Since the Nation at Risk report was issued by the National Commission on Excellence in Education in 1983, local and state educators have been involved in wide ranging attempts at reforming the way they teach students and evaluate teachers, at improving the setting in which students learn, at increasing the involvement of parents and of those outside education, and even at revamping the content of the curriculum. Measurements, assessments, and evaluations abound; the results are vigorously debated; the description of success is discussed and challenged. For nearly 15 years, the intensity of reform activity has been especially strong. Never without controversy and often obscured by ideology or jargon, the form, purpose, and content of education have rarely earned such sustained attention from so many--both inside and outside the schools.

In Virginia, every governor since Chuck Robb has made some form of education improvement a hallmark of his administration. Whether he has tackled reduced class size, international curricula, full funding for the Standards of Quality, disparity in financing education among different districts, or the establishment of charter schools, each of these governors has found his proposals to be costly and controversial. In other words, even in Virginia, reform is not cheap; nor is it necessarily congenial.

It would be useful, then, to step back from the sound and the fury that swirl around these attempts to change the enterprise of education so that we might consider what we are doing and why.

In the final analysis, the curriculum presented to students; the means of and the setting for presenting that curriculum; the teachers who present it; and the administrators, the support systems, and the whole social and political infrastructure that make the presentation possible are all components of education reform to varying degrees. Researchers still debate which of these elements are the most influential in improving education and consequently how far we have actually gone down the road toward improvement.

The Education Commission of the States (ECS), a unique, nonpartisan policy research institute formed by interstate compact, has evaluated education reform efforts in every state for the past two years and has reached some interesting conclusions about how effective these reforms seem to be. For example, the ECS report, The Progress of Education Reform: 1996, concludes that the most promising reforms are those aimed at what goes on in the classroom: strengthening the interaction between students and teachers and enhancing the curriculum. Thus, issues like school choice, charter schools, and technology initiatives are interesting from the point of view of education theory, but perhaps less important for education reform than are better curriculum standards and improved teaching quality and conditions.

The 1996 ECS report also characterizes a five-year study by the Center on Organization and Restructuring of Schools (CORS) at the University of Wisconsin. According to ECS, the study concludes that 'the most important factor in successful reform is the presence of a strong professional community in which teachers pursue a clear, shared purpose for student learning; engage in collaborative work; and take collective responsibility for student learning.' The emphasis on teachers and on their interaction with students in the classroom seems to be the most successful element in school reform.

WHERE DO WE STAND?

To most Americans, public education remains a matter of primary importance. As Sara Mosle points out in The New Republic, 'Despite much rhetoric to the contrary, . . . Americans are not abandoning the public school system in droves, nor are they even particularly dissatisfied with their own children's schools.' She believes that ideologically driven criticisms of education over the past 30 years have contributed to a decline in American's general opinion of the country's educational system; however, most parents give good grades to their own children's schools. (However, Lawrence C. Stedman, writing in Educational Policy Analysis Archives, cites an assertion by Andrew Coulson that 'citizens are better informed about the national condition of education than they are about the local one.' This is primarily because assessments are usually national rather than local in scope.)

Nonetheless, signs of serious problems do emerge from the countless studies. In late November, the U.S. Department of Education released the Third International Mathematics and Science Study, which evaluates the results of tests taken by students in 41 industrial countries. This study is considered the broadest international study ever conducted comparing the math and science performance of seventh and eighth graders. According to this study, as reported in Education Week, 'American students are neither the very worst in the world nor the very best, a finding that confirms past studies comparing the United States with other countries in mathematics and science. But the findings . . . show that science proved more manageable for American students--they scored above average internationally--than did math, in which they ranked below the mean.'

Stedman, who is an associate professor of education at SUNY- Binghamton, writes that '[a]lthough trends have generally been stable, there are important exceptions. . . . Science and civics scores remain below their 1969 level, high school reading scores fell in the late 1980s on several tests, and the SRA tests showed reading and math declines at several grades.' Stedman summarizes the condition of American education compared to education in other industrial nations by noting that American students 'have done well in reading and elementary school science, middling to poor in geography and secondary school science, and last or near-last in mathematics.' The condition of American education may not be as dire as it is often portrayed; nonetheless, as Stedman asserts, 'One cannot look over this information without a sense that our schools are not what they should be. . . . What we're seeing, particularly at the high-school level, is that students are often disengaged, teachers' work is often factory-like, and intellectual life is often poor.'

In a forum sponsored by the Brookings Institution on the future of education, Diane Ravitch summarized her view of the condition of education after a decade of reforms: 'Although exceptions exist, student performance remains distressingly poor; standards and expectations are too low; most states, using money supplied [by the federal government], are developing new content and performance standards; few states or school districts have assessments that are tied to high standards; most American parents do not know whether their children are getting a good education.'

In his book on the fundamental principles governing education in the U.S.--The End of Education: Redefining the Value of School--Neil Postman notes that 'in considering how to conduct the schooling of our young, adults have two problems to solve. One is an engineering problem; the other, a metaphysical one.' If, in the context of this essay, the reform of the student-teacher interaction is a metaphysical problem, then the engineering problem that our schools face continues to trouble educators. The setting in which students learn is showing clear signs of strain and may be diminishing the learning potential of many students and undermining measures to improve education.

According to a recent U.S. General Accounting Office report, School Facilities: America's Schools Report Differing Conditions, one-third of all schools, serving 14 million students, need extensive repair or replacement. More than 50 percent of schools in America have at least one serious environmental problem, such as poor indoor air quality. Almost half--46 percent--of the schools report inadequate electrical wiring for computers and communications technology, and over half--52 percent--report six or more insufficient technology elements, such as fiber optics cabling, phone lines for modems, and wiring for computers. With public school enrollment in grades K-12 expected to rise 20 percent between 1990 and 2004, many school districts face the need to build new schools. A first-rate education may not require a first-rate classroom or laboratory, but it is clear that we are making it more difficult to achieve that first-rate education when it occurs in unacceptable settings.

At the request of the governor, the Virginia Department of Education has proposed revising the state's rules for school construction funding in an attempt to make borrowing for construction simpler for school districts. The measure, which Governor George Allen made public in November and which must be approved by the General Assembly, is included in the budget amendments for FY 1998. It would allow local school districts to spend some of the construction bond proceeds that they are now required to keep in a reserve fund. With the change, districts would have an expanded buying power estimated at $200 million each year for the next five years. School districts also would have the flexibility to use the freed-up reserve funds for more than long-term construction projects.

The Education Commission of the States summarizes well the mixed results we have achieved in improving the condition of education in the United States: 'American schools are making slow but steady progress, despite the fact that they serve a student population facing increasingly significant nonacademic barriers to success. But this progress is dwarfed by changes in the knowledge and skill requirements of work and citizenship in 21st century America. . . . American students are doing better than they did a decade ago, with particular increases among minority students. The dropout rate has gone down, especially among [African-Americans], even as students in general are meeting tougher graduation requirements. . . . [Nevertheless], American students stack up poorly against youngsters from other industrialized nations in mathematics and reading achievement.' In other words, American students are moving ahead, if somewhat falteringly, in achieving national education goals. However, they are being rapidly and consistently surpassed by students in other industrial nations. Progress, yes; but not yet success.

SOME RECIPES FOR REFORM SUCCESS

The approaches to maintaining effective progress in improving education vary with the sense of urgency and of the extent of the problems. Theodore Sizer, for example, writing in Debating the Future of American Education: Do We Need National Standards and Assessments? believes that American schools are essentially sound when they are sufficiently financed as they are in the suburbs, but that they are dangerous and not 'learning communities' when they are inner city or rural schools starved for even minimal financial support.

To succeed in reforming education, Mosle suggests that we consult teachers more and we need a better understanding of idealism. She writes, 'Idealism is part of the job description of a teacher, and so the fortunes of idealism bear directly on our comprehension of what is possible in our schools.' The role of teacher is so pivotal because the teacher will carry out or undermine the reform proposals. Without the active support of teachers, reform will fail.

According to David C. Berliner and Bruce J. Biddle, authors of The Manufactured Crisis: Myths, Fraud and the Attack on America's Schools, the three problems that American schools face are (1) unequal support between states and between local districts; (2) sudden, unplanned radical expansion of the proportion of students in school; and (3) the inclusion of previously excluded student populations, especially those from impoverished families, those who are disabled, and those who are from broken homes. The solutions require stronger financial support for at-risk children and their schools and a renewed social commitment to education and to the elimination of the pressures of poverty and isolation.

However, Minnesota-based education expert Ted Kilderie has observed that the most important characteristic of urban and rural public schools is that they are monopolies without serious competition. The solution is to free all schools from central bureaucracies and from union regulations. This is accomplished by introducing marketplace dynamics through the establishment of independent charter schools and greater discretion for management at the level of individual schools.

The ECS report advises states and communities to focus on improving academic standards because 'results suggest that all students benefit from higher [academic] standards and that standards do not damage the academic chances of disadvantaged students.' Roy Romer, governor of Colorado, former chair of ECS, and a long-time education reform activist, has asserted that 'standards and assessments are the most hopeful, systemic tools to reshape American education.' Chester Finn, a fellow with the Hudson Institute and former assistant secretaryfor education in President Bush's admini-stration, agrees: 'This standards and accountability model of education reform made sense to elected officials, business leaders, and laymen.'

According to ECS, 44 states now mandate some form of academic standards. Most of the approaches fall into one of three categories: the statewide leadership approach, in which the state guides the development of consensus standards used by all districts; the local leadership approach, in which the state requires each district to develop its own set of standards; and the state-local approach, in which the state develops model standards and requires each district to develop its own standards that meet or exceed the state's.

Whether the recipe for progress is a comprehensive, community-wide approach, a more targeted effort to ignite and sustain the creativity of teachers, a statewide mandate for higher academic standards, or a mixture of many or all of these elements, no researcher or educator is yet able to say. We are still in a period of experimentation in which trial-and-error is the preferred method of action; evaluations and assessments are still far from complete. Policymakers at all levels of government have a significant role to play in this controlled chaos of experimentation, but the principal players reside in the state capitals. As the following samples suggest, the state legislators and governors set the tone, the direction, and often the pace of reform.

A FEW OF THE INTERESTING EXPERIMENTS

While the federal government has proposed major initiatives to encourage states to raise academic standards through the Goals 2000 program and to subsidize the cost of school construction and renovation, the impetus for most education reform still emerges from the state and local school systems. A sample of these state programs will suggest the variety and innovative quality of the current reform efforts. Perhaps this sample will also provide ideas for Virginia's educational policymakers.

Mississippi's FiberNet 2000:

Advanced technology for rural schools that need it most but can afford it least

Launched by the governor of Mississippi in March 1991, FiberNet 2000 involves high-level officials in a partnership between the state and five different private companies. The FiberNet 2000 system connects four rural high schools in the state with one another and with Mississippi State University, the Mississippi School for Math and Science, Mississippi University for Women, and the Mississippi Educational Television Network studio via a fiber-optic network. A teacher in any of these locations can conduct a class in any of the four secondary schools. The availability of new broadband switching technology makes it possible for FiberNet 2000 to use the public switched network telephone at lower cost and with more flexibility.

(Editor's note: In June 1996, working under the leadership of Virginia Tech, Virginia established the contractual and physical infrastructure to connect any school in the commonwealth. Dubbed Net.Work.Virginia, the statewide, high-speed, multimedia network is capable of simultaneously transmitting two-way integrated voice, data, and video images over the Internet from thousands of sites across Virginia. In time, the network will connect every state and private university and college, community college, and secondary school in the state. Net.Work.Virginia is a partnership of the commonwealth, Sprint, and Bell Atlantic.)

Oregon's Education Act for the 21st Century:

Improving the school-to-work transition

Through its Education Act for the 21st Century, Oregon has expanded early childhood education; established new and high learning standards; developed a performance-based assessment system; integrated health and social services; restructured professional-technical education; implemented applied learning throughout the school system; developed youth apprenticeship programs; decentralized decision-making to the local level; implemented certificates of initial and advanced mastery; and provided workplace learning for secondary students. Progress is measured through the Oregon Benchmarks, which are 272 different indicators.

Georgia's HOPE Scholarship:

Giving every student a chance at higher education

Since September 1993, Georgia has devoted revenue from the statewide lottery for HOPE scholarships for students from its high schools who choose to attend public colleges in state. The student must have a B average. In applying for college, the student must also apply for all other appropriate federal grants and loans, and the HOPE scholarship will make up the difference between federal money and the college's tuition. The HOPE scholarship can also pay for tuition equalization payments to private colleges in Georgia.

Texas proposal:

Educating the children of teachers

The Texas state comptroller has proposed offering free college tuition for the children of career educators to curtail the exodus of experienced teachers from public schools in Texas. Under this proposal, teachers with at least ten years of classroom experience would receive free tuition for their children at any Texas public college. Teachers with at least 15 years' service would also have their children's required fees paid by the state. The comptroller estimates that costs would total $20.3 million every two years.

Massachusetts Education Reform Act:

Enhancing standards and giving teachers the means to help students succeed On June 18, 1993, the Massachusetts Education Reform Act was signed into law. The major categories of this comprehensive measure address curriculum and assessment, teacher tenure and certification, school administration, and school finance. The measure requires all students, by the year 2000, to pass a state assessment of core competencies in order to earn a high school diploma. In addition to promoting better educational technologies, more structured learning and challenging new curricula, and early childhood education, the measure also requires that to become certified, teachers must pass tests that incorporate challenging content and performance standards.

WHERE ARE WE HEADED?

Higher academic standards and improved classroom instruction by teachers with up-to-date training and increased authority in schools that are safe, sturdy, and well-equipped: that summarizes the goal of education reform. In Virginia, public education has come a long way toward that goal. First of all, educators in Virginia are accustomed to an emphasis on standards since the state constitution has mandated them in the Standards of Quality (article VIII, section 2). Secondly, beginning with Governor Robb's and Governor Baliles's proposals to improve teacher salaries, Virginia's school districts and teachers have attempted to support better the professionalism of instructors. Finally, Governor Allen's new proposal to make more money available for classroom construction and maintenance may signal progress in the improvement in classroom settings.

As long as learning is understood to be essential to the life of a free nation, then education will properly continue to receive exquisitely close attention. Too much is at stake for students, for their parents, for their future employers, and for the democratic society in whose governance they mustparticipate. However, the diversified, decentralized system of education in the United States that makes reform easier also makes evaluation more difficult. Consequently, those who are concerned about improvements in teaching and learning need the opportunity to evaluate other experiments, like the preceding ones, and to assess the results that other states and schools systems have achieved. The picture and pace of education reform will always seem to be chaotic under those conditions, but progress is still both achievable and necessary.

Kevin J. Burke, who works for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, was an education policy assistant to Virginia's Governor Gerald Baliles. He also has taught high school English in Northern Virginia.

SPRING 97 VIA