherd Express used to praise the candidates the endorsed and to criticize their opponents.
There is no question about the Journal’s favorite term. In a fairly short editorial, I count it using “reform” or “reformers” nine time. But, one may ask, doesn't everyone want to be considered a reformer? Does also claim the mantle of reform? Not at all. In a much longer series of endorsement editorials, the Shepherd does not once mention reform.
Instead of reform, the Shepherd wants strong loyalty to MPS from its board members. One candidate is described as a “defender of public schools.” A second is an “advocate for public schools.” A third a “passionate advocate of public education.”
What form does this defense of public education take? In the Shepherd’s view it largely consists of opposition to anything that might compete with conventional public schools. The only word I found shared by both editorials was “charter.” But the attitude towards charter schools were diametrically opposed. While the Journal praised candidates’ involvement charter schools as reflecting a willingness to innovate, the Shepherd found such involvement showed alarming disloyalty to MPS.
Thus the reformers and defenders–and their supporters–have very different philosophies as to the proper role for board members. Reformers want the board to push for improvement while defenders see it as protecting MPS from its enemies.
Wednesday, April 06, 2005
Wisconsin Citizen Action
A flyer from Wisconsin Citizen Action sets a new low for sleaze:
Rampant corruption. No accountability. Dangerous criminals in taxpayer-supported schools. Does that sound like a program you would support? Danny Goldberg does.
More on the Shepherd Express
A while back, I expressed surprise about actually agreeing with the Shepherd Express. In their school board pre-election articles, however, they returned to form. In an article speculating on pro-voucher money the paper expected in the election, the paper said "Bruce Thompson .... wouldn't reveal his plans for this election." I suspect most readers would interpret this to mean the paper asked me for my plans and I refused to discuss them. In actuality the Shepherd never talked to me. So I never had a chance to refuse to reveal my plans.
The reporter did leave a message on my phone but stressed that there was no urgency in returning the call. When I called back, his message said he was out of town for the week. I haven't heard from him since.
This could be racked up to sloppy reporting, but over the years I have noticed the Shepherd's sloppiness has a purpose. If a story works against the cause of reform in MPS, the Shepherd will run it whether or not it is true.
This is unfortunate on several levels, I think. First unethical journalism hurts our society whatever the ideology of the publisher. Second, there are a number of strong conservative voices in Milwaukee; it would be beneficial to have a strong, trustworthy, liberal voice to balance them.
The reporter did leave a message on my phone but stressed that there was no urgency in returning the call. When I called back, his message said he was out of town for the week. I haven't heard from him since.
This could be racked up to sloppy reporting, but over the years I have noticed the Shepherd's sloppiness has a purpose. If a story works against the cause of reform in MPS, the Shepherd will run it whether or not it is true.
This is unfortunate on several levels, I think. First unethical journalism hurts our society whatever the ideology of the publisher. Second, there are a number of strong conservative voices in Milwaukee; it would be beneficial to have a strong, trustworthy, liberal voice to balance them.
Friday, April 01, 2005
Bicycles and School Board Elections
With the (sort of) coming of spring last weekend, I took a bike ride from the East Side to Muskego. One striking change crossing into the suburbs was the explosion of signs for school board candidates. By contrast, in Milwaukee, even in districts with races, the number of signs was pitifully few.
Why do suburbanites care so much about their school systems? Part of the explanation is simply size; MPS seems too large and too remote. But suburbanites also recognize their stake in the schools. Even if they have no children in the schools, their property values and their neighborhood depend on the attractiveness of the schools.
In Milwaukee, unless they either work for the schools or have children enrolled, most people seemed profoundly uninterested in who runs the schools. The schools simply seem irrelevant to most.
Can this situation be changed? Part of the answer may be to really push the Neighborhood Schools Initiative to restore the local school as the glue that holds its community together.
Another is to get better leadership on the school board, so that once again there is a sense of progress. This morning's Journal Sentinel points out that Kevin Ronny, Danny Goldberg, and Bernardine Bradford offer much more effective leadership than their opponents.
Why do suburbanites care so much about their school systems? Part of the explanation is simply size; MPS seems too large and too remote. But suburbanites also recognize their stake in the schools. Even if they have no children in the schools, their property values and their neighborhood depend on the attractiveness of the schools.
In Milwaukee, unless they either work for the schools or have children enrolled, most people seemed profoundly uninterested in who runs the schools. The schools simply seem irrelevant to most.
Can this situation be changed? Part of the answer may be to really push the Neighborhood Schools Initiative to restore the local school as the glue that holds its community together.
Another is to get better leadership on the school board, so that once again there is a sense of progress. This morning's Journal Sentinel points out that Kevin Ronny, Danny Goldberg, and Bernardine Bradford offer much more effective leadership than their opponents.
Saturday, March 26, 2005
Where are the children?
A Thursday New York Times article (sorry, don't have a link) and a follow-up NPR program describe cities that have been most successful economically but find they have fewer and fewer children. Portland Oregon, for example, has about half as many children as it had in the 1960s.
On a much smaller scale than the cities described in the article, Milwaukee has also enjoyed a revival, notably in Brewer's Hill and along the river. But as with these other cities, few of the people moving in are families with children. An article about Brewer's Hill in the current Milwaukee magazine (not available on the web) describes, inadvertently perhaps, why making schools attractive to middle class parents is so difficult. Palmer elementary school is in the heart of Brewer's Hill but is considered unacceptable to most residents. By most measures, Palmer has been among the poorest performing of all MPS schools for many years.
Yet all schools, no matter how much in need of change, have their passionate defenders. The article describes a proposal from then-board member John Gardner that quickly bogged down in racial and class politics. Yet, according to the same article, few of the Palmer students came from its attendance area.
Side Note: I am increasingly puzzled by Milwaukee magazine's practice of hiring partisans to do reporting without disclosing potential biases. For example, the author of this article is a retired teacher and former union officer who ran against Joe Dannecker (an ally of John Gardner) for school board. The magazine simply describes him as a free-lance writer.
On a much smaller scale than the cities described in the article, Milwaukee has also enjoyed a revival, notably in Brewer's Hill and along the river. But as with these other cities, few of the people moving in are families with children. An article about Brewer's Hill in the current Milwaukee magazine (not available on the web) describes, inadvertently perhaps, why making schools attractive to middle class parents is so difficult. Palmer elementary school is in the heart of Brewer's Hill but is considered unacceptable to most residents. By most measures, Palmer has been among the poorest performing of all MPS schools for many years.
Yet all schools, no matter how much in need of change, have their passionate defenders. The article describes a proposal from then-board member John Gardner that quickly bogged down in racial and class politics. Yet, according to the same article, few of the Palmer students came from its attendance area.
Side Note: I am increasingly puzzled by Milwaukee magazine's practice of hiring partisans to do reporting without disclosing potential biases. For example, the author of this article is a retired teacher and former union officer who ran against Joe Dannecker (an ally of John Gardner) for school board. The magazine simply describes him as a free-lance writer.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)