QUALITY EDUCATION
Dale Russakoff’s report on the attempted rescue of the Newark school system contains echoes of the social-reform efforts of a century ago (“Schooled,” May 19th). When Cory Booker, Newark’s “rock-star mayor,” called for top-down reform because an open political process could potentially be taken captive by opponents, he reminded me of the social reformer John Purroy Mitchel, the wondrous “Boy Mayor” of New York City, who took office in 1914. Convinced of his own pure motives, Mitchel felt himself to be uniquely capable of transforming the lives of the downtrodden, and so never bothered to consult the folks he was uplifting. Neither Mitchel nor Booker thought that serious participation could be a positive force in his grand plans, and both appeared to believe that the dilemmas of a democracy are best addressed through less, not more, democracy. Such beliefs rest on an ugly assumption: that only “the best and the brightest” are capable of exercising their own agency, while the rest of us can be written off according to age, race, income, and place of residence. Mitchel was driven from office after a single term. The New Republic wrote that people had “revolted against the consequences to themselves of government by capable and disinterested experts”—an undemocratic “autocracy of experts.” The election of Ras Baraka as Newark’s new mayor is yet another echo.
William Ayers
Chicago, Ill.
Russakoff’s article focusses on the feelings of disenfranchisement experienced by Newark schools’ stakeholders: students, families, and teachers. This focus on feelings is misplaced. The would-be reformers have failed to persuade the stakeholders because their proposed reforms are unproved. A study published last month in a journal of the American Educational Research Association casts doubt on the utility of using student test scores to evaluate teacher performance, a centerpiece of the reforms described in Russakoff’s article. The study was funded in part by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which advocates precisely this type of teacher evaluation, but in comments about the findings one of the researchers was clear: “Value-added scores don’t seem to be reflecting the quality and content of the work that teachers are doing in the classroom.” The Newark school stakeholders are acting rationally by refusing to accept radical, disruptive, and dubious reforms.
John Hankey
Teacher, Los Angeles Unified School District
Los Angeles, Calif.
Many of the decisions made by the Newark School Superintendent, Cami Anderson, seem farsighted given the complexity of what she calls “sixteen-dimensional chess,” the socio-economic-scholarly context within which school systems operate. As a lifelong educator, I know that effective schooling is complicated, especially in an environment poisoned by poverty, corruption, and in-fighting. Progress is possible if decision-makers heed a few basic principles: learning isn’t a commodity; schools are not profit centers; and communities are entitled to a voice and to an accounting of resources. Ultimately, what matters most is what takes place between students and teachers. An authoritative 2007 study by McKinsey & Company concluded that most reform efforts, including restructuring and charter schools, have little or no systemic impact: “The quality of a school system rests on the quality of its teachers.” Human capital is the capital that counts.
Jim Haas
Olathe, Kans.
