Join the conversation

When it comes to schools, does the business community suffer from split personality?

We hear a lot about the influence of business on school reform. But I'm not sure there's a monolithic "business" perspective on schools. Instead, I've seen at least two major thrusts in what business leaders have said about school reform. First, there are those who championed No Child Left Behind. Then there are those who urge hands-on learning, higher-order thinking skills, and rich opportunities to learn outside school walls. Needless to say, the two approaches don't always mingle happily.

Maybe that's why a new set of business recommendations on ESEA seemed almost at war with itself. The Business Coalition for Student Achievement's (BCSA) "Principles for the Reauthorization of ESEA" combine many of NCLB's greatest hits with more muted appeals for a broader vision of schooling. In these very lean years, I worry that NCLB's narrow vision will prevail as the broader vision falls by the wayside.

First, the Blast from the Past. BCSA wants to retain the major hallmarks of NCLB: Annual testing in math and reading, full proficiency, and sanctions for struggling schools. They even want to keep the SES provisions. (Because they were such a smashing success?) What's more, they want to add merit pay to this mix, a move that might actually ratchet up the pressure to teach to tests and dump all but math, reading and science out of the curriculum.

Now the Kinder, Gentler Vision of the Future. But then BCSA includes a kinder, gentler vision of schooling. They call for ESEA to support "inquiry based learning, project based learning and hands-on activities." (I wish they had said more about knowledge.) And they want to engage students by showing them the "real world applications" of what's in a "standards-based curriculum." That's all good and well, but NCLB's accountability structure does precious little to reward schools for going out on any of those limbs.

Can Better Tests Unite the Two Visions? To be fair to BCSA, the group does call for "R&D to develop a next generation of assessments" that would (I assume) do a much better job than the current lot does of measuring what's important. I wish they had pushed this point with even more urgency. Tests are the engine that drives this big, lumbering vehicle, so they had better be pulling in the right direction.

And Let's Not Forget Capacity to Do the Job. The BCSA also deserves credit for saying more than most about the capacity of schools to succeed. They call for someone (though it's not clear who, or with what resources) to "redesign and strengthen ineffective professional development programs." They urge "increased support for parent involvement programs." They suggest "training on the use of data to differentiate instruction for students," because the data alone will not set you free. And they support "extended learning time initiatives (including afterschool and summer programs) for at-risk students."

But What Happens If The Funding Never Comes? Even with its many flaws, NCLB would certainly be much better if it balanced accountability with an agenda for building schools' capacity. But I get worried when I start adding up the price tag of the BCSA's suggestions: Much better tests, more R&D, better staff development, after-school and summer school.... If we do all of these things well enough to make an actual difference, we're talking about a lot of money.

Let's not forget that others in the business community are calling for tax cuts and limits on government spending. As the money runs dry, we're all too likely to do what we've always done: Keep the lousy tests and sanctions, but dial back on better assessments and steady support.

The BCSA group has shown real and sustained commitment to poor students and students of color. But we can only hope against hope that the law they propose doesn't become another Frankenstein monster bereft of a human soul.

Some Other Principles to Think About. Over a year ago, LFA released a set of principles for federal involvement in education.These principles are still important today, in large part because they seek to resist the tendency to narrow our education vision:

• A Broad vision for student learning.
• Adequate funding for students in need.
• Shared accountability for student learning.
• A comprehensive approach to supporting students and families.
• Support for education research and development.
• Support for the Education Profession.