________________________________________  THE VERMONT EDUCATION REPORT April 18, 2005 - Vol. 5, No. 14 ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯  Covering education news in Vermont and beyond... Informative, provocative, unique... Published by Vermonters for Better Education  VBE is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization whose mission is to enlist parents and the public at large in achieving quality educational opportunities for all the children of Vermont by monitoring the state of education in Vermont; promoting the value of educational freedoms for all parents; and giving parents the evaluative tools with which to identify excellence. Libby Sternberg, executive director: VTBetterEd@aol.com NEWS & ANALYSIS... AN INTERVIEW WITH TOM JAMES, NEW CHAIRMAN OF THE SBOE Recently, the State Board of Education elected new officers. Tom James of Essex Junction was chosen as the chairman. Last week, the VER interviewed him, getting his thoughts on a range of issues before the board. VER: The State Board is composed of ten citizen volunteers, all appointed by the governor for six-year terms. Governor James Douglas has now appointed a majority of the members. Recently, some legislators introduced a bill, S.133, that would include four legislators on the State Board. What is the Board's position on that? TJ: The State Board is appointed by the governor and (therefore) is an agency under the executive branch. We did recognize there were state colleges, etc. that were not part of the executive branch -- these were areas where proponents of the bill were citing legislative representation. Most Board members mentioned if we were to do this (have legislative members) then it would be a politicization of the education process. If you had legislators on the board they would be basically two-year assignments and one of the great strengths of the board is that the people on it are named for six years. Education isn't something that changes every year or every two years and six-year appointments make a lot of sense.  The legislature already has a paramount oversight role, so why do they need additional authority? When you put that all together, this bill doesn't do a thing to advance the interests of students and could potentially detract (from the interests of students). VER: What if the bill changed into a requirement that the governor appoint certain types of people -- for example, teachers, administrators and the like? TJ: We haven't discussed that but I have a sense that the governor does that anyway. I know we have some teachers, some business people, a homeschooler, a couple folks who have a huge background in education (now on the Board). If you have a governor who's interested in education, I think those things are going to happen anyway. VER: The SBOE is, in effect, the Commissioner of Education's boss. What is your process for monitoring his performance? How do you act as his -- and the VT Department of Education's -- supervisor? Is that difficult for a volunteer board? TJ: Let me really emphasize that it's clear to me that the purpose of this board is policy making. The job is to determine what needs to be done, versus how it's done. In our Strategic Plan, we made it clear that the job of the Board is to come up with policy. I've made that clear to everyone I've talked to. I've made it clear when I've talked to the governor. A part of that is we're also the boss of the Commissioner. Our Commissioner hasn't been on board that long. And the majority on the Board hasn't been on the Board that long. We're now doing two things. One is a self-evaluation of the Board. We're in the process of implementing that right now. We will implement it in its entirety at our planning session in June. At the same time, a few months ago we asked Commissioner Cate to give us some feedback on his performance from his perspective against the advertised requirements for the job. Secondly, we have, through the Strategic Plan, a whole series of things that are clearly defined as the Commissioner's responsibilities. We in turn will measure him on those things. That is just being implemented and will be getting close in the June timeframe. Our job is to very specifically and systematically address the performance of the Commissioner. Some of that will end up in private session, as it should. And through him, that's how we affect the Department. I think we're going to have a good system. It's evolving. VER: What is your own background in education? TJ: I went into the Air Force 17 days after graduating from high school. I spent some of my time in the Air Force teaching. I also attended the University of Colorado. After I left the Air Force, I went to work for IBM. ...I spent three years teaching for IBM in Minnesota. And I worked as a consultant with a variety of folks in the state on different kinds of education and teaching. I served on the school board in the town of Essex for three years. VER: What are the main issues before the Board at this time? TJ: I think our attention in the near term should be policy clarity. The Strategic Plan says: "And be proactive in policy development." That's where the school choice (resolution and bill)...came from. The Plan also says: "Will be cognizant of the impact of policy on local school boards" -- Quite a few of us are still serving on local school boards and we know a lot of things can be (implemented) that don't make a lot of sense. Connected with (all this) is legislative involvement. I have to admit that makes a lot of people nervous because to some folks that means these non-professionals, volunteers, are going to start messing around with legislation. I don't mean to suggest that we go wild, but on the other hand, if we are the State Board, then the State Board should have some hand in giving direction - (direction that represents) our collective thinking. I feel very deeply that when someone becomes chair of a board they are not somehow smarter than others on the board. They are someone who can help facilitate getting things done. The third thing I'm focusing on is communication with stakeholders - the Education Coalition [editor's note: this is a group of organizations - the VTNEA, the VSBA, the VSA, the VPA, etc.], parents, legislators. Open communication is extremely important. VER: What are the most rewarding aspects of being a member of the SBOE? The most frustrating (or challenging)? TJ: Rewarding? Having a real identifiable impact on what's going on in your community. As far as the State Board is concerned, the community is the state. By being on the State Board and thereby being appointed to the Council on Governance, for example, I think we're making a big impact on the improvement of education in the state. Most frustrating? To me the most frustrating thing is the time it takes to make anything happen. It's probably wisdom that says it should take time but that makes it no less challenging.   *   *   * FROM ELSEWHERE... From... THE MANHATTAN INSTITUTE On the web at: http://www.manhattan-institute.org/ SMALLER SCHOOL DISTRICTS IMPROVE GRADUATION RATES, STUDY FINDS A new study by Manhattan Institute scholars Jay P. Greene and Marcus A. Winters finds that decreasing the size of a state's school districts leads to substantial improvements in its public high school graduation rate. Conversely, consolidating school districts into fewer, larger units decreases a state's public high school graduation rate. The results of the analysis indicate that decreasing the average size of a state's school districts by 200 square miles would lead to an increase of about 1.7 percentage points in its graduation rate. This study is of particular importance because several states have recently considered either consolidating or breaking-up their school districts. Many have argued that decreasing the size of school districts could improve educational outputs because it would increase the choice parents have in the school system that educates their child. By making it easier to relocate from one school system's jurisdiction to another, smaller school districts make it possible for families to exercise choice among different school districts.  This "residential school choice" makes it easier for parents to leave school districts that provide inadequate services. Easier access to "residential school choice" would also give schools an incentive to improve because they don't want to lose enrollment and revenue to other districts. This study provides empirical evidence that increasing the choice parents have in their child's school district contributes to higher public high school graduation rates. The authors calculated high school graduation rates for each state over a decade-long period using a highly respected method. They then empirically measured the effect that changes in the size of a state's school districts during this time have had on their graduation rates. They found a statistically significant, positive relationship between decreasing the size of school districts and public high school graduation rates. __________________ The study is available online at http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/ewp_09.htm. If you would like to schedule an interview with one of the authors, please contact Marcus Winters at mwinters@manhattan-institute.org. Jay P. Greene, Ph.D., is a Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research where he conducts research and writes about education policy. Dr. Greene obtained his doctorate in political science from Harvard University and was a professor of government at the University of Texas at Austin before joining the Manhattan Institute in 2000. His education research has been cited in U.S. Supreme Court opinions and has appeared in scholarly and popular publications. Marcus A. Winters is a Research Associate at the Manhattan Institute's Education Research Office. He earned his B.A. in political science with departmental honors from Ohio University in 2002. The Education Research Office, a part of the Center for Civic Innovation at the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, produces high-quality academic research on U.S. education issues, including school choice policies and other aspects of education reform.  From... THE US FREEDOM FOUNDATION On the web at: http://www.freedomfoundation.us/ PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SCHOOLS by David W. Kirkpatrick, Senior Education Fellow Money magazine once featured an article with a headline indicating public schools are as good as private schools. The substance of the article did not support that conclusion. The article stated that "Students who attend the best public schools outperform most private school students," that "The best public schools offer a more challenging curriculum than most private schools." Of course. The best public schools were compared with the majority of private ones. It would be equally true to say that the best private schools are better than most public ones. One important element not mentioned was that private schools typically spend one-half to one-third as much as public schools. While some reject studies finding private schools produce superior results, hardly anyone argues that their students don't do at least as well as the public schools, thus giving a better return for the money. When it comes to spending money, the article noted that "Taj Mahal" schools were most common in public school districts. Clearly, many public school boards and superintendents have an "edifice complex." The article also said that, "The most racially segregated institutions in our sample are the advantaged public schools." There were then about 26,000 nonpublic and 87,000 public schools in the nation, with some 20,000 of the latter being high schools. The report "examined 70 public and private schools." They visited 22 and interviewed the principals of 48 by telephone. Based on this extremely limited sample, it was claimed about 10%, or 2,000, of the nation's public high schools are as outstanding academically as the nation's 1,500 most prestigious and selective private schools. This comparison of the best in both categories, or 3,500 out of more than 113,000 schools, even if valid, and that is questionable, had little to say about the nation's 47,000,000 public and 5,000,000 private students. While reference was made to the cost of private schools, none was given for the elite public ones which spend up to $45,000 annually per pupil. To the extent that the public cost is paid from a local property tax, deductible from the federal income tax, citizens receive a partial subsidy on the money they provide for their children. For wealthy citizens this can be a substantial amount. For those who choose not to pay private school tuition, or who can't afford to do so, the article suggested that parents seeking a good public school "move to an affluent district with a top-ranked public school system." What a fantastic recommendation! Median prices for single-family homes in the suburbs listed ranged from $156,000 in a Detroit suburb, to more than $500,000 in Beverly Hills, California and Kenilworth, Illinois. It isn't much help to tell poor inner-city parents their children can obtain better schooling if they buy a $500,000 suburban home. The truth is that wealthy suburban schools have been correctly termed private schools in public school disguise. They are elite schools, for the most affluent Americans, in private enclaves excluding perhaps 90% of all Americans and virtually 100% of the disadvantaged. This argument is thus irrelevant to most parents, and to discussing the availability of quality schooling. No one seriously argues that all private schools are better than all public, or the reverse. Even if, to quote a former Pennsylvania Secretary of Education, "every school a good school" were the norm, individuals should still be able to select one rather than another as they do in higher education. Schools may be equally able to serve diverse interests without being identical. The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously decided in 1925 everyone has a constitutional right to choose the education setting for their children. In 2002 it is constitutional to provide public funding to make this choice possible for all. Those with means exercise this right by paying tuition at a nonpublic school or living in "an affluent district with a top-ranked public school system." Those without are effectively denied either option. School choice thus is not an educational issue about comparing schools or about religion. It is about civil rights and, at its core, a moral issue about compelling the children of others to remain in a failing educational environment not acceptable for one's own. David Kirkpatrick is a Bennington native. A former public school teacher and former officer in the Pennsylvania NEA, he now lives in Pennsylvania.   *   *   * WHO COVERS EDUCATION IN VERMONT? We do! Consider a gift to Vermonters for Better Education, the publisher of the weekly Vermont Education Report, Vermont's ONLY continual source of education news. Send donations to: VBE, 170 Church Street, Rutland, Vermont 05701. VBE is a nonprofit organization and contributions are tax-deductible.  *   *   * The VERMONT EDUCATION REPORT is published by Vermonters for Better Education 170 Church Street, Rutland, VT 05701, 802.773.5240 Contact VTBetterEd@aol.com for more information.   Subscribe Here SubscribeRemove

---

Return to Education Report Index | Return to VBE Index | Vermonters for Better Education Homepage

---

........