Post by southsidesignmaker on Oct 6, 2010 8:31:14 GMT -5
Look past 'Superman' for reform answers
By Timothy Knowles
October 6, 2010
www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/ct-oped-1006reform-20101006,0,4396601.story
Hollywood deals in heroes and villains, winners and losers, tragedy and triumph.
"Waiting for Superman," director Davis Guggenheim's documentary on school reform, contains these stock components in spades. It is a powerful film with the potential to outrage, provoke and sharply focus the country on the cause of creating excellent schools for all children.
But the silver screen cannot provide a useful blueprint for school reform. For that, the movie's incensed viewers must leave the theater and hit the books. They'll find that we've learned a lot about why some schools succeed, and how communities can build excellent schools without a superhero's help.
The film follows five students and their families as they attempt to flee struggling neighborhood schools and secure coveted spots in public charter schools. The audience learns that a random lottery — simple chance — will determine whether these kids receive a quality education. Interspersed amongst these stories is a parallel narrative about school reform that casts charter school operators, education entrepreneurs and firebrand iconoclasts, such as Washington, D.C., public schools chief Michelle Rhee, as the saviors of public education fighting the good fight against self-interested teachers unions and incompetent bureaucrats.
The film packs an emotional wallop: It's nothing less than gut-wrenching to witness these families fight for their children's future and galling to confront the hard truth that education is a zero-sum game for many students in many states and districts in America. Audiences likely will leave the film outraged at the system (which Guggenheim refers to as "the blob"), outraged at the overlapping rules and regulations that put a chokehold on innovation, and outraged at teachers unions.
Register with Chicago Tribune and receive free newsletters and alerts >>
These are all valid emotions. For too long our schools have put the needs of adults ahead of the needs of children. Viewers should be incensed that union contracts guarantee teachers a job for life and that bureaucratic red tape regularly stymies innovation. Likewise, there is value in Rhee's take-no-prisoners approach to school reform and — critically — the film captures some powerful examples of what a small number of charter schools have achieved.
Yet, there is a crucial message in the film that nearly gets lost amidst the narrative's sound and fury. Characters in the film say repeatedly "we know what works," and indeed we do. The film's characters don't explain the factors that drive schoolwide improvement, but research tells us what they are.
The Consortium on Chicago School Research at the University of Chicago has identified "five essentials" of school reform that reliably lead to better schools: instruction, school climate, parent involvement, professional capacity and leadership. Schools strong in three of the five supports are 10 times more likely to achieve substantial gains in reading and math than schools that are not. And a sustained weakness in just one of these supports virtually guarantees stagnation.
Researchers discovered this formula while analyzing why students in 100 public elementary schools in Chicago managed to improve significantly in reading and math over a seven-year period, while students in another 100 schools did not. Significantly, the researchers found improving schools in virtually every neighborhood of the city. Whether in advantaged or disadvantaged communities, very well-organized schools improved and poorly organized schools stagnated.
The inconvenient truth about school reform is that it's incredibly difficult, multifaceted and resistant to faddish quick fixes. In short, it doesn't fit neatly into narrative format. Charter schools are not a silver bullet — which the film only briefly acknowledges with a fleeting reference to the fact that just one in five charters produces "amazing" results. And a study by Stanford University's Center for Research on Educational Outcomes suggests the numbers are lower than that. Stanford researchers found that 17 percent of the nation's charter schools outperform their traditional public school counterparts. The rest turned out to be the same or worse.
If viewers leave "Waiting for Superman" convinced that charter schools are the answer — or turned off by the film's one-sided depiction of charter schools — a substantial opportunity will be lost, and the buzz generated by the movie will amount to little more than white noise. But if we channel some of this passion into building the essential supports in all schools, then we won't have to keep waiting for Superman to save the day.
Timothy Knowles is director of the University of Chicago Urban Education Institute. Paul Goren is director of the university's Consortium on Chicago School Research.
By Timothy Knowles
October 6, 2010
www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/ct-oped-1006reform-20101006,0,4396601.story
Hollywood deals in heroes and villains, winners and losers, tragedy and triumph.
"Waiting for Superman," director Davis Guggenheim's documentary on school reform, contains these stock components in spades. It is a powerful film with the potential to outrage, provoke and sharply focus the country on the cause of creating excellent schools for all children.
But the silver screen cannot provide a useful blueprint for school reform. For that, the movie's incensed viewers must leave the theater and hit the books. They'll find that we've learned a lot about why some schools succeed, and how communities can build excellent schools without a superhero's help.
The film follows five students and their families as they attempt to flee struggling neighborhood schools and secure coveted spots in public charter schools. The audience learns that a random lottery — simple chance — will determine whether these kids receive a quality education. Interspersed amongst these stories is a parallel narrative about school reform that casts charter school operators, education entrepreneurs and firebrand iconoclasts, such as Washington, D.C., public schools chief Michelle Rhee, as the saviors of public education fighting the good fight against self-interested teachers unions and incompetent bureaucrats.
The film packs an emotional wallop: It's nothing less than gut-wrenching to witness these families fight for their children's future and galling to confront the hard truth that education is a zero-sum game for many students in many states and districts in America. Audiences likely will leave the film outraged at the system (which Guggenheim refers to as "the blob"), outraged at the overlapping rules and regulations that put a chokehold on innovation, and outraged at teachers unions.
Register with Chicago Tribune and receive free newsletters and alerts >>
These are all valid emotions. For too long our schools have put the needs of adults ahead of the needs of children. Viewers should be incensed that union contracts guarantee teachers a job for life and that bureaucratic red tape regularly stymies innovation. Likewise, there is value in Rhee's take-no-prisoners approach to school reform and — critically — the film captures some powerful examples of what a small number of charter schools have achieved.
Yet, there is a crucial message in the film that nearly gets lost amidst the narrative's sound and fury. Characters in the film say repeatedly "we know what works," and indeed we do. The film's characters don't explain the factors that drive schoolwide improvement, but research tells us what they are.
The Consortium on Chicago School Research at the University of Chicago has identified "five essentials" of school reform that reliably lead to better schools: instruction, school climate, parent involvement, professional capacity and leadership. Schools strong in three of the five supports are 10 times more likely to achieve substantial gains in reading and math than schools that are not. And a sustained weakness in just one of these supports virtually guarantees stagnation.
Researchers discovered this formula while analyzing why students in 100 public elementary schools in Chicago managed to improve significantly in reading and math over a seven-year period, while students in another 100 schools did not. Significantly, the researchers found improving schools in virtually every neighborhood of the city. Whether in advantaged or disadvantaged communities, very well-organized schools improved and poorly organized schools stagnated.
The inconvenient truth about school reform is that it's incredibly difficult, multifaceted and resistant to faddish quick fixes. In short, it doesn't fit neatly into narrative format. Charter schools are not a silver bullet — which the film only briefly acknowledges with a fleeting reference to the fact that just one in five charters produces "amazing" results. And a study by Stanford University's Center for Research on Educational Outcomes suggests the numbers are lower than that. Stanford researchers found that 17 percent of the nation's charter schools outperform their traditional public school counterparts. The rest turned out to be the same or worse.
If viewers leave "Waiting for Superman" convinced that charter schools are the answer — or turned off by the film's one-sided depiction of charter schools — a substantial opportunity will be lost, and the buzz generated by the movie will amount to little more than white noise. But if we channel some of this passion into building the essential supports in all schools, then we won't have to keep waiting for Superman to save the day.
Timothy Knowles is director of the University of Chicago Urban Education Institute. Paul Goren is director of the university's Consortium on Chicago School Research.
