There is Another Way: A Different Approach to Education Reform

Abstract

Education reform is a long-term project, Mr. Levin and Mr. Wiens argue, and the Manitoba Education Agenda for Student Success will not meet the immediate political need to demonstrate bold action. However, by focusing on teaching and learning, respecting all participants, building capacity, and making use of research, it just might achieve the goals we want for all our children. FOR THE LAST 20 years, governments across North America and around the world have been concerned with improving the outcomes of schooling. The pressure to make changes in schools is fueled by national and international test comparisons and driven by the belief that economic competitiveness rests increasingly on people's skills and knowledge. The specifics of education reform vary from setting to setting, shaped by particularities of history, culture, political structures, demography, and other factors. Nonetheless, some common elements are evident across the English-speaking industrialized countries.1 The main strategies have included: * greater specification of curriculum standards and outcomes, with more focus on reading, writing, mathematics, science, and technology; * more assessment of student outcomes and public reporting of the results on a school-by-school basis; * greater opportunity for parents and students to choose the school the student attends; * more pressure on teachers through measures that control their work, limit their pay, test their competence, and so on; * altered finance structures to reward schools that are able to increase academic results or attract more students or both; and * within these policy frames, greater decentralization of managerial responsibility to individual schools. Kappan readers will be familiar with many examples. In the U.S., reforms in Chicago, Kentucky, North Carolina, Texas, and California have been the subject of much discussion, but every state has had some kind of major reform program, and some states have had several different reform programs over the last 10 years. Countries such as England and New Zealand as well as some of the Australian states have gone through some dramatic changes. In Canada, reforms have been particularly extensive in provinces such as Ontario and Alberta. All this reform has produced a great deal of upheaval and much controversy. Many speeches have been made, much improvement has been promised, lots of money has been spent, and many educators have felt disheartened. The results in terms of increased student achievement have been generally disappointing. In reviewing five large-scale change efforts, Ken Leithwood, Doris Jantzi, and Blair Mascall concluded: Most large-scale reforms have not produced gains [in student achievement], however. . . . Furthermore, where data were available on other types of student-related outcomes across the five cases, results were negative. None of the . . . cases of large-scale reform demonstrated evidence of increasing graduation rates, college attendance, or student retention.2 Why have the results of so many reforms been so disappointing? The answer is no great mystery. Reforms have not worked because they have not focused on the things that we know can affect student performance in schools.3 To put it bluntly, improved student outcomes result from appropriate changes in classroom and school practices that are widely accepted and implemented by teachers, seen as meaningful by students, and supported by parents and communities. We have in recent years been learning more and more about each of the elements of this definition. There is growing - though far from complete - agreement on approaches to teaching that are more and less effective. In areas such as reading, writing, mathematics, science, and citizenship we have increasing evidence on the kinds of instructional practices that are most likely to improve students' skills and commitment. …