Office of the Ser secraiary mrt. vost Office of the Office of the Under Deputy Secretary Seerstary ottes ot Office of the Ottce of Sori cotieot | | Fem, Pd ementaryS| | inspect: | | evauatons et j Sreanday | | "Ete fae “s | sate Devipient offer of be} orice ot Inte ot cnkmerean ‘oe Innownbon & Ejucaton Inchar & tsmaton | | pronee Seences Asan ee — “ceed | cust iain Specs, | Otce ates a cohen ote of otice tt cL gation | Stee, [| cates svencate tuanagernt [austen | Gants | EASE sraPacne ‘Sven visege Office of Ofice ot on eovensoea mo Legation Tecra et | usage cra met equiaton mars amencans Difion of on copes eau ttoas ory eters Tipence Wine ‘ack ater: Sshoraibosverano csacaten Covenant: Whe aes Decne in a Hah owe avenon Nn: Ez Ns duration Governance: Makes the Baueation andl Who Iias the Power? n con 4 Amber M, Northern arid Chaster E. Finn Jr. 09/91/20 Anyone who has spent serious time within the U.S. public education system would likely agree that there are too many chefs in the school governance kitchen. Not only that, some of them are gervible cooks. Which means that great ‘governance is scarce, consensus is hard to achieve, and significant change is rare. Yet our education governance system, lamented and disparaged asit often is, is one of the least understood aspects of American K—12 schooling. So while it’s easy to agree that “bad” governance gets in the way of doing what's best for Kids, i's harder to pinpoint just that exactly sso dysfunctional when it comes to running sehools. -¥ COIN’ f1Nd SpFC1N ‘To shine a flashlight into this murk, we must first define the governance “system” that we're talking about. Who exactly makes which kinds of education decisions? State or local? Who has the power? Is that power dispersed or centralized? To what degree can the wider publie—not just insiders—participate in policymaking? These are some of the gnarly questions that characterize governance; but because they're also humdrum and wonky, not many people bother trying to ask them, Some ofthis apathy (or is it despair?) arises from the reality thatthe structures, rules, and institutions of Am public education are indeed cumbersome and difficult to change, Issues like whether the state, distrit, or building Jeader decides how to dismiss an ineffective teacher often fall under the purview of the state constitution or education code. Ditto for how the state superintendent i selected. Even seemingly small matters like altering when the local school board holds elections, can prove impervious to change. Yet alls not lost. Fissures can be seen inthe governance glacier. We've seen “cage-busting” eadars who know how to wvotk in or around the system so that it fonctions better for kids (think of Paul Pastore, Howard Buller, Mike /74) Esinberg, Wen Chris Barbie, Deborah Gist, Joel Klein, and others). We've even seen the structure itself en remodeled in plaves that have shifted from uniformity to “portfolio” models, switched from board to mayoral control hg d charter schools and statewide recovery districts, and handed schoo! leaders more power while awarding “central offices" less. So how to make sense out of a system with some cords that are binding and others that show some stretch? We turned to the University of Oregon's Joanna Smith, who had previously co-authored a nifty study on education governance in California, Dr. Smith, aided by several talented graduate students, agreed to conduct a new study with two of Fordham’s own best analysts, Dara Zeehandelaar and David Griffith. The result is Schools of Thought: A Taxonomy of American Education Governance, released today. (Our dream team categorized state-level governance systems around three broad questions: 1. How much education decision-making authority lies at the state versus the local level? Do state-level institutions eontrol decisions related to school takeovers, teacher evaluations, textbook adoption, and taxation or are these things mostly decided locally? 2. Is education decision-making distributed among many institutions or consolidated in a few? Does single state board have authority over issues like higher education and teacher credentialing, or are these handled by separate bodies? 3-To what degree ean the public participate in the polieymaking process? Are leaders elected ‘or appointed, and by what means? ipswaw eaueatonnextcrglesston govemance-sho-makesthe-dectsons-andaho-nas.he power!igs andl tantalizng factoids (atleast inthe eyes of us se questions yielded both big-picture findin ‘concentrates by far the Jisrict boundaries and tax rates, authorize new pment. w that (aside from Ravwail, with ts single school district), we, Tar Heel state officials have the power to determine d re which textbooks tnay be used in classrooms, jaks ove: low-performing schools and districts hers annvelly, using a state-prescribed evaluation inst Spools al require that districts evaluate teas ‘the spectrum is Wyoming, which leaves most of this authority to its local districts ai{Gigsbiathas the mest “consal rity overwhelmingly vested in a The Last Frontier has the education parceled 1 governance system, with auth Sith a small number of very large school districts ts fit i Alas of ‘with authority over higher education, CTE, and adult ba ST Regents the Commission on Postsecondary Education, and the Department of Labor and ~five districts to serve 131,000 students ot tothe Board Workfonve Development. Additionally, it operates fifty aly hnted for similarities, not contrasts. To that end, the analysts fit similar states into eight categories —a you will based on their common characteristics, We named those categories after an octet of history's os political thinkers and statesmen, people who have wrested with governance questions over the “nttoce central beliefs ean be distinguished from one another: Jefferson, Hamilton, Lincoln, Locke, Burke, Madison, Andrew Jackson, and Plato, just as Jefferson distrusted the wisdom ofa rling class, the ten JeTEEsomTaMtates (including Alaska, Arizona, and California) yest much authority at the local eve s ple institutions, and favor cratic participation. By contrast, the sever| Hamilto overmance systems that vest greater author cola inian ftates (Michigan, Nevada, and Tennessee among them) concent te level and with few institutions, yet also encourage bls pasteiation, In this, they mirror the preferences of ou siteenth president, who supported a strong central government that was also accountable to public opinion. (See the fullreport for more on the taxonomy.) Burke remarked in 1792 that “the several species of government vie with each other in the absurdity of their constitutions, and the oppression which they make their subjects endure.” Those desiring to undo the absurdities of American public education governance are wise to begin with a clearer understanding not only ofthe arrangements they're presently working within, but also ofthe remarkably different ciccumstances that have arisen in other jurisdictions. Our new report supplies such understanding, ~ Amber M, Northern and Chester E. Finn, Jr ‘This first appeared on Elynaner Notify Me When Education Next Posts a Big Story Yer your email also want to receive the Education Next daily email alert. ‘Submit sor Aereemont | Privacy Policy ‘Reporting Copyright Infkingement } Guideline for Submissions | Permissions | EAQ nepsunew eaentennestcrleaveaton-goverancenuho-mekes-be dacsions-andnhotas:he-powee a