Posted on: Tuesday, February 10, 2004
ISLAND VOICES
Schools: Results argue for change
By Malcolm Kirkpatrick
A DOE teacher for 10 years who now tutors
Standardized tests of reading, science and math place the statewide district operated by the Hawai'i DOE in the national cellar. By some measures, we are dead last.
Aggregation of students and resources into large districts intensifies the contest for control of school policy. In small districts, with no large asset at stake, parents win this contest. In large districts, insiders win.
Every debate over reform of the Hawai'i DOE is itself an argument for multiple, independent school districts or a voucher-subsidized market in K-12 education services.
With "public school choice" and multiple independent districts, or a voucher-subsidized market, unhappy parents may take their children and the taxpayers' K-12 education subsidy to a different institution. If we disagree over matters of fact, where "what works?" is an empirical question, multiple independent districts or a voucher-subsidized market will generate more of the information needed to assess and revise policy than will a statewide monopoly school system.
Joseph Gedan's criticism of DOE reform proposals ("Education reform misguided," Jan. 23) demonstrates the need for the reform he criticizes. Mr. Gedan offers three determinants of system performance: parent motivation, teacher qualifications and resources.
He asks: "What do the principals' union and the number of school boards have to do with parent attitudes and behavior?" A lot. One size does not fit all.
With multiple districts and "public school choice," motivated parents can place their children in a school that better fits their interests and abilities. Also, the prospect that advocacy will work encourages parents. Today, parents learn that the statewide system does not respond, and so they give up beating their heads against a bureaucratic wall.
Mr. Gedan is correct that variations in teacher quality influence student performance. DOE defenders would have us suppose that good teachers have advanced degrees and cost a lot.
Not so. Good teachers have subject-area competence, good communication skills and empathy.
