Blue-state ed reform is different, not dead
Deep Dives
Explore related topics with these Wikipedia articles, rewritten for enjoyable reading:
-
No Child Left Behind Act
12 min read
The article directly references NCLB and its 'progressive leaders' Ted Kennedy and George Miller as historical precedent for bipartisan education reform. Understanding this landmark 2002 legislation provides essential context for the current debate about reform approaches in blue vs red states.
-
National Assessment of Educational Progress
12 min read
NAEP scores are mentioned as a pivotal factor driving a wedge between unions and state leaders, with the author suggesting annual NAEP testing could help reform efforts. Understanding how this 'Nation's Report Card' works illuminates why these scores carry such political weight.
-
American Federation of Teachers
12 min read
The AFT is named alongside the NEA as one of the major teachers unions whose relationship with Democratic politicians is central to the article's thesis about blue-state education reform. Understanding the AFT's history, structure, and political influence provides crucial context for the reform debate.
Hi friends. I hope y’all are gearing up for a great Thanksgiving. SCHOOLED will be off on Friday, but before you turn off your devices and start brining your turkey, we’ve got one more jam-packed issue for you. And if you’re craving even more, stay tuned for a special edition of the Education Gadfly Weekly later this morning, which will feature this year’s winner of our annual Wonkathon.
Today in SCHOOLED, we hear from Conor Williams, Heather Peske, Margarita Roza, and Morgan Polikoff on why it’s wrong to think of blue-state ed reform as hopeless, plus round up recent posts by Joe Viteritti, Liz Cohen, Paul DiPerna, Freddie deBoer, Ray Domanico, Andy Rotherham, Andrew Rice, Megan McArdle, John Katzman, Lisa Guernsey, Nat Malkus, Emily Cherkin, and Rick Hess.
Sign up to receive this newsletter in your inbox on Tuesday and Friday mornings. SCHOOLED is free, but a few linked articles may be paywalled by other publications.
Last week I claimed that ed reform is currently hopeless in blue states because elected Democrats have no incentive to buck the teachers unions. I heard five responses:
It’s not hopeless because the unions support some (blue-tinged) reforms.
It’s not hopeless because some elected Democrats are tiring of the union position.
It’s not hopeless because a progressive approach to reform can overcome union resistance.
It’s not hopeless because regulatory agencies—which are somewhat insulated from politics—can drive reform in blue states.
It may or may not be hopeless, but education policy in red states is a mess, too.
1. Unions support some progressive reforms.
Some folks wrote me privately to argue that the unions are not the boogeyman I make them out to be. The NEA and AFT and their state and local affiliates are on board with school funding reforms, for example, that drive more resources to the neediest schools—as well as efforts to diversify the teaching profession and implement universal pre-K. In all three of these cases, they say, it’s stingy Republicans (and their business backers) or ideological conservatives (with their bugaboos about any race-conscious policies) that are the problem. And they have less power in blue states, so progress is possible there.
2. Some Democrats are showing more willingness to break with the unions.
Marguerite Roza is hopeful that Democratic leaders are starting to show some courage again:
...My oversimplified take: In the last few years, blue state leaders and unions
This excerpt is provided for preview purposes. Full article content is available on the original publication.