Smart, S-M-R-T

Your reading for this post, the recent article on the reason about Washington D.C.'s public schools.

Most people know I am not a huge fan of the status quo in American education.  I have spent over 10 years after high school in my quest to learn stuff (I still teach myself a lot, look at my reading list to see how this is going).  I have a lot to say about all levels of education, everyone does.  I have a lot of friends who are teachers, everyone does.  I think it is wrong to say, 'If you don't have a solution, you can't criticize the current situation,' which is just a stupid thing to say.  Anyone can look at a stock portfolio that is down 20% and realize there is a problem when everyone else is only down 10%, doesn't mean we all know the answer to fix the former.

Anyway, this article is a very engaging piece.  We need major reform in primary and secondary education.  Let me start by saying that I don't know what the answer is and I don't know if what Rhee is doing is correct, but at least she is trying.  The article is about this change.  I don't know if the decidedly libertarian/pro-voucher/anti-union bias of the article is needed though.  However I would suggest those with a little bit of time give it a read, it is slightly long.

I very much applaud Rhee for trying something in Washington D.C.  It is all too common for people to look towards the federal government for answers.  I think this is a mistake with education (I also think it is a mistake in general but I leave that to another post).  At least with more experiments in more districts we can find what works.  That being said it is not obvious that the changes in Washington D.C. are hurting the kids which is a hurdle most programs must pass for most people.  We need more localized initiatives to fix education.  On a local level people are invested in their schools.  If a school board says, 'We are going to try this' then you know the public will help watch over the program and vote for change locally if things go south.  One a national level you have no such immediate concern for grass-roots efforts.  Additionally you have big money buying votes in congress.  Additionally if education is returned to the local areas then they can copy the things that work from other districts and remove the bad things when they find them.  If someone above you is dictating your policy it is hard to change.

In my opinion education is too important to be left to the federal government.  I am going to follow this post up in a few days with a post about Arne Duncan (the current secretary of education, a department which I do not really like) since he was referenced in this article.  I think it is important to know what he has been doing since assuming office.  If anyone has any reading for that post feel free to post below and I will review it.