Red flags on the road to reform

I was going to stop writing about education for a while, because it can be frustrating.

But too much is going on.

Washington is trying to get some of the Race to the Top money the other Washington is dangling to entice states to conform to its ideas for improving education.

Everyone's talking about improvement. The Seattle School District announced plans to give itself a report card.

Also, this Wednesday, the Seattle School Board will vote on new school-assignment maps.

I covered my desk with copies of recent stories and e-mails about education and tried to put it all into some context.

Everyone from the League of Women Voters to early-education proponents and anti-gang-violence petitioners had a take on what needs to be done and how.

I picked up the late educator Gerald Bracey's final report on the condition of public education. Some of what he says is relevant to what's going on here, now.

Bracey died in Port Townsend in October. He was 69 and had worked in nearly every area of education. He taught at George Mason University's graduate school of education until 2005 and was known for his analysis and criticism of education research and faulty reform efforts.

His final report published this month questioned three assumptions.

The first is that high-quality schools can eliminate the achievement gap between whites and minorities.

There's no common definition of high-quality, he said. It's hard to hit a target people can't agree on.

Mostly he questioned whether underachieving schools repair themselves if no one addresses what happens to their students outside of school.

He criticized people who praise the Harlem Children's Zone based solely on test results and classroom rigor.

HCZ makes a difference because it offers a full range of social services that address many of the reasons children in poverty struggle in school.

Bracey also chided people who claim U.S. schools as a whole lag behind schools elsewhere in the world.

But it's really about how much money families in the school have. Schools with high percentages of poor students who don't do well give rise to unfavorable comparisons with other nations.

You can't improve education without addressing poverty. And the effects of poverty are made worse when poor students are concentrated in a school.

Our city needs to take that into account. When those boundary lines are set this week, schools in high poverty will need services that reach beyond the campus and into homes if they are to succeed.

Second, Bracey looked at cities in which mayors had taken over schools.

Our next mayor, Mike McGinn, is interested in taking responsibility for schools. Taking responsibility, or rather sharing it, is good, but taking over, not so good. Bracey found it doesn't work.

Third, he looked at calls for higher standards, often based on standardized testing.

He notes that Sidwell Friends, the school President Obama's daughters attend, doesn't dwell on standards and tests.

Bracey cites another local education researcher, David Marshak, professor emeritus at Seattle University, who suggested moving away from "factory model schools."

Sidwell Friends tries to develop thinking and creativity rather than test-taking ability. Of course, it costs nearly $30,000 a year to attend.

Any effort to improve education has to take into account the ways in which money matters. It's not always the dollars spent in the classroom, though that's important. The economic status of the school community may matter even more.

Counteracting the effects of poverty, especially multigenerational poverty, is a must.

Any plan lacking that element will just lead to more frustration.

Jerry Large's column appears Monday and Thursday. Reach him at 206-464-3346 or jlarge@seattletimes.com.