As chancellor of America’s largest traditional public school system — and one of the leading advocates for school reform — New York City Department of Education Chancellor Joel Klein has his own set of views on how the federal Race to the Top program can shape state policymaking — and even reshape the reauthorization of the No Child Left Behind Act.

During his speech yesterday at the Alliance for Excellent Education’s luncheon on how New York City’s overhaul in the context of federal school reform activity, Klein said he wants the particular elements of Race to the Top — including the emphasis on increasing the number of charter schools available to parents, improving teacher quality and accountability — to be reflected in the next version of No Child. He wants the law to emphasize states and school districts to focus on what New York City focused on in its reform — the creation of  “a system of great schools” and the willingness to shutter schools in which pervasive academic failure has become too stubbornly entrenched.

Klein offers his reasons why the traditional education establishment, school choice advocates and even parents should embrace school reform in this clip. You can also check out the Alliance’s own report on New York City’s efforts. And come back later to watch Klein’s sparring partner in school reform, United Federation of Teachers President (and Randi Weingarten successor) Michael Mulgrew offer thoughts on how No Child reauthorization should emphasize things other than testing.

The Assembly chamber isn't the only thing empty when it comes to school reform. Photo courtesy of the New York Times.

What’s happening in the dropout nation after the AFC and NFC title games:

1. Opponents of standardized testing tend to think that there is little value to subjecting students (and teachers and school districts) to exams. But, as reported at Miller-McCune, testing is valuable in improving student learning (as well as proving valuable in tracking their academic progress).
2. It wasn’t unsurprising last week when New York State’s Democratic-led legislature failed to the pass legislation eliminating restrictions on growth of charter schools. What may be more surprising, as the Daily News reports, is that 49 percent of legislators received part of their education in private schools. Essentially, a good number of Empire State politicians denied to poor children the access to high-quality education they themselves received. Hypocritical. But, as we’ve seen inside the Beltway with the shuttering of the D.C. voucher program, not shocking.
3. When it comes to education reform, India and the United States aren’t far apart, according to Tom Vander Ark.
4. The Gates Foundation hands off $10 million to Denver’s traditional school district, according to the Denver Post. Whether this is a smart move or an Annenberg-like miscue? A different story.
5. Collin Hitt of the Illinois Policy Institute gives some perspective on what may be a fascinating attempt at education reform by Rod Blajocevich’s successor, Pat Quinn.
6. Even more going on in Memphis, another potential hotspot for school reform. The traditional school district there is offering more-rigorous math classes in elementary school (albeit, unfortunately, at just a few of its schools) and preparing to offer International Baccalaureate classes, notes the Commercial Appeal‘s Jane Roberts. Now if the district can make this widespread. Meanwhile Richard Locker analyzes how Tennessee’s latest round of teacher evaluation reforms came to fore.
7. Fordham (or to be more-specific, Smooth Mike) wants to know if you think Race to the Top is a “rip-off”. Let them know through their poll. I have my thoughts — and you already know what they are.
8. And at Indianapolis blog, IPS B.S., teachers are debating whether the state’s proposed grade retention law is worthy of discussion. Many seem to think kids should be held back even earlier than the state suggests.
9. Finally, off-education: Get a good start this Monday. Listen to “Rip the Universe”, a song from one of my favorite bands, a Canadian group called Reverie Sound Revue. For something a little less modern, you can also go with The O’Jays‘ “Love Train”.

Don’t forget to check out this week’s Dropout Nation Podcast, which focuses on the high cost of teacher compensation and tenure for America’s taxpayers — and how it will drive the efforts to revamp how teachers are paid and evaluated. Also read last week’s Dropout Nation articles, including Saturday’s This is Dropout Nation report on one of the nation’s worst school systems.

These seats shouldn't be empty. Let's make sure all the children are here.

What’s happening in the Dropout Nation:

1. The past couple of days has been filled with news about the various Race to the Top applications. You can check out the applications submitted by Indiana, Tennessee, Illinois, Alabama, Ohio, and California. Alexander Russo offers a more-comprehensive list; Andy Smarick offers some thoughts; and Neal McCluskey wishes it would all fade away (with the help of newly-elected U.S. Senator Scott Brown).
2. The Wall Street Journal editorial board offers some advice to Arne Duncan on spending the Race to the Top money. Pick the best and most-innovative plans, they say, and forget a “Race to the Middle”.
3. At EducationNews, Linda Schrock Taylor offers a few suggestions on how schools should teach reading. Start with by not bothering to teach it at all. She’s just kidding (I think).
4. John Fensterwald looks at the latest NAEP data and sees bad news for the Golden State. Not exactly surprising.
5. In the Detroit Free Press, the state-appointed finance czar (and school district overlord-in-waiting) Robert Bobb proposes that he and others should be “righting the great wrongs” of educational neglect that happens daily within the district. Well, it is a start.
6. Charter Insights responds to AFT New York City honcho Michael Mulgrew’s latest paean against lifting New York State’s charter school cap.
7. The SacBee offers a database on average teacher salaries in its region. It notes that the average teacher saw a 1.8 percent increase in pay.

More coming later this afternoon. Until then, enjoy this week’s Dropout Nation Podcast and commentary on the need to bring diversity of thought and coverage to education reporting. A video featuring D.C. Public Schools’ teacher quality czar will come in the next hour.

The dropout nation is brimming with news:

1. Matt Yglesias argues that some conservatives are moving past charters because they “don’t do anything to entrench the privileges of the wealthy.” As usual, Yglesias weakens his arguments with class warfare material instead of making a strong case for his position. For one, plenty of conservatives are supportive of charters; it’s usually hard-core libertarians — who, on principle, are opposed to any state intervention in education — and moderate Republicans representing suburban school districts (which oppose vouchers and charters altogether) who have issues with charters. Two, as seen in the case of D.C.‘s soon-to-be-shuttered voucher program and the pioneering program in Milwaukee (along with programs run by private foundations), all the kids attending private schools on vouchers are poor. If Yglesias is going to play the class warfare game, he should at least get it right.
2. In any case, charters and vouchers can both foster educational equity, especially for the poorest children, who couldn’t otherwise afford even the highest-quality Catholic schools. As I’ve reported in The Catholic World Report, Catholic archdioceses across the country struggle to maintain their position as the private schools of choice for poor immigrant, urban and rural families largely because of the costs. Allowing for both charters and vouchers, along with improving the quality of public education overall, helps to bring equity to all.
3. Speaking of charters: Diane Ravitch is at it again. At least she admits charter schools do work (even if it is a tad backhanded).
4. And the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools releases its rating of states today. The Washington Post has its take.
5. The Orlando Sentinel notes that only 14 Sunshine State districts have so far signed onto the state’s Race to the Top reform plan. Meanwhile the head of Florida’s PTA has taken a stand for Race to the Top participation.
6. Speaking of Race to the Top, Tom Carroll speculates on whether the state’s dysfunctional legislature will get the job done. Of course, the AFT’s New York State affiliate is key in this discussion — as as noted yesterday, aren’t exactly playing nice.
7. Speaking of the AFT, here is the video of union president Randi Weingarten’s announcement that it will begin supporting the use of student test score data in teacher evaluations. How much of this is proverbial rope-a-dope? As Andy Rotherham notes, Weingarten declares the union is turning over a new leaf every year with little in the way of follow-through. Weingarten’s letter in Monday’s Wall Street Journal (along with her classic “Bush II” comment last year) justifies the skepticism. But, as I’ve noted, the location of the AFT’s locals in hotbeds of reform, along with its history and demographics, makes it more likely that the union will actually walk the walk. Besides, as pointed out by the Education Equality Project, it’s a sweet way to stick it to the rival National Education Association (which has historically lagged behind the AFT in everything).
8. Meanwhile the guy causing all these dust-ups, Arne Duncan, gets a bashing from one outlet for lacking teaching experience. As if the most successful education reformers this past decade (or for that matter, this past century) have been teachers. By the way, my take on Duncan and the problems in reforming school districts is officially up today.
9. EducationNews’ Michael Shaughnessy interviews The Month of Zephram Mondays author Leslie A. Susskind. Short and interesting.
10. Chad Ratliff observes the appointment of a charter school-friendly state education chieftain in his home state of Virginia — a notoriously difficult state in which to start them — and is excited by the possibilities.
11. Joanne Jacobs comments on the latest round of charter school activity in L.A. and notes that charters are doing well by their students even if they have to admit all children– unlike magnet schools, which Richard Kahlenberg fails to point out in a screed dedicated to yours truly. As an aside: It is interesting that those arguing for equity support a form of public education that is inherently unequal and anti-family choice.
12. And for those interested in the role of broadband in education, here’s a PowerPoint presentation on distance learning and broadband given yesterday at the Broadband Breakfast by the Federal Communications Commission’s education director. Enjoy.

Photo courtesy of Jose Vilson

What the dropout nation is reading this Monday morning:after the NFL playoffs:

1. John Fensterwald notes Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s effort to revamp the state’s teacher seniority rules, which force districts to lay off their younger teachers first without regard to their performance. Fensterwald notes that if Schwarzenegger succeeds, districts will have to step up to the plate and conduct strong rigorous evaluations of teacher performance. Fensterwald also reports that some school districts are getting cold feet about Race to the Top participation.
2. In the Daily News, Tom Carroll takes to task Randi Weingarten’s replacement as head of New York City’s AFT local. Sample quote: “Mulgrew’s point is not actually the advancement of any specific proposal, but rather to throw out there as much mischief as possible to gum up charter schools”.
3. In Dropout Nation comments for Friday’s Read. Southern Education Foundation’s Steve Suitts, who co-wrote the recently-released A New Diverse Majority report, responds to Monise Seward’s criticisms of the study (and of education think tankers in general). He makes some important points about the study and its overall focus. I’m reading the report now for an upcoming Spectator report.
4. Virginia’s Democratic House leader argues that support for charter schools shouldn’t be a “partisan” issue.
5. School administrator Deron Durflinger offers a voucher-like kind of school reform: Give vouchers to parents, who can then directly select the teachers they want to teach their children. Intriguing idea. It could actually lead to greater parental engagement, improve student achievement and make teachers true professionals the way lawyers usually are.
6. Alan Bonsteel of California Parents for Educational Choice offers historical perspective on school choice and the Golden State’s recent school reform efforts.
7. Julia Steiny focuses on a union-sponsored charter school. A school not sponsored by either the NEA or AFT.
8. Kevin Carey observes the financial havoc within California’s university system and takes shots at the University of California’s leaders and wealthy students for their “faux solidarity” with poor collegians.

The happy faces of children engaged in learning. It is a beautiful thing. (Photo courtesy of the New York Daily News)

As both the Bluegrass Policy Institute and Fordham’s Andy Smarick have pointed out, several states are putting together what can be best called Trojan Horses reform packages for Race to the Top funding. This can be expected. Even as state legislators and governors want to get their hands on the money, they must also stare down the teachers unions, suburban school districts and skeptical suburban parents who are satisfied with the status quo.

One area in which states may be able to fudge is in the requirement to remove restrictions on the growth of the charter school movement. The U.S. Department of Education regulations governing Race to the Top clearly states that caps on the number of charter schools allowed to be authorized must be removed (this can be found in Appendix B of this Ed Department answer sheet). But it doesn’t clearly state that other kinds of restrictions on charter school growth can exist. This is a problem. In many states, there are terms and rules in charter school laws that essentially act to restrict the growth of (and diversity within) charters.

One method is to limit their existence to large urban areas. In Missouri, charters can only be opened in St. Louis and Kansas City. Although the rules initially were written in order to bring competition and choice to poor urban families stuck with woeful traditional public schools, the rules essentially keep charters out of suburbia. Suburban districts, therefore, remain safe. Massachusetts’ own Race to the Top reforms, for example, still essentially restrict charter schools to the poorest and worst-performing school districts.

Another is to require charters to be approved by traditional school districts. Considering that they operate existing public schools, this also deters charter school expansion. Suburban school districts, in particular, have little reason to embrace any kind of competition. This is why there are fewer charters in Maryland and Virginia, which have this requirement, than in neighboring D.C., which doesn’t — even though D.C. has a far smaller student population. Although exceptions to the rule are usually made in the case of big cities — because charters are supposed to help the parents who live there — there are occasional exceptions: The massive Los Angeles Unified School District, for example, attempted to frustrate charter school expansion efforts until public pressure forced its hand.

And though Race to the Top regulations can be interpreted to ban states from restricting the kind of students that can attend charters, this may not necessarily stand up once the vetting process begins in earnest. As I’ve noted in my recent report on charter school diversity, Tennessee only allows charters to enroll students who previously attended other charters, were formerly enrolled in laggard traditional public schools, or have failed the state’s standardized tests. Such rules may be rare, but they do exist — and states may not feel the pressure to abide by the spirit of the program.

It isn’t enough to just lift a cap on the number of charter schools. Expanding where charters can operate will go a long way in providing all children and parents the kind of options they seek in order to improve their educational destinies. It also goes a long way towards blunting the objections of civil rights activists who see charters as merely a path towards segregation (and ignore the concerns black and Latino parents have for ensuring high-quality curricula — and the presence of successful role models of similar race and ethnicity — for their children).

There will be plenty of more battles to come, even as Race to the Top is clearly spurring states such as California and New York to engage in truly meaningful reforms. The pressures politicians face from opponents to Race to the Top is strong — especially for Democrats in fear of losing statehouse and congressional seats and Republicans representing suburbia. There’s also the lack of focus among school reformers on rallying parental backing. And in  many states, a lack of well-supported grassroots reformers is also a problem. In short, school reform is a long way from being sustainable.