Sometimes politics makes one too
clever by half, as is the case with a bill to alter the governance structure of
the East Baton Rouge Parish School District. But also sometimes the limits of
politics forces very imperfect solutions.
While several bills to address the
troubled district, which as of the latest
data ranked in the 23rd percentile in performance, got
introduced into the Louisiana Legislature this session with actions such as
carving out a new community school district and dividing the EBRPSD into four
zones, the one with most traction so far is SB
636 by state Sen. Bodi White. It
would decentralize many governance decisions to the school level, where
principals would be responsible for recruiting and hiring personnel, would oversee
curriculum, instruction methods, and professional development, and with district
oversight be responsible for food services, transportation, custodial, health
and a wide range of other services. Principals would operate under management
contracts of up to five years and be subject to dismissal if they fail to meet
performance goals spelled out in the written agreement. A community council
would provide parental input.
It’s clear that, left to its own
devices in its current form, the EBRPSD will continue to underserve children.
Over the last several years, it has continued to hemorrhage students even as
the parish population has grown and its performance has been stagnant, even as
its per pupil spending (as of the latest data) has
increased nearly 50 percent since the hurricane disasters of 2005, or the ninth
highest of all, while having the twelfth highest per pupil spending. Despite
these facts, the past and present leadership has taken a bifurcated approach as
the district continues to sink: blame its ills on a lack of money but try to
build political support among advantaged families by a “two Baton Rouges”
tactic of creating programs to attract high performing students to make a few strong schools while
ghettoizing the remainder.
That nonstarter has resulted in
poor performance and thereby the creation of 21 charter schools within it.
Overall, in the state the infusion of charter schools unquestionably has
improved performance, confirmed by the most
recent research that demonstrates, among other salutary results, children
in charter schools over the course of a year end up in performance two months
ahead of similar children in traditional schools. And perhaps that’s why, when
reviewing the bill, its contents aren’t far off from being the charter school
concept in different raiment. Many of the similar decentralization aspects
currently afforded to charter schools in Louisiana also appear in this
legislation.
But there is one crucial
difference. With a charter school, the bureaucratic structure with its rules
and regulations completely is shunted aside, while this bill would keep it
intact. And it’s this very difference that allows charter schools to post their
superior results over similarly-situated traditional schools. They don’t have
to make personnel actions on the basis of civil service regulations or deal
with teacher unions. They don’t have patronage and political pressures
influencing staffing or programmatic decisions. They don’t have to conform to
an attendance zone.
Yet the biggest impediment to not
loosening the one-size-fits-all, government monopoly format by allowing these
bureaucratic strictures to remain in place is the linchpins in this governance
structure, the principals. Unlike the ones that run charter schools, if testimony
about this bill to the Senate
Education Committee serves as any kind of guide, the fear too many of them evince
over the prospect of taking on what the bill asks shows they lack the talent
and desire to succeed. Unfortunately, too many are drones of the failing system,
where, compared to charter schools, in heading up schools accountability is too
tepid, creativity is too lacking, and management skills don’t translate well
outside of the monopoly environment.
Perhaps after a few years of
having this system in place the cream will rise to the top and more capable
individuals will govern. However, it begs the question that to overcome this
vitiating impact to bring better administration faster, why not simply make
them all charter schools, or follow the Orleans Parish model of making all but
the least deficient charter schools? The concept is so close already, yet that’s
precisely why the bill’s sponsors eschew that extra step: because there is so
much political opposition to charter schools by the education establishment,
its fellow-traveling politicians, and ideologues wedded to the
command-and-control model of education. Following that model, politically only
possible because of the ravages of the hurricane disasters in Orleans that
opened minds to better approaches, seems unlikely to appear as public policy at
this juncture given the political strength of the education revanchists.
Thus, it may be that this charter
school model imposed on the government monopoly structure is the maximally
politically possible maneuver, and that despite the inherent difficulties of
the hybrid, it may be thought to be better than letting things go on as they
are. It’s a risky proposition, but considering the dire straits in which is the
EBRPSD, perhaps worth taking.
No comments:
Post a Comment