Imagine

...if we were putting $4 billion into this instead of $10 million?

And while we're talking about HCZ

...and in honor of this past week, which I spent in Minnesota, I bring you this editorial from last week's Minneapolis Star Tribune:
... On Aug. 9, "Kids Count" released data showing that the number of children living in poverty in Minnesota grew by an astonishing 33 percent from 2001-2007. Right now, 2,700 children are homeless, 40,000 do not have health care and at least 112,000 children and counting are living in poverty. These numbers and the challenges they create for our schools -- as revealed in the recent No Child Left Behind reports -- should be jolting Minnesotans into action. We need to act to broadly change the future for our children...

Union organizing and what kids really need

Very interesting editorial in yesterday's Boston Globe on Governor Patrick and Mayor Menino's moves toward stripping teachers of collective bargaining rights (am I alone in having missed this? If you're reading this and know more, please comment!). The link between unionized teachers and poorly performing children being....nonexistent, Ed Doherty, formerly of the Boston Teachers Union, goes on to what really would help kids to better:

The first step is to accept that if we are serious about closing the achievement gap, we must begin to help long before these children arrive for the first day of school. The beginning point is adequate prenatal care for mothers, followed by information and training for parents on fostering their children’s good health and social and intellectual growth from birth. The period from birth to age 5 is critical in determining a child’s long -range educational success.

Most parents want to do the right thing for their children, but far too many simply do not know how. This outreach and involvement with parents in the poorest communities will require the coordinated efforts of social service agencies, neighborhood health clinics, community organizations, and schools.

The next step is assuring these children access to quality day care and early education programs, followed by mandatory all-day kindergarten. Once in school, children from these poorer neighborhoods should be guaranteed small class size, adequate materials and resources, a longer school day, and quality before- and after-school programs.

It's remarkable how much this sounds like the Harlem Children's Zone as put together by Geoffrey Canada. I've said it before and I'll say it again: I wish this administration was doing more to create more models of that and doing less with the proposals under Race to the Top. We know what works. We just aren't doing it.

Reforming school reform

An absolutely amazing article in this week's The Nation on school reform, or what's being called "school reform" nationally right now. This is what Duncan, Rhee, Klein, and yes, even Al Sharpton have in common on education. It's what I've been complaining about in the Obama administration for several months now; their reform isn't reform at all. The article is only available to subscribers, but you can:

1. sign up for their free four week trial
2. borrow it from your local liberal
3. read it at your local library
4. let me know if you'd like to see the whole thing (I'd be violating fair use to post it all)

It is well worth it!
Here's the kicker:
Obama's decision to invite representatives of only one side of this divide to the Oval Office confirmed what many suspected: the new administration--despite internal sympathy for the "broader, bolder approach"--is eager to affiliate itself with the bipartisan flash and pizazz around the new education reformers. The risk is that in doing so the administration will alienate supporters with a more nuanced view of education policy. What's more, critics contend that free-market education reform is a top-down movement that is struggling to build relationships with parents and community activists, the folks who typically support local schools and mobilize neighbors on their behalf.

So keenly aware of this deficit are education reformers that a number of influential players were involved in the payment of $500,000 to Sharpton's nearly broke nonprofit, the National Action Network, in order to procure Sharpton as a national spokesman for the EEP. And Sharpton's presence has unquestionably benefited the EEP coalition, ensuring media attention and grassroots African-American crowds at events like the one held during Obama's inauguration festivities, at Cardozo High School in Washington.

"Sharpton was a pretty big draw," says Washington schools chancellor Michelle Rhee, recalling the boisterous crowd at Cardozo. Rhee is known for shutting down schools and aggressively pursuing a private sector-financed merit pay program. Some of the locals who came out to hear Sharpton booed Rhee's speech at the same event, despite the fact that her policies embody the movement for which Sharpton speaks.

The $500,000 donation to Sharpton's organization was revealed by New York Daily News columnist Juan Gonzaacutelez on April 1, as the EEP and National Action Network were co-hosting a two-day summit in Harlem, attended by luminaries including Chicago schools CEO Arne Duncan. The money originated in the coffers of Plainfield Asset Management, a Connecticut-based hedge fund whose managing director is former New York City schools chancellor Harold Levy, an ally of the current chancellor, Joel Klein. Plainfield has invested in Playboy, horse racetracks and biofuels. But the company did not donate the money directly to Sharpton. Rather, in what appears to have been an attempt to cover tracks, the $500,000 was given to a nonprofit entity called Education Reform Now, which has no employees. (According to IRS filings, Education Reform Now had never before accepted a donation of more than $92,500.) That group, in turn, funneled the $500,000 to Sharpton's nonprofit.

Okay, that's a lot of smoke and mirrors. Why should you care? First of all, this is a group of people remarkably far removed from classrooms, making decisions about education at some very high levels, right up to the Secretary of Education for the country. They have very little idea of the realities of teaching and learning in those classrooms, and they have very little idea of what has actually been shown to work. (See, for example, David Brooks' misreading of Geoffrey Canada's Harlem Children's Zone as a vindication of needing only to improve schools rather than their surroundings. There's a reason it's called a Zone.) This is much of what some bloggers have been referring to as "vulture philanthropists" who are experimenting with public education across the country.

The big reason to be concerned is that these are largely people who have no interest in parental and community involvement: quite the reverse. They see it as getting in their way.

Great summary of Geoffrey Canada

I haven't posted as much as I ought to have about Geoffrey Canada's Harlem Children Zone. Canada is among those who are speaking at the New Yorker Summit .
Kottke has a great summary of what Canada's discovered:

1. We have to tackle everything at the same time. Small programs touching unconnected parts of kids lives aren't that effective.

2. They start working with kids from birth and stay with them until they graduate from college. If they don't let them get behind, later superhero-type interventions (which don't often work) are not needed.

3. Scale is important. If you work with lots of kids, their collective action reinforces itself with little further effort.

4. Accountability and evaluation is needed. Canada said that if bad teachers aren't teaching the kids, they should be fired.