NR special education section assessments and some forms of accountability may change the incentives and productivity within public schools.” This suggestion squares with much anecdotal information in Massachusetts: Kim Marshall, for example, is a fine principal in an inner-city elementary school in Boston. His students did poorly on the statewide tests, and he mobilized the school to respond. “We had a curriculum and test we could focus on,” he says. Many districts across the state have responded to the new pressure by running summer programs for both students and teachers, placing new emphasis on intervention in the early grades, adding more reading and writing to the curriculum, and making other essential changes.
But will such efforts suffice? It’s unlikely. More sweeping change is needed. Only a minority of public-school teachers, Public Agenda reports, have changed their teaching as a result of new state demands. That’s not surprising, given the poor quality of leadership that principals often provide, and the general resistance to change. In addition, in too many schools, principals don’t control their budgets, and have limited say over whom they hire. The market does not determine salaries. The school day and year are both too short, an astonishing amount of time is wasted, and homework is seldom assigned. Schools need the gifted graduates of the nation’s best colleges, but the requirements for certification are often mind-numbing, and the work conditions a disaster. Rude and disorderly behavior is rampant, and the rewards for doing a bang-up job nonexistent. In fact, idealistic young teachers who give their all to their students frequently find themselves resented and isolated, they report.
Comments