The Federal role in Education
By Nancy Salvato (01/20/06)
An Interview with G. Reid Lyon, Part III
Q. What role should the federal government play in education -in addition to conducting tax funded educational research on “best practice” since in order for our republic to function properly there must be a well educated citizenry?
A. The federal role is absolutely necessary. They have the nation’s welfare in mind and the organizational capability to base informed policy and practice on the back of the best evidence available. We do it with the FDA, we can do it with education.
Reading First demands that we examine our efforts and their impact on kids honestly
Q. Why do you suppose President Bush is so misunderstood with regard to his educational concerns? Why do you think people are so easily distracted by the accusation “unfunded mandate” that they can lose focus on the bigger picture -that there are significant groups of children whose learning needs are not being addressed by the educational process- wouldn’t you consider this to be the most important issue on which we should concentrate our energy?
A. It is surprising there is so much criticism. Reading First is certainly funded at historic levels. There is 1 billion a year provided in Reading First which is an increase over previous funding. It is tough to see this argument. What I think is operating when people malign Reading First for example, is the predictable pushback you will find when a change is asked for and when greater accountability is put in place. Reading First demands that we examine our efforts and their impact on kids honestly. No hiding the numbers – No excuses. Teachers’ decisions should be based on strong evidence- based knowledge, not beliefs, philosophies, untested assumptions, or anecdotes. Evidence is not the plural of anecdote. Pushback is cultural, historical and political. As a scientist, I want to see if we’re putting the right stuff in and are teachers benefiting kids. When teachers see how things work, they’ll trust it. This is a Republican administration with the boldest initiative in history that departs from status quo. Federal money can’ be used with that which does not work and must be used to help kids who are disenfranchised.
Competition
Q. NCLB was originally written to include private school choice. It was passed with this section of the law left out. What are your thoughts about having the money follow the child in education?
A. I’m for anything that increases competition.
Accountability
Q. How can you be sure that schools receiving federal money are implementing programs properly?
A. If you find a program isn’t doing well, that is to be expected if teachers aren’t implementing the program with fidelity. Likewise, you can have the most well prepared teacher, but if the program is ineffective, kids will not learn. One can also have a great teacher and a great program but if the building level leadership is poor and the teachers are not provided enough time to teach and to collaborate with one another, then kids will not learn. It is complex, but so is life. The point is when all elements are in place, students learn – even those from the direst circumstances.
Reading First has also instituted accountability into the educational culture. Schools are now monitored to determine if the programs they purchased with federal funds are effective in improving student achievement and closing achievement gaps between subgroups of students. If schools do not produce learning gains among students, then students will have the right to transfer to a school where their needs can be met. Again, common sense.
Education has always been a local issue
Q. You’d think an audit would be welcomed.
A. This is such a sea change; education has always been a local issue and people felt they were doing extremely well without the feds help. A blue ribbon school could come in at 80th % proficiency in reading but if you disaggregated scores by student subgroup – for example, looked specifically at how kids from different SES levels, race and ethnicity were doing, you would typically see very few kids from disadvantage learning to read at all – but, their difficulties were not noticed because all of the scores were lumped together. Disaggregating the data forces an answer to the question, why are you leaving kids behind? For example, there were and still are in some schools very low expectations that kids from disadvantaged environments could actually learn as well as their more affluent classmates. Now, we know they can if the right programs are in place, if the teachers are well prepared, and if the schools are led by effective principals. But until we asked the question about how ALL of your students are doing, many youngsters were left behind. The law is based upon getting those kids the very strong help they need.
Implementing ineffective programs constitute malpractice
Q. I recently heard a speaker who disappointed me by suggesting that we want to go back to this golden age of education that never existed and expressed his belief that he thought educators were doing pretty well. I wanted to say, well some people are… but what about those sub groups who aren’t.
A. We line up in the middle when compared against other countries. Where are our disadvantaged kids? When we maintain status quo we don’t truly look to see who is being hurt. Now we’re being honest about who is not doing well and if we provide the right stuff, will they do better? Absolutely. As I mentioned earlier, I believe that implementing ineffective programs constitute malpractice.
Typical media outlets foster debate and controversy rather than dig for the objective facts
Q. What role has the media played in helping us understand critical educational issues and needs?
A. What has always disappointed me is that your typical media outlets foster debate and controversy rather than dig for the objective facts. Reporters will frequently tell me that you can use research to support anything you want. Bull hockey. Good research is good research and good research is defined by using the right methods and designs to answer specific questions. If you could make research support anything you want, why have we given up the practice of using leeches to treatment particular maladies? Surely, some may say they have “research” that continues to support that. The media gets lazy – they tend to base their stories on “appeals to Authority” rather than the objective scientific evidence. Figuring out what works with students is not about a particular individual or personality – it is only about what the evidence proves
Parents frequently assume that the teachers and schools know best
Do we have to use scientific evidence in making instructional decisions? You bet. If your own child was sick and being seen by a physician would you not want to make sure that the treatment was based on the best and most objective knowledge available. The FDA requires two clinical trials for treating particular illnesses. There needs to be this sort of rigor in the educational community. Parents frequently assume that the teachers and schools know best. If you survey parents and ask them if schools are doing a good job, they’ll say no. But if you ask them if their school is doing a good job, they’ll say yes. Teachers want to do a great job but teachers can’t teach what they don’t know. That gap in evidence based knowledge exists and we need to make people understand this without making people feel bad.
Articles in this Complete Series Include:
1. Shifting the focus to Effective Instruction
2. Effective Reading Programs Share Common Characteristics
3. The Federal role in Education
4. Getting Beyond Polarization of Bilingual Methods
5. Developing an American College of Education
Copyright © Nancy Salvato 2006
(Printer friendly version) Email: Nancy Salvato
