PIG PILE! GR Press editorial piles on the educational-reform-by-people-who-aren't-educators

Today's GR Press editorial, disguised as support for the State Board of Education's higher test score standards, piles on more of the same suggestions they claim are "the only way to help students do better." (I'll get to their lame choice of "do better" later.)

Higher standards for cut scores is a no-brainer. The Press' top five ideas for reform, however, are debatable:

Among those reforms should be an expansion of charter schools, changes to laws on teacher tenure, more merit pay to reward good teachers, better teacher training, and privatization of some school services that would allow more money to go into the classroom.

Let's examine what will help our kids "do better." First, more charter schools. There is no compelling evidence that proves charter schools outperform public schools. Charter schools may provide families with a choice, but they also are not required to enroll every child who enters their school, as do public schools. Furthermore, there is no statistically-significant difference in standardized test scores between the two.

(more after the jump)

As for changing tenure laws and teacher evaluations, the Press parrots the popular stance of those who want President Obama's "Race to the Top" moolah:

(It) would tie teacher evaluation in part to student performance and not just to longevity on the job. That should be done to focus more directly on how teachers do their jobs, and not just how long they have done them. 

What makes the Press think that teacher evaluations aren't focused directly on how teachers do their jobs?  What makes them think standardized test scores are an indication of what students actually learn? Or how well teachers teach?

Within hours of posting their editorial touting merit pay as one key aspect of education reform, the Press' own education reporter/blogger, Dave Murray, linked to a Harvard study showing how merit pay does little to improve student achievement:

“The program had only a 'negligible' effect on a list of other measures that includes student attendance, behavioral problems, Regents exam scores, and high school graduation rates, the study found.”

The Press offers no explanation as to what constitutes "better teacher training." Does that mean professional development for current teachers, or training at the collegiate level?  I'd be curious to hear what the education departments of Grand Valley State University and Calvin College - two of the finest schools for future teachers - have to say regarding that.

Privatization may save a district a few bucks in the short term, but it often leads to hiring people who have no connection to a school community. Take a look at your kid's school: how many of those food service workers, custodians, and bus drivers live in your district?

So, what are the answers to improving our schools? Certainly not in what education scholar Diane Ravitch calls "corporate-driven school reform." The real problems, she says,  are "poverty and family support."

Finally, "do better"? Improve, excel, achieve, strive, upgrade, enhance, boost. . . so many possibilities.