Education Next https://www.educationnext.org A Journal of Opinion and Research About Education Policy Thu, 10 Aug 2023 15:08:31 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.4.2 https://i2.wp.com/www.educationnext.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/e-logo-1.png?fit=32%2C32&ssl=1 Education Next https://www.educationnext.org 32 32 181792879 “It’s just safer to avoid current events” https://www.educationnext.org/its-just-safer-to-avoid-current-events/ Fri, 11 Aug 2023 09:00:40 +0000 https://www.educationnext.org/?p=49716856 Polarization has made teaching harder, but "constructive dialogue" may offer a way forward

The post “It’s just safer to avoid current events” appeared first on Education Next.

]]>

Illustration

As regular readers know, I’ve a passionate interest in how educators model and teach the norms of healthy, civil disagreement. Heck, Pedro Noguera and I wrote a whole book on this and spent the better part of two years discussing this topic with leaders and groups around the nation. That’s why I’m such a fan of the Constructive Dialogue Institute (CDI), founded by Jonathan Haidt and Caroline Mehl in 2017 to develop tools, resources, and frameworks to support this work. Well, CDI has conducted a series of teacher interviews that offer some insight into how polarization impacts classrooms. I thought readers might be interested in the takeaways, and Jake Fay, CDI’s director of education, was kind enough to share some thoughts. Here’s what he had to say.

Rick Hess

Over the past few years, schools have been the site of fierce political conflict. While the U.S. has a long history of conflict in and about schools, things seem exceptionally intense and not in a good way. It feels like everybody is butting heads with everybody else. Parents, teachers, school leaders, teacher unions, community members, students, state legislators—this entire post could easily be just a list of conflicts among different stakeholders in schools. Everyone is certain they are on the side of the angels … and that the other side is most definitely not. And the volume is turned up to 11.

Compounding typical disagreement about schools is the rise of polarization across the social and political spheres of our country. Echo chambers reinforce singular perspectives, quash dissent, and make it nearly impossible to hear reason from an opposing viewpoint. Even worse, our attention-based media ecosystem prioritizes the loudest voices and the hottest takes. So, when you do hear the opposing side, you tend to get the version that gets the most clicks.

It all adds up to a sobering reality for schools. Polarization is distracting our schools from their most fundamental purpose: educating children.

A new series of interviews prepared by my organization, the Constructive Dialogue Institute (CDI), provides some insights into how educators see polarization affecting the work of schools. We conducted interviews with 14 public school teachers from diverse regions and grade levels, and they offer snapshots of classrooms, school board meetings, teacher interactions, and communications with parents.

One teacher, for example, noticed how the calculus behind a routine decision to choose a textbook has changed as America has become more politically divided. The first questions the district considered weren’t about student learning but rather about the politics of the decision. “How can this be viewed through the lens of polarization? How’s the community going to receive this? Who could potentially look at this textbook? What state did it come from?”

It’s not just textbook choices, either. We found that educators are increasingly experiencing a chilling effect on classroom dialogue. On the one hand, they feel a sense of increased scrutiny over their work that leads them to pull back from leading classroom discussions out of fear of reprisal. This can come from multiple sources—state legislators, community members, or parents—and from both the right and the left. On the other hand, when educators do engage in discussions, their attempts feel more and more likely to devolve into name-calling among students. “It just became safer to just avoid current events altogether, even if it was something major,” one educator reported.

Pulling back from discussion stings for educators. Another educator we spoke to expressed feelings of guilt for avoiding classroom dialogue. “I hate to admit this, but I’ve been starting to walk away from discussion in my classroom. I’ve been doing more and more ‘Watch the video, read the book, answer the questions, wait for the bell, leave my classroom.’” For the teachers, avoidance lowers the pressure. But if the alternative is disengagement, the cost is steep.

We need to ask ourselves: Is this the direction we want to go?

The bad news is that polarization is not going away anytime soon. It’s a complex problem that needs to be addressed at many levels. Educators will increasingly feel the pressure as we further sort, align, and consequently distance ourselves by ideology. Still, all is not lost. There are ways educators can address how polarization reaches into their schools and classrooms.

The trick is to tackle the part of the problem educators can control. Things like social media, political campaigns, and news media drive polarization at a scale no single educator can truly address. But in their classrooms, schools, and communities, educators can begin to repair fractured trust and develop understanding across differences. They don’t have to avoid discussion and miss out on opportunities to develop students’ critical-thinking skills. They can help their students develop the mindsets and skills they need to navigate differences of opinion and belief. One real way forward is for educators to teach students how to engage in constructive dialogue.

Later this week, in another letter, I’ll explain why constructive dialogue is a viable solution. I’m not going to claim that building practices of constructive dialogue in classrooms and schools will make all disagreements and conflicts related to polarization disappear, as there are real differences of opinion about schools that we aren’t going to resolve overnight. But we shouldn’t be afraid of those disagreements or avoid them. We can intentionally build capacity for discussion and disagreement and we can change how we navigate ideological tensions. Doing so will help us all get back to making the best educational decisions for all our children.

Frederick Hess is director of education policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute and an executive editor of Education Next.

This post originally appeared on Rick Hess Straight Up.

The post “It’s just safer to avoid current events” appeared first on Education Next.

]]>
49716856
The Progressive Case for K–12 Open Enrollment https://www.educationnext.org/the-progressive-case-for-k-12-open-enrollment/ Wed, 09 Aug 2023 09:00:36 +0000 https://www.educationnext.org/?p=49716857 How Democrats in blue states can lead the way on school choice

The post The Progressive Case for K–12 Open Enrollment appeared first on Education Next.

]]>

Illustration

School choice victories made waves this year, with states like Arkansas, Utah, and Iowa adopting expansive choice programs that pay for private-school tuition and other educational expenses.

But what flew under many people’s radar is another form of choice that also achieved impressive gains, with four states adopting open enrollment policies that enshrine the right for students to attend any public school that has an available seat.

Unlike legislation to create private school choice programs, which faced stiff opposition from Democrats, these open enrollment bills garnered noteworthy bipartisan support. In total, nearly 95% of Republican and 82% of Democratic votes across four red states—Idaho, Montana, North Dakota, and West Virginia—were cast in favor of public school choice. West Virginia’s House Bill 2596 passed unanimously in both of the state’s legislative chambers. Only in North Dakota did a majority of Democrats in either chamber vote against the measure.

 

Open Enrollment Vote Count by Political Affiliation

 

State

Republicans Democrats
House Senate House Senate
Yea Nay Yea Nay Yea Nay Yea Nay
Idaho (SB 1125) 57 0 28 0 6 5 7 0
Montana (HB 203) 68 0 34 0 31 1 16 0
North Dakota (HB 1376) 77 4 24 19 3 9 1 3
West Virginia (HB 2596) 87 0 29 0 12 0 5 0
Total 289 4 115 19 52 15 29 3

Note: Arkansas also improved its open enrollment law, but its bill was part of an extensive package of reforms including private school choice and teacher pay. All tallies reflect initial votes in each respective legislative chamber.

 

But most of the recent momentum for open enrollment has been in red states with Republican governors and legislatures. For all kids to have unfettered access to public schools—34 states still allow school districts to discriminate against students based solely on where they live—Democratic policymakers in blue and purple states like Pennsylvania, Virginia, and North Carolina must lead the way. There’s a strong case to be made for Democrats to do exactly that.

First, open enrollment is a key step toward making public schools available to all-comers, a progressive value that most states fail to uphold. Research shows that many schools remain racially segregated decades after Brown v. Board of Education. For instance, a Government Accountability Office report found that in 2020–21, more than one-third of students attended schools where at least 75% of students were a single race or ethnicity. The biggest driver of persistent segregation is school-district boundaries, including demographic trends shaped by racist government policies like redlining and segregated public housing.

As a result, Black and Hispanic students are often concentrated in high-poverty schools, which studies have found to be less effective in raising student achievement than lower-poverty schools on average. “Every moderately or highly segregated district has large racial achievement gaps,” according to Sean Reardon, an education professor at Stanford University.

School district policies often make it difficult for these students to transfer to schools outside of their neighborhoods. Whether it’s public schools refusing to accept transfer students entirely or charging families transfer tuition—New York’s Rye Brook School District charges up to $21,500 per transfer student for its public schools—the system leaves many students without options. While open enrollment alone can neither eliminate segregation nor achievement gaps, it’s an immediate remedy for students who are zoned to underperforming public schools.

Open enrollment can also help strengthen public schools, another key aim for progressives. In the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic, public-school enrollment nationwide has fallen by more than 1.2 million students compared to pre-pandemic levels. Research shows that parents want more agency over their children’s K–12 experiences and are increasingly choosing private schools or homeschooling. Giving families significantly more options within the public education system could help mitigate enrollment declines across many school districts.

Some districts will lose students to open enrollment, but this can be a good thing: A study by California’s nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office found that school districts that lost students to open enrollment responded by engaging their communities and taking steps to improve their instructional offerings, with some achieving “significant drops in the number of students transferring out.” The study also reported that school districts with the greatest enrollment declines improved at a faster pace than a comparison group of districts with similar demographics, but without any students transferring out through the program. These results aren’t causal, but they should allay fears that public school choice will leave some students behind.

Finally, progressives should embrace open enrollment because it’s good for students. Studies of states like Colorado, Wisconsin, and Minnesota show that students tend to transfer to higher-performing school districts when given the opportunity. Research also suggests that they use open enrollment for diverse reasons, such as to escape bullying or to access specialized instructional approaches. Some studies show that disadvantaged students use open enrollment at lower rates, suggesting that they may face barriers to doing so. Yet other studies find that Black students are more likely than their peers to participate and that good policies such as transparency requirements and free transportation, can improve access for low-income students.

At a time of deep political divisions, open enrollment holds immense promise as a bipartisan policy to improve public education that lawmakers should rally behind. With a Morning Consult opinion poll showing 70% of Republicans and 68% of Democrats supporting open enrollment, all states should move swiftly to adopt public school choice. Although Democrats and teachers’ unions often fear that school choice will undermine public schools, open enrollment can clearly make public schools stronger. Democrats in a few red states have shown that it’s possible to do what’s best for kids. Those in blue and purple states should step up next.

Aaron Smith is the director of education policy at Reason Foundation.

The post The Progressive Case for K–12 Open Enrollment appeared first on Education Next.

]]>
49716857
AI in Education https://www.educationnext.org/a-i-in-education-leap-into-new-era-machine-intelligence-carries-risks-challenges-promises/ Tue, 08 Aug 2023 09:00:22 +0000 https://www.educationnext.org/?p=49716825 The leap into a new era of machine intelligence carries risks and challenges, but also plenty of promise

The post AI in Education appeared first on Education Next.

]]>

Illustration

In Neal Stephenson’s 1995 science fiction novel, The Diamond Age, readers meet Nell, a young girl who comes into possession of a highly advanced book, The Young Lady’s Illustrated Primer. The book is not the usual static collection of texts and images but a deeply immersive tool that can converse with the reader, answer questions, and personalize its content, all in service of educating and motivating a young girl to be a strong, independent individual.

Such a device, even after the introduction of the Internet and tablet computers, has remained in the realm of science fiction—until now. Artificial intelligence, or AI, took a giant leap forward with the introduction in November 2022 of ChatGPT, an AI technology capable of producing remarkably creative responses and sophisticated analysis through human-like dialogue. It has triggered a wave of innovation, some of which suggests we might be on the brink of an era of interactive, super-intelligent tools not unlike the book Stephenson dreamed up for Nell.

Sundar Pichai, Google’s CEO, calls artificial intelligence “more profound than fire or electricity or anything we have done in the past.” Reid Hoffman, the founder of LinkedIn and current partner at Greylock Partners, says, “The power to make positive change in the world is about to get the biggest boost it’s ever had.” And Bill Gates has said that “this new wave of AI is as fundamental as the creation of the microprocessor, the personal computer, the Internet, and the mobile phone.”

Over the last year, developers have released a dizzying array of AI tools that can generate text, images, music, and video with no need for complicated coding but simply in response to instructions given in natural language. These technologies are rapidly improving, and developers are introducing capabilities that would have been considered science fiction just a few years ago. AI is also raising pressing ethical questions around bias, appropriate use, and plagiarism.

In the realm of education, this technology will influence how students learn, how teachers work, and ultimately how we structure our education system. Some educators and leaders look forward to these changes with great enthusiasm. Sal Kahn, founder of Khan Academy, went so far as to say in a TED talk that AI has the potential to effect “probably the biggest positive transformation that education has ever seen.” But others warn that AI will enable the spread of misinformation, facilitate cheating in school and college, kill whatever vestiges of individual privacy remain, and cause massive job loss. The challenge is to harness the positive potential while avoiding or mitigating the harm.

What Is Generative AI?

Artificial intelligence is a branch of computer science that focuses on creating software capable of mimicking behaviors and processes we would consider “intelligent” if exhibited by humans, including reasoning, learning, problem-solving, and exercising creativity. AI systems can be applied to an extensive range of tasks, including language translation, image recognition, navigating autonomous vehicles, detecting and treating cancer, and, in the case of generative AI, producing content and knowledge rather than simply searching for and retrieving it.

Foundation models” in generative AI are systems trained on a large dataset to learn a broad base of knowledge that can then be adapted to a range of different, more specific purposes. This learning method is self-supervised, meaning the model learns by finding patterns and relationships in the data it is trained on.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are foundation models that have been trained on a vast amount of text data. For example, the training data for OpenAI’s GPT model consisted of web content, books, Wikipedia articles, news articles, social media posts, code snippets, and more. OpenAI’s GPT-3 models underwent training on a staggering 300 billion “tokens” or word pieces, using more than 175 billion parameters to shape the model’s behavior—nearly 100 times more data than the company’s GPT-2 model had.

By doing this analysis across billions of sentences, LLM models develop a statistical understanding of language: how words and phrases are usually combined, what topics are typically discussed together, and what tone or style is appropriate in different contexts. That allows it to generate human-like text and perform a wide range of tasks, such as writing articles, answering questions, or analyzing unstructured data.

LLMs include OpenAI’s GPT-4, Google’s PaLM, and Meta’s LLaMA. These LLMs serve as “foundations” for AI applications. ChatGPT is built on GPT-3.5 and GPT-4, while Bard uses Google’s Pathways Language Model 2 (PaLM 2) as its foundation.

Some of the best-known applications are:

ChatGPT 3.5. The free version of ChatGPT released by OpenAI in November 2022. It was trained on data only up to 2021, and while it is very fast, it is prone to inaccuracies.

ChatGPT 4.0. The newest version of ChatGPT, which is more powerful and accurate than ChatGPT 3.5 but also slower, and it requires a paid account. It also has extended capabilities through plug-ins that give it the ability to interface with content from websites, perform more sophisticated mathematical functions, and access other services. A new Code Interpreter feature gives ChatGPT the ability to analyze data, create charts, solve math problems, edit files, and even develop hypotheses to explain data trends.

Microsoft Bing Chat. An iteration of Microsoft’s Bing search engine that is enhanced with OpenAI’s ChatGPT technology. It can browse websites and offers source citations with its results.

Google Bard. Google’s AI generates text, translates languages, writes different kinds of creative content, and writes and debugs code in more than 20 different programming languages. The tone and style of Bard’s replies can be finetuned to be simple, long, short, professional, or casual. Bard also leverages Google Lens to analyze images uploaded with prompts.

Anthropic Claude 2. A chatbot that can generate text, summarize content, and perform other tasks, Claude 2 can analyze texts of roughly 75,000 words—about the length of The Great Gatsby—and generate responses of more than 3,000 words. The model was built using a set of principles that serve as a sort of “constitution” for AI systems, with the aim of making them more helpful, honest, and harmless.

These AI systems have been improving at a remarkable pace, including in how well they perform on assessments of human knowledge. OpenAI’s GPT-3.5, which was released in March 2022, only managed to score in the 10th percentile on the bar exam, but GPT-4.0, introduced a year later, made a significant leap, scoring in the 90th percentile. What makes these feats especially impressive is that OpenAI did not specifically train the system to take these exams; the AI was able to come up with the correct answers on its own. Similarly, Google’s medical AI model substantially improved its performance on a U.S. Medical Licensing Examination practice test, with its accuracy rate jumping to 85 percent in March 2021 from 33 percent in December 2020.

These two examples prompt one to ask: if AI continues to improve so rapidly, what will these systems be able to achieve in the next few years? What’s more, new studies challenge the assumption that AI-generated responses are stale or sterile. In the case of Google’s AI model, physicians preferred the AI’s long-form answers to those written by their fellow doctors, and nonmedical study participants rated the AI answers as more helpful. Another study found that participants preferred a medical chatbot’s responses over those of a physician and rated them significantly higher, not just for quality but also for empathy. What will happen when “empathetic” AI is used in education?

Other studies have looked at the reasoning capabilities of these models. Microsoft researchers suggest that newer systems “exhibit more general intelligence than previous AI models” and are coming “strikingly close to human-level performance.” While some observers question those conclusions, the AI systems display an increasing ability to generate coherent and contextually appropriate responses, make connections between different pieces of information, and engage in reasoning processes such as inference, deduction, and analogy.

Despite their prodigious capabilities, these systems are not without flaws. At times, they churn out information that might sound convincing but is irrelevant, illogical, or entirely false—an anomaly known as “hallucination.” The execution of certain mathematical operations presents another area of difficulty for AI. And while these systems can generate well-crafted and realistic text, understanding why the model made specific decisions or predictions can be challenging.

The Importance of Well-Designed Prompts

Using generative AI systems such as ChatGPT, Bard, and Claude 2 is relatively simple. One has only to type in a request or a task (called a prompt), and the AI generates a response. Properly constructed prompts are essential for getting useful results from generative AI tools. You can ask generative AI to analyze text, find patterns in data, compare opposing arguments, and summarize an article in different ways (see sidebar for examples of AI prompts).

One challenge is that, after using search engines for years, people have been preconditioned to phrase questions in a certain way. A search engine is something like a helpful librarian who takes a specific question and points you to the most relevant sources for possible answers. The search engine (or librarian) doesn’t create anything new but efficiently retrieves what’s already there.

Generative AI is more akin to a competent intern. You give a generative AI tool instructions through prompts, as you would to an intern, asking it to complete a task and produce a product. The AI interprets your instructions, thinks about the best way to carry them out, and produces something original or performs a task to fulfill your directive. The results aren’t pre-made or stored somewhere—they’re produced on the fly, based on the information the intern (generative AI) has been trained on. The output often depends on the precision and clarity of the instructions (prompts) you provide. A vague or poorly defined prompt might lead the AI to produce less relevant results. The more context and direction you give it, the better the result will be. What’s more, the capabilities of these AI systems are being enhanced through the introduction of versatile plug-ins that equip them to browse websites, analyze data files, or access other services. Think of this as giving your intern access to a group of experts to help accomplish your tasks.

One strategy in using a generative AI tool is first to tell it what kind of expert or persona you want it to “be.” Ask it to be an expert management consultant, a skilled teacher, a writing tutor, or a copy editor, and then give it a task.

Prompts can also be constructed to get these AI systems to perform complex and multi-step operations. For example, let’s say a teacher wants to create an adaptive tutoring program—for any subject, any grade, in any language—that customizes the examples for students based on their interests. She wants each lesson to culminate in a short-response or multiple-choice quiz. If the student answers the questions correctly, the AI tutor should move on to the next lesson. If the student responds incorrectly, the AI should explain the concept again, but using simpler language.

Previously, designing this kind of interactive system would have required a relatively sophisticated and expensive software program. With ChatGPT, however, just giving those instructions in a prompt delivers a serviceable tutoring system. It isn’t perfect, but remember that it was built virtually for free, with just a few lines of English language as a command. And nothing in the education market today has the capability to generate almost limitless examples to connect the lesson concept to students’ interests.

Chained prompts can also help focus AI systems. For example, an educator can prompt a generative AI system first to read a practice guide from the What Works Clearinghouse and summarize its recommendations. Then, in a follow-up prompt, the teacher can ask the AI to develop a set of classroom activities based on what it just read. By curating the source material and using the right prompts, the educator can anchor the generated responses in evidence and high-quality research.

However, much like fledgling interns learning the ropes in a new environment, AI does commit occasional errors. Such fallibility, while inevitable, underlines the critical importance of maintaining rigorous oversight of AI’s output. Monitoring not only acts as a crucial checkpoint for accuracy but also becomes a vital source of real-time feedback for the system. It’s through this iterative refinement process that an AI system, over time, can significantly minimize its error rate and increase its efficacy.

Uses of AI in Education

In May 2023, the U.S. Department of Education released a report titled Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Teaching and Learning: Insights and Recommendations. The department had conducted listening sessions in 2022 with more than 700 people, including educators and parents, to gauge their views on AI. The report noted that “constituents believe that action is required now in order to get ahead of the expected increase of AI in education technology—and they want to roll up their sleeves and start working together.” People expressed anxiety about “future potential risks” with AI but also felt that “AI may enable achieving educational priorities in better ways, at scale, and with lower costs.”

AI could serve—or is already serving—in several teaching-and-learning roles:

Instructional assistants. AI’s ability to conduct human-like conversations opens up possibilities for adaptive tutoring or instructional assistants that can help explain difficult concepts to students. AI-based feedback systems can offer constructive critiques on student writing, which can help students fine-tune their writing skills. Some research also suggests certain kinds of prompts can help children generate more fruitful questions about learning. AI models might also support customized learning for students with disabilities and provide translation for English language learners.

Teaching assistants. AI might tackle some of the administrative tasks that keep teachers from investing more time with their peers or students. Early uses include automated routine tasks such as drafting lesson plans, creating differentiated materials, designing worksheets, developing quizzes, and exploring ways of explaining complicated academic materials. AI can also provide educators with recommendations to meet student needs and help teachers reflect, plan, and improve their practice.

Parent assistants. Parents can use AI to generate letters requesting individualized education plan (IEP) services or to ask that a child be evaluated for gifted and talented programs. For parents choosing a school for their child, AI could serve as an administrative assistant, mapping out school options within driving distance of home, generating application timelines, compiling contact information, and the like. Generative AI can even create bedtime stories with evolving plots tailored to a child’s interests.

Administrator assistants. Using generative AI, school administrators can draft various communications, including materials for parents, newsletters, and other community-engagement documents. AI systems can also help with the difficult tasks of organizing class or bus schedules, and they can analyze complex data to identify patterns or needs. ChatGPT can perform sophisticated sentiment analysis that could be useful for measuring school-climate and other survey data.

Though the potential is great, most teachers have yet to use these tools. A Morning Consult and EdChoice poll found that while 60 percent say they’ve heard about ChatGPT, only 14 percent have used it in their free time, and just 13 percent have used it at school. It’s likely that most teachers and students will engage with generative AI not through the platforms themselves but rather through AI capabilities embedded in software. Instructional providers such as Khan Academy, Varsity Tutors, and DuoLingo are experimenting with GPT-4-powered tutors that are trained on datasets specific to these organizations to provide individualized learning support that has additional guardrails to help protect students and enhance the experience for teachers.

Google’s Project Tailwind is experimenting with an AI notebook that can analyze student notes and then develop study questions or provide tutoring support through a chat interface. These features could soon be available on Google Classroom, potentially reaching over half of all U.S. classrooms. Brisk Teaching is one of the first companies to build a portfolio of AI services designed specifically for teachers—differentiating content, drafting lesson plans, providing student feedback, and serving as an AI assistant to streamline workflow among different apps and tools.

Providers of curriculum and instruction materials might also include AI assistants for instant help and tutoring tailored to the companies’ products. One example is the edX Xpert, a ChatGPT-based learning assistant on the edX platform. It offers immediate, customized academic and customer support for online learners worldwide.

Regardless of the ways AI is used in classrooms, the fundamental task of policymakers and education leaders is to ensure that the technology is serving sound instructional practice. As Vicki Phillips, CEO of the National Center on Education and the Economy, wrote, “We should not only think about how technology can assist teachers and learners in improving what they’re doing now, but what it means for ensuring that new ways of teaching and learning flourish alongside the applications of AI.”

The homescreen for OpenAI’s foundation-model generative artificial intelligence, ChatGPT, gives users three sample commands and a list of functions and caveats.
The homescreen for OpenAI’s foundation-model generative artificial intelligence, ChatGPT, gives users three sample commands and a list of functions and caveats. Introduced publicly in November 2022, ChatGPT can produce creative, human-like responses and analysis.

Challenges and Risks

Along with these potential benefits come some difficult challenges and risks the education community must navigate:

Student cheating. Students might use AI to solve homework problems or take quizzes. AI-generated essays threaten to undermine learning as well as the college-entrance process. Aside from the ethical issues involved in such cheating, students who use AI to do their work for them may not be learning the content and skills they need.

Bias in AI algorithms. AI systems learn from the data they are trained on. If this data contains biases, those biases can be learned and perpetuated by the AI system. For example, if the data include student-performance information that’s biased toward one ethnicity, gender, or socioeconomic segment, the AI system could learn to favor students from that group. Less cited but still important are potential biases around political ideology and possibly even pedagogical philosophy that may generate responses not aligned to a community’s values.

Privacy concerns. When students or educators interact with generative-AI tools, their conversations and personal information might be stored and analyzed, posing a risk to their privacy. With public AI systems, educators should refrain from inputting or exposing sensitive details about themselves, their colleagues, or their students, including but not limited to private communications, personally identifiable information, health records, academic performance, emotional well-being, and financial information.

Decreased social connection. There is a risk that more time spent using AI systems will come at the cost of less student interaction with both educators and classmates. Children may also begin turning to these conversational AI systems in place of their friends. As a result, AI could intensify and worsen the public health crisis of loneliness, isolation, and lack of connection identified by the U.S. Surgeon General.

Overreliance on technology. Both teachers and students face the risk of becoming overly reliant on AI-driven technology. For students, this could stifle learning, especially the development of critical thinking. This challenge extends to educators as well. While AI can expedite lesson-plan generation, speed does not equate to quality. Teachers may be tempted to accept the initial AI-generated content rather than devote time to reviewing and refining it for optimal educational value.

Equity issues. Not all students have equal access to computer devices and the Internet. That imbalance could accelerate a widening of the achievement gap between students from different socioeconomic backgrounds.

Many of these risks are not new or unique to AI. Schools banned calculators and cellphones when these devices were first introduced, largely over concerns related to cheating. Privacy concerns around educational technology have led lawmakers to introduce hundreds of bills in state legislatures, and there are growing tensions between new technologies and existing federal privacy laws. The concerns over bias are understandable, but similar scrutiny is also warranted for existing content and materials that rarely, if ever, undergo review for racial or political bias.

In light of these challenges, the Department of Education has stressed the importance of keeping “humans in the loop” when using AI, particularly when the output might be used to inform a decision. As the department encouraged in its 2023 report, teachers, learners, and others need to retain their agency. AI cannot “replace a teacher, a guardian, or an education leader as the custodian of their students’ learning,” the report stressed.

Policy Challenges with AI

Policymakers are grappling with several questions related to AI as they seek to strike a balance between supporting innovation and protecting the public interest (see sidebar). The speed of innovation in AI is outpacing many policymakers’ understanding, let alone their ability to develop a consensus on the best ways to minimize the potential harms from AI while maximizing the benefits. The Department of Education’s 2023 report describes the risks and opportunities posed by AI, but its recommendations amount to guidance at best. The White House released a Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights, but it, too, is more an aspirational statement than a governing document. Congress is drafting legislation related to AI, which will help generate needed debate, but the path to the president’s desk for signature is murky at best.

It is up to policymakers to establish clearer rules of the road and create a framework that provides consumer protections, builds public trust in AI systems, and establishes the regulatory certainty companies need for their product road maps. Considering the potential for AI to affect our economy, national security, and broader society, there is no time to waste.

Why AI Is Different

It is wise to be skeptical of new technologies that claim to revolutionize learning. In the past, prognosticators have promised that television, the computer, and the Internet, in turn, would transform education. Unfortunately, the heralded revolutions fell short of expectations. 

There are some early signs, though, that this technological wave might be different in the benefits it brings to students, teachers, and parents. Previous technologies democratized access to content and resources, but AI is democratizing a kind of machine intelligence that can be used to perform a myriad of tasks. Moreover, these capabilities are open and affordable—nearly anyone with an Internet connection and a phone now has access to an intelligent assistant. 

Generative AI models keep getting more powerful and are improving rapidly. The capabilities of these systems months or years from now will far exceed their current capacity. Their capabilities are also expanding through integration with other expert systems. Take math, for example. GPT-3.5 had some difficulties with certain basic mathematical concepts, but GPT-4 made significant improvement. Now, the incorporation of the Wolfram plug-in has nearly erased the remaining limitations. 

It’s reasonable to anticipate that these systems will become more potent, more accessible, and more affordable in the years ahead. The question, then, is how to use these emerging capabilities responsibly to improve teaching and learning. 

The paradox of AI may lie in its potential to enhance the human, interpersonal element in education. Aaron Levie, CEO of Box, a Cloud-based content-management company, believes that AI will ultimately help us attend more quickly to those important tasks “that only a human can do.” Frederick Hess, director of education policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, similarly asserts that “successful schools are inevitably the product of the relationships between adults and students. When technology ignores that, it’s bound to disappoint. But when it’s designed to offer more coaching, free up time for meaningful teacher-student interaction, or offer students more personalized feedback, technology can make a significant, positive difference.” 

Technology does not revolutionize education; humans do. It is humans who create the systems and institutions that educate children, and it is the leaders of those systems who decide which tools to use and how to use them. Until those institutions modernize to accommodate the new possibilities of these technologies, we should expect incremental improvements at best. As Joel Rose, CEO of New Classrooms Innovation Partners, noted, “The most urgent need is for new and existing organizations to redesign the student experience in ways that take full advantage of AI’s capabilities.”

While past technologies have not lived up to hyped expectations, AI is not merely a continuation of the past; it is a leap into a new era of machine intelligence that we are only beginning to grasp. While the immediate implementation of these systems is imperfect, the swift pace of improvement holds promising prospects. The responsibility rests with human intervention—with educators, policymakers, and parents to incorporate this technology thoughtfully in a manner that optimally benefits teachers and learners. Our collective ambition should not focus solely or primarily on averting potential risks but rather on articulating a vision of the role AI should play in teaching and learning—a game plan that leverages the best of these technologies while preserving the best of human relationships.

John Bailey is a strategic adviser to entrepreneurs, policymakers, investors, and philanthropists and is a nonresident senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.

 

Policy Matters

Officials and lawmakers must grapple with several questions related to AI to protect students and consumers and establish the rules of the road for companies. Key issues include:

Risk management framework: What is the optimal framework for assessing and managing AI risks? What specific requirements should be instituted for higher-risk applications? In education, for example, there is a difference between an AI system that generates a lesson sample and an AI system grading a test that will determine a student’s admission to a school or program. There is growing support for using the AI Risk Management Framework from the U.S. Commerce Department’s National Institute of Standards and Technology as a starting point for building trustworthiness into the design, development, use, and evaluation of AI products, services, and systems.

Licensing and certification: Should the United States require licensing and certification for AI models, systems, and applications? If so, what role could third-party audits and certifications play in assessing the safety and reliability of different AI systems? Schools and companies need to begin thinking about responsible AI practices to prepare for potential certification systems in the future.

Centralized vs. decentralized AI governance: Is it more effective to establish a central AI authority or agency, or would it be preferable to allow individual sectors to manage their own AI-related issues? For example, regulating AI in autonomous vehicles is different from regulating AI in drug discovery or intelligent tutoring systems. Overly broad, one-size-fits-all frameworks and mandates may not work and could slow innovation in these sectors. In addition, it is not clear that many agencies have the authority or expertise to regulate AI systems in diverse sectors.

Privacy and content moderation: Many of the new AI systems pose significant new privacy questions and challenges. How should existing privacy and content-moderation frameworks, such as the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), be adapted for AI, and which new policies or frameworks might be necessary to address unique challenges posed by AI?

Transparency and disclosure: What degree of transparency and disclosure should be required for AI models, particularly regarding the data they have been trained on? How can we develop comprehensive disclosure policies to ensure that users are aware when they are interacting with an AI service?

 

 

How do I get it to work? Generative AI Example Prompts

Unlike traditional search engines, which use keyword indexing to retrieve existing information from a vast collection of websites, generative AI synthesizes the same information to create content based on prompts that are inputted by human users. With generative AI a new technology to the public, writing effective prompts for tools like ChatGPT may require trial and error. Here are some ideas for writing prompts for a variety of scenarios using generative AI tools:

Adaptive Tutoring

You are the StudyBuddy, an adaptive tutor. Your task is to provide a lesson on the basics of a subject followed by a quiz that is either multiple choice or a short answer. After I respond to the quiz, please grade my answer. Explain the correct answer. If I get it right, move on to the next lesson. If I get it wrong, explain the concept again using simpler language. To personalize the learning experience for me, please ask what my interests are. Use that information to make relevant examples throughout.

Mr. Ranedeer: Your Personalized AI Tutor

Coding and prompt engineering. Can configure for depth (Elementary – Postdoc), Learning Styles (Visual, Verbal, Active, Intuitive, Reflective, Global), Tone Styles (Encouraging, Neutral, Informative, Friendly, Humorous), Reasoning Frameworks (Deductive, Inductive, Abductive, Analogous, Casual). Template.

Socratic Tutor

You are a tutor that always responds in the Socratic style. You *never* give the student the answer but always try to ask just the right question to help them learn to think for themselves. You should always tune your question to the interest and knowledge of the student, breaking down the problem into simpler parts until it’s at just the right level for them.

Writing Feedback

I want you to act as an AI writing tutor. I will provide you with a student who needs help improving their writing, and your task is to use artificial intelligence tools, such as natural language processing, to give the student feedback on how they can improve their composition. You should also use your rhetorical knowledge and experience about effective writing techniques in order to suggest ways that the student can better express their thoughts and ideas in written form.

Quiz Generator

You are a quiz creator of highly diagnostic quizzes. You will make good low-stakes tests and diagnostics. You will then ask me two questions. First, (1) What, specifically, should the quiz test? Second, (2) For which audience is the quiz? Once you have my answers, you will construct several multiple-choice questions to quiz the audience on that topic. The questions should be highly relevant and go beyond just facts. Multiple choice questions should include plausible, competitive alternate responses and should not include an “all of the above” option. At the end of the quiz, you will provide an answer key and explain the right answer.

Example Generator

I would like you to act as an example generator for students. When confronted with new and complex concepts, adding many and varied examples helps students better understand those concepts. I would like you to ask what concept I would like examples of and what level of students I am teaching. You will look up the concept and then provide me with four different and varied accurate examples of the concept in action.

HBS Case Study

You will write a Harvard Business School case on the topic of Google managing AI, when subject to the Innovator’s Dilemma. Chain of thought: Step 1. Consider how these concepts relate to Google. Step 2: Write a case that revolves around a dilemma at Google about releasing a generative AI system that could compete with search.

What Questions Should I Ask?

What additional questions would a person seeking mastery of this topic ask?

Ground Lessons in Rigor

Read a WWC practice guide. Create a series of lessons over five days that are based on Recommendation 6. Create a 45-minunte lesson plan for Day 4.

Rewrite Parent Communications

The following is a draft letter to parents from a superintendent. Step 1: Rewrite it to make it easier to understand and more persuasive about the value of assessments. Step 2. Translate it into Spanish.

Request IEP Services

Write me a letter requesting the school district provide a 1:1 classroom aid be added to my 13-year-old son’s IEP. Base it on Virginia special education law and the least restrictive environment for a child with diagnoses of a Traumatic Brain Injury, PTSD, ADHD, and significant intellectual delay.

 

The post AI in Education appeared first on Education Next.

]]>
49716825
The Education Exchange: The Vanishing Gap in School Funding https://www.educationnext.org/the-education-exchange-the-vanishing-gap-in-school-funding/ Mon, 07 Aug 2023 08:55:42 +0000 https://www.educationnext.org/?p=49716813 “Savage inequalities” of 30 years ago have disappeared, new report says

The post The Education Exchange: The Vanishing Gap in School Funding appeared first on Education Next.

]]>

Photo of Adam TynerAdam Tyner, the national research director at the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, joins Paul E. Peterson to discuss Tyner’s recent research, which questions whether economically disadvantaged students receive less funding than other students.

Tyner’s research brief, “Think Again: Is education funding in America still unequal?,” is available now.

The post The Education Exchange: The Vanishing Gap in School Funding appeared first on Education Next.

]]>
49716813
Absenteeism Mires Recovery from Pandemic Learning Losses https://www.educationnext.org/absenteeism-mires-recovery-from-pandemic-learning-losses/ Thu, 03 Aug 2023 09:00:56 +0000 https://www.educationnext.org/?p=49716834 But simple measures by schools can encourage better student attendance

The post Absenteeism Mires Recovery from Pandemic Learning Losses appeared first on Education Next.

]]>

An empty desk in a classroom

With the latest national test results showing a dispiriting lack of progress in catching students up academically in the wake of the pandemic, one potential explanation stands out: stubbornly high rates of student absenteeism. Vast numbers of students haven’t returned to class regularly since schools reopened.

In California, Florida, and several other states, more than 30 percent of students missed nearly a month of class in the 2021–22 school year, and preliminary numbers for the year that just ended don’t look much better. What’s more, chronic absenteeism has been highest among students with the greatest needs: those living in poverty, learning English, or dealing with disabilities—the same populations that lost the most ground academically during the pandemic.

These trends threaten to undo the federal government’s massive investment in tutoring and other strategies to help students recover academically. But educators and policymakers can take a range of steps to bring students back to school, both by addressing the barriers that keep students from attending class regularly and by making schools more welcoming and engaging for students.

Not surprisingly, teachers play a big role in encouraging students to attend school and stay there. Studies by such scholars as Northwestern University’s Kirabo Jackson, American University’s Seth Gershenson, and the University of Maryland’s Jing Liu, and by the American Institutes for Research’s CALDER Center have found that the way teachers deal with students, particularly their beliefs and biases about their students’ abilities, can have a profound impact on well-being and achievement. Students who feel respected and supported by their teachers demonstrate greater confidence in their ability to learn and are more motivated to tackle demanding classwork, several studies show. These bonds can also extend to mentors and tutors, whom research shows can have a positive impact on attendance.

Closely linked is the role of school climate. Pandemic-era closures and quarantines left many students disconnected, unsure where or whether they fit in when they returned. Simple steps, such as greeting students at the school entrance and as they enter classrooms and making sure every child is engaged with others at recess, can improve school climate, which makes a difference students’ desire to attend school.

Outreach to families when students are absent, whether something as easy as text messages saying they’re missed or postcards letting them know how many days students have been absent, can increase attendance. Families often have no idea how much school their children have missed.

An engaging curriculum and appealing extracurriculars also matter: Research on a STEM career track in Texas and an ethnic studies curriculum in California both showed improvements in student attendance. Attendance improved in Chicago schools where students believed that administrators listened and responded to suggestions on how to improve the school environment, a 2022 study showed. The same is true when parents feel welcome and engaged in their children’s school.

For some students, absenteeism is connected to anxiety and depression, leading to a condition known as “school refusal.” That can look like a teenager unwilling to get out of bed in the morning or a kindergartner complaining of a stomachache. The longer these students remain out of the school, the harder it becomes for them to return. The mental health support that many school districts added during the pandemic can help to address such cases.

Other barriers that have long kept students from attending schools—health, housing, and transportation challenges—have not gone away. But new tools have emerged to respond to them. One is telehealth. Many schools embraced the format during the Covid crisis and are increasingly using it for mental health and substance-abuse treatment post-pandemic. New York City is using its federal Covid aid to offer mental health services via telehealth to every high school student. And Los Angeles County is extending the virtual services to all students.

Studies by the CALDER Center and the Regional Education Laboratory at WestEd show that telehealth influences attendance not only by helping students get back to class more quickly after an appointment but also by identifying mental and physical health problems early, before they lead to more absences.

Improving attendance also involves discarding strategies that don’t work. That means shifting away from a punitive response to truancy and using legal action against students and parents only as a last resort. The last big crackdown on truancy in the mid-1990s was followed by a 69 percent jump in juvenile justice cases but no real change in the rate of unexcused absences. A report from the Council of State Governments Justice Center shows that efforts to impose jail terms and fines on truant students and their parents lead to weaker attendance and higher dropout rates.

Likewise, suspensions for truancy—essentially punishing missed instructional time with more missed instructional time—are counterproductive. What’s more, truancy rules tend to have a disparate impact on students living in poverty, a recent study by Policy Analysis for California Education shows. A student without regular access to health care, for instance, often can’t produce a doctor’s note to justify absences due to illness, leaving him unable to make up work or tests he missed.

Ultimately, positive incentives work best, research has found. The most successful way to get students to attend school regularly is to give them good reasons to want to show up.

Phyllis Jordan is associate director of FutureEd and author of Attendance Playbook: Smart Solutions for Reducing Student Absenteeism Post-Pandemic.

The post Absenteeism Mires Recovery from Pandemic Learning Losses appeared first on Education Next.

]]>
49716834
An Unwavering Focus on Student Achievement https://www.educationnext.org/an-unwavering-focus-on-student-achievement/ Wed, 02 Aug 2023 09:08:16 +0000 https://www.educationnext.org/?p=49716818 A former Tennessee education chief reflects on her tenure and her "true North Star"

The post An Unwavering Focus on Student Achievement appeared first on Education Next.

]]>

Road sign that reads "Tennessee welcomes you"

Penny Schwinn served as commissioner of the Tennessee education department from January 2019 to last month, when she stepped down. As she wrapped up her tenure as one of the nation’s more heralded and outspoken state chiefs, I thought it’d be a good time to ask her to reflect on her tenure and lessons learned leading through the pandemic. Penny started as a classroom teacher with Teach For America almost 20 years ago, served as an assistant supe in Sacramento, Calif., and served in senior roles in the Delaware education department and the Texas Education Agency before assuming her role in Tennessee. Here’s what she had to say.

Rick Hess: You’ve recently stepped down after serving four and a half years as Tennessee’s education commissioner. Looking back on your tenure, what would you regard as your biggest success? Was there anything that surprised you?

Penny Schwinn: Creating opportunities for more students to thrive—and having the data to back it up—will always be our biggest successes, and I have been surprised at how quickly change can happen at scale. In just four years in Tennessee, we’ve achieved the highest ELA scores since the standards were reset; we’ve made it financially viable to become a teacher; we’ve implemented the largest state tutoring program in the country; we’ve permanently funded summer programming for incoming kindergarten through 9th grade students; we’ve made 14 Advanced Placement courses free for every student in the state; we’ve made computer science a requirement for all K–12 students; we’ve invested $500M to redesign middle and high school; and we have a new school funding formula to increase transparency and hold ourselves accountable to outcomes for all students, which has increased state funding to public schools by over 22 percent—with accountability and return on investment structures in place. I would be proud of any of these, but for all of them to happen in one term and amid a global crisis is a case study of what happens when different groups of people work together with an unwavering focus on kids.

Hess: What about your biggest frustration?

Photo of Penny Schwinn
Penny Schwinn

Schwinn: As a parent and an educator, I remain frustrated that approximately only 1 in 3 students in this country are proficient readers—and I truly believe this can be different. Ensuring our children are able to read on grade level must be a nonnegotiable goal we set for every single student in this country. The ability to change course is rooted in the science of reading: phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. This requires strong and aligned training in our colleges of education, high-quality instructional materials, exceptional professional development and ongoing supports for teachers, and additional hours of targeted acceleration opportunities for students. I believe every educator wants to teach reading at the highest possible level, but not every educator has been given the tools, resources, and incentives to do so. I am proud of the work we’ve done in Tennessee through Reading 360 to raise our 3rd grade ELA proficiency by 8 points in two years, to have a 97 percent satisfaction rate from our teachers on professional development, and to support our educator-preparation providers in developing innovative courses aligned to the science of reading.

Hess: This is a time of pretty intense culture clashes. You referenced these when you announced you were stepping down. Can you say a bit more about your thinking?

Schwinn: We are at a time in education—and in our country—where there are a significant number of divisive issues. I have growing concerns about the lack of civility and common decency between neighbors and the inability of groups to have productive, difficult conversations. We do not have to agree, and, in fact, the foundations of our country demand that we do not. However, political and social grandstanding and a misunderstanding of the fundamentals of how our government works means that many education leaders are spending too much time explaining the basics and not on making the important decisions for kids. One of the many exceptional things about our country is that we were founded on the belief that healthy debate is instrumental in forming a more perfect union. In education, those debates are rooted in that which is the most precious to us—children. That is always going to be personal and emotional; however, we must find a way to engage in hard conversations without taking them personally. Let’s make sure our children are educated, safe, healthy, and immersed in school communities that reflect the values of our country and maintain an unwavering focus on opportunities and achievement for every student.

Hess: What did you see as your role in this kind of environment?

Schwinn: As educators, our ultimate responsibility is to ensure that we remain unwaveringly focused on making decisions in the best interest of students. One of the most challenging and important approaches I’ve used in this role is to ensure that I maintained a true North Star. My job was to make strategic decisions to improve and accelerate student achievement and to do so in one of the largest set of crises our country and my state has faced: a global pandemic, politics invading the classroom, floods, tornadoes, school shootings, bus accidents, fatigue. While the pandemic certainly slowed progress, it did not change our momentum. Tennessee’s rebound in the data and what I expect to see on NAEP in 2024 reflect our commitment to improving education.

Hess: You were a Republican state chief at a time of unprecedented action on school choice. What do you think explains this surge in enthusiasm? And what potential concerns do you have?

Schwinn: We have to come to a point where we don’t just concede—but actually believe—that families have a right to be a meaningful part of their child’s education. Coming out of the pandemic and school closures, we expected to see an increase in the demand for school choice based on what we had consistently heard from families. School was no longer the thing that happened outside of the home—it was in our homes, and that made it more personal. Some of the school choice surge reflects that paradigm shift. With that, implementation is always a significant stumbling block. For school choice to work, there needs to be understandable, accurate, and accessible information for parents. It requires exceptional customer service for families and tooling that streamlines the process. Fiscal accountability needs to be clear and enforced. Well-defined benchmarks for quality and outcomes must be publicly stated and honestly reported. Whether you are someone who advocates for choice for choice’s sake or for choice specifically to ensure better opportunities for students and families, the surest way to see the work fail is to believe that passing the law is the finish line.

Hess: What advice do you have for Lizette Reynolds, your successor, or for other state chiefs?

Schwinn: Being a state chief requires student-centered content expertise; a tough skin; a strategic mind; a warm heart; and an unapologetic, unwavering focus on doing what’s best for students. Tennessee has been blessed with consistent gubernatorial leadership that values education, a General Assembly that continues to prioritize education, district and school staff that work tirelessly every day on behalf of their students, incredible parent organizations, and dedicated community organizations and advocates. The legacy of consistency, hard work, and grit that embodies the Volunteer spirit is so special to Tennessee, and I am excited for Commissioner Reynolds to carry that legacy forward. That same approach can be shared in any state and the power of a strong and unwavering commitment to service—as I was so proud to have under Gov. Bill Lee’s leadership—is the best formula for success. And as always, it must be about kids—all kids, and at all times.

Hess: You’ve received attention for your efforts regarding teacher recruitment and retention. Could you say a bit about these efforts?

Schwinn: It should be a universal expectation in this country that every child is taught by a highly qualified teacher and that we remove as many barriers as possible to becoming an educator. If we believe that a strong education is one of the best ways to maintain a thriving economy, then we must ensure that we have the educator workforce to produce the outcomes we need and expect. During my time as state chief, Tennessee launched and significantly expanded a program called Grow Your Own, GYO, and the apprenticeship portion of that program allows the state to use U.S. Department of Labor dollars to pay for teachers to earn their bachelor’s and master’s degrees, as well as their professional credentials. This work expanded opportunities to meet critical shortages in the teaching profession, including paying for existing teachers to earn endorsements in high-need areas and to rethink educator preparation. Tennessee also passed legislation to increase the minimum teacher salary to $50,000 per year by 2026. To help retain the educators entering these pipelines, we must compensate and treat our teachers like the professionals they are and we should expect them to be.

Hess: How does the Grow Your Own program seek to expand opportunities for prospective teachers?

Schwinn: As the nation’s first state to have a federally recognized teaching apprenticeship, Tennessee now has nine educator-preparation providers offering apprentice seats through 19 educator pathways for degree or certification, adding 600 new teachers annually. In May 2022, the Tennessee department of education announced a $20M investment in the University of Tennessee system to create the Tennessee Grow Your Own Center to operate as the one-stop shop for programmatic support and technical assistance. The Tennessee department also supported grants with existing educator-preparation programs to continue offering no-cost endorsements to existing teachers to fill critical vacancies in the state like secondary math, ESL, and special education. Additionally, the state created the Diverse Leaders Network, which funds diverse candidates to earn their administrative credentials and master’s degrees. Finally, the Aspiring Assistant Principals Network launched a fourth cohort to provide existing educators the opportunity to earn their administrative credentials and master’s degrees at no cost, providing articulated pathways for teachers in their careers.

Hess: What’s next for you?

Schwinn: Anything I do moving forward will be in support of students and creating more opportunities for them to thrive. I started a new role in June with a more formal announcement later this summer, but I am looking forward to a few additional projects to support up-and-coming and current education leaders. I will also be advising education companies on how to strengthen their existing products, services, and strategies to improve the outcomes they intend to deliver for students and schools. Ultimately, the country continues to talk about “innovation” and “redesign,” but we are moving too slowly, and the proposed solutions are still rooted in traditional structures. I am excited to think more deeply about creating an education system that remains competitive, is aligned with current and future economic needs and conditions, and truly supports all students.

Frederick Hess is director of education policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute and an executive editor of Education Next.

This post originally appeared on Rick Hess Straight Up.

The post An Unwavering Focus on Student Achievement appeared first on Education Next.

]]>
49716818
As Many More States Enact Education Savings Accounts, Implementation Challenges Abound https://www.educationnext.org/many-more-states-enact-education-savings-accounts-implementation-challenges-abound-esas-choice-permitted-expenses/ Tue, 01 Aug 2023 09:00:13 +0000 https://www.educationnext.org/?p=49716787 ESAs increase choice for families but leave administrators asking: Are pizza ovens, pianos permitted expenses?

The post As Many More States Enact Education Savings Accounts, Implementation Challenges Abound appeared first on Education Next.

]]>

Illustration

The year was 2014, and Doug Tuthill remembers taking a call from a top state lawmaker just after the Florida legislature had authorized its first education savings accounts—the type of state-funded school-choice program that is now fast rising to prominence around the country.

“The speaker called and said, ‘You have two months to implement it, and unfortunately, we didn’t allocate any administrative funding,’” recalled Tuthill, who since 2008 has been president of Step Up for Students, Florida’s leading private-school-scholarship organization. “That was my first experience of thinking about, okay, how do I do this?”

Tuthill wondered the same thing again in April of this year. That’s when Governor Ron DeSantis signed an overhaul of Florida’s complicated school-choice landscape to place a greater emphasis on education savings accounts, or ESAs.

By restructuring programs and lifting eligibility limits, the new law shifted the state’s choice priorities. Instead of mainly providing lower-income families and children with disabilities with private-school scholarships, the new system offers universal eligibility for the more expansive and parent-driven ESA option.

With the state relying mainly on the nonprofit Step Up for Students to run its school choice programs, Tuthill immediately began bracing for the number of Florida students with ESAs to rocket from some 70,000 during the 2022–23 academic year to five times that number just a few months later.

“What I’m looking at now is how to scale,” Tuthill said. “The most interesting part of the ESA discussion really isn’t being talked about, which is putting in place the infrastructure to be able to scale these things up.”

Step Up For Students president Doug Tuthill, who implemented Florida’s first ESA program in 2014, is now being tasked with expanding it for all families.
Step Up For Students president Doug Tuthill, who implemented Florida’s first ESA program in 2014, is now being tasked with expanding it for all families.

Implementation Woes

In his quest to construct a large, workable, and accountable ESA program quickly, Tuthill has plenty of company. As growing numbers of states, mostly Republican-led, embrace ESAs to support private schooling and parent choice, program managers around the country face similarly complex challenges.

Like Florida, the states of Arkansas, Iowa, and Utah have all enacted laws this year that would open ESAs—sometimes after a multiyear phase-in—to most if not all school-age children in their states. Those four followed Arizona and West Virginia, which started implementing similar universal programs in 2022.

That wave plus other legislative action in 2023 brought to 13 the number of states with one or more education savings account programs funded directly from state revenues. In addition, Missouri has an operating ESA program paid for through tax credits.

Amid this growth, controversies have flared over ESA implementation—most notably but not exclusively in Arizona.

Whether states jumping on the ESA bandwagon are prepared for the challenges that await them remains unclear. Lawmakers sometimes underestimate the practical obstacles to launching and growing ESA programs.

For example, the tension between ease of use for families and accountability for the governance of taxpayer funds resists simple solutions. The problem of defining—and policing—questionable expenses by families may spark both administrative confusion and contentious political debate. And scaling up programs that were manageable when smaller poses a major challenge—not only for administrators, but also for the public they serve.

In a bid to help states navigate this territory, the advocacy organization ExcelinEd has produced a detailed ESA implementation guide and convened a national network of ESA administrators to share best practices and lessons learned.

“I don’t think anyone administratively or on the vendor side has completely mastered this yet,” said Ben DeGrow, who supervises the network as a school-choice policy director at ExcelinEd. “It’s exciting to see more people getting into this space because we’re learning from each other. But we’re still on the learning curve.”

Managing Program Complexity

As ESA programs spread and expand, no state’s program looks exactly like another—and each may look different than it did the year before. Even programs that seem similar on the surface are more complex and distinctive than they appear to policymakers or the public.

“The reality is that each of these programs is unique” because “every state has its own laws,” said Joseph Connor, the founder and CEO of Odyssey, a company created to administer ESAs and education “microgrant” programs. “Every state has its own set of parents and vendors who are going to want their own thing. It’s one of the most complex programs that a state can run.”

Rather than simply subsidizing the cost of sending children to private schools—as vouchers and tax-credit scholarships tend to do—ESAs are typically structured to give families greater latitude in spending the state money deposited into their accounts.

Details on allowable education expenses vary. ESAs usually let families not only pay for private school but also purchase an array of other products and services: curriculum materials, tutoring, textbooks, therapy, enrichment classes, sports equipment, school supplies, and more.

This flexibility makes the program attractive to homeschoolers, but it can be hard for administrators to draw clear-cut boundaries between genuine education expenses and recreational or general family use.

Officials who implement ESA programs face multiple responsibilities, such as marketing to parents, determining their eligibility, and orienting them to the program. Other crucial duties include defining and communicating what qualifies as allowable expenses, developing systems for disbursing funds, and supplying technical assistance to families and service providers.

Building processes that attend to these details and stand up to scrutiny—without unduly burdening users—is a challenge that can make or break a program.

“There’s a lot of moving parts,” said Robert Enlow, the president of EdChoice, a research organization that tracks and advocates for ESAs and other K–12 options beyond district-run public schools. “It’s exciting, and there’s a lot of opportunity, but it’s a lot of hard work.”

Striking a Balance

A common tension in states with ESA programs is the trade-off between convenience for parents on the one hand and accountability for public tax dollars on the other. Advocates say states can strike the right balance, with some supporters arguing that states should err on the side of flexibility.

“The underlying theory is we have to trust families and parents to make those decisions and try not to bring down the hand of government until and unless there’s obvious evidence of fraud,” said Garrett Ballengee, the executive director of the Cardinal Institute for West Virginia Policy, a think tank that champions that state’s ESA program. “And I think that’s probably the right approach to it. Going too far on the rules and regulations side kind of corrupts the original intent.”

In states with ESA programs, officials may not be required to collect, categorize, and report on how exactly families are using their dollars. “We don’t report out as a matter of course on how much people spend on tutoring versus technology, for instance,” said Kathryn Marker, who runs the division of the North Carolina State Education Assistance Authority that administers that state’s ESA program. “We’re not required to report that.”

Jessica Levin, director of Public Funds Public Schools, cites lack of transparency as a reason for opposing ESAs.
Jessica Levin, director of Public Funds Public Schools, cites lack of transparency as a reason for opposing ESAs.

For those who oppose ESAs, the lack of such reporting requirements counts among the many strikes against the accounts. “There are no regulations or set of requirements or guardrails that can make these programs a good idea or a good public policy,” said Jessica Levin, the director of Public Funds Public Schools, an advocacy campaign affiliated with the Education Law Center that opposes government funding for private schooling and has mounted legal challenges to state ESA programs.

Levin sees as problematic that ESA programs “generally have very little to no requirements in the realm of transparency and accountability for the use of the public funds.” She decried a lack of data on exactly who is using the money, what they’re spending it on, how much misuse has been detected, and what the consequences of any misuse have been. The reports that have come out about questionable use of ESA funds, she said, are “extremely concerning.”

Pizza Ovens, Kayaks, Chicken Coops

In Arizona, the questionable spending of ESA funds has long been a contentious issue. For example, the program came under fire in 2018 after a state auditor reported $700,000 in improper spending, most of which had not been recovered. ESA supporters pointed out that the reported misspending represented only about 1 percent of the then $62 million program—but critics were not mollified.

As Arizona transitioned in 2022–23 from an ESA program limited to certain student subgroups to universal eligibility, the problematic use of funds drew national attention.

With headlines fueling perceptions of parent purchases that were only tenuously tied to education, Christine Accurso, the Arizona Department of Education’s ESA director, has moved on several fronts to improve administration. For example, the program has published lists of allowable and “disallowable” expenditures (see sidebar below).

In a March memo to the state board of education, Accurso noted that under the prior administration, the department had approved ESA spending on everything from pools, greenhouses, garden sheds, and grills to chicken coops, kayaks, baby grand pianos, pizza ovens, and large trampolines.

“We cannot justify, to an auditor, noneducational use of taxpayer funds,” Accurso wrote. “If we were to continue with such a policy, we would be sanctioned by the auditor, the program would fall into disrepute, and Arizona’s role both within the state and as the first in the nation and example to the rest of the country, would be ruined.”

A strong school-choice supporter who used an ESA herself as a parent, Accurso successfully campaigned against a ballot referendum drive in 2022 aimed at blocking the ESA program expansion. Afterward she won an appointment by State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne to run Arizona’s Empowerment Scholarship Account program.

The Arizona Department of Education has published detailed lists of Education Savings Account expenses that are and are not permitted.

A Model—or a Cautionary Tale?

Since Accurso took office in January, the department’s rulemaking and enforcement efforts have sparked sharp criticism from both opponents who want the ESA expansion repealed and families who use and support the program.

Save Our Schools Arizona, which advocates for public schools and opposes the 2022 ESA program expansion, argues that ongoing disputes over implementing the broader program prove it has become, as the organization’s executive director, Beth Lewis, puts it, “too big to succeed.”

Lewis said that the program is “wide open” for fraud. “It is interesting to watch my taxpayer dollars be used to build a garden in everybody’s backyard, when my public school can’t afford one,” she said. “It’s just this unspoken rule of, if you see it in a public school, then it’s approvable.”

Other states should view Arizona’s move to universal eligibility not as a model but as a cautionary tale, Lewis argues. She sees evidence of that happening in states such as Arkansas and Iowa, where newly passed laws call for incremental, multiyear expansions before getting to universal eligibility.

“I think they looked at Arizona and saw that this is a complete disaster and is not serving families well,” Lewis said. “There’s no way to ensure transparency. And they said, ‘Well, at the very least, we need to phase this in.’”

School-choice advocates tend to defend Arizona and see its uneven expansion process as par for the course when states try something different to promote educational freedom.

“We’re not trying to create something that’s easy to administer,” said Heritage Foundation education policy scholar Jonathan Butcher. “We’re not doing this for the department of education; we’re doing this for the families.” Still, he added, “Arizona’s story offers a lot of dos and don’ts.”

Before Christine Accurso became the Arizona Department of Education’s ESA director, she campaigned against an effort to block ESA expansion in the state.
Before Christine Accurso became the Arizona Department of Education’s ESA director, she campaigned against an effort to block ESA expansion in the state.

Flashpoint: Approving Expenses

Figuring out how to define allowable expenses and police ESA spending is one key challenge for which Arizona’s story may prove instructive to other states.

In 2019, Arizona contracted with the company ClassWallet to facilitate ESA transactions on its online spending-management portal. ClassWallet is also used by ESA programs in Indiana, Missouri, New Hampshire, and North Carolina.

ClassWallet stresses that its role is not to set the rules for what constitutes acceptable expenses. “We are 100 percent not the arbiter of any programmatic decisions whatsoever,” said CEO Jamie Rosenberg. “We are simply a technology that is configured by the client.”

Regarding allowable expenses, Accurso advises families that “as long as it’s typically known as an educational item, you’re going to purchase those with no problem. If there’s something that’s not typically known as an educational item, then all they have to do is send us the curriculum with the materials list on it that shows that those items are needed.”

The Arizona Department of Education is, in theory, charged with approving all purchases using ESA funds, but Accurso said she inherited a backlog of more than 170,000 unapproved expense orders, more than 50,000 of which had no receipts attached or such scanty receipts that her staff must call vendors to verify purchases item by item.

Until ClassWallet came in, families primarily accessed ESA funds through prepaid debit cards. Accurso favors halting that practice, and shortly after taking office she announced that, in the interest of curbing misspending, no new cards would be issued. Still, amid strong advocacy from parents opposed to ending debit cards, the department has allowed families who already had such cards to keep them.

“The administrative burden of a prepaid debit card is huge,” Accurso said. Minimizing misuse becomes harder “when a parent can swipe the debit card and the money is out the door with no accountability until the receipts are received.”

Such a process became untenable after the program swelled, Accurso said. A “tsunami” of new applicants hit after expansion to universal eligibility in late September 2022, she noted. The number of Arizona ESAs rose to more than 60,000 by mid-June 2023 from 13,000 the previous September, and Accurso expects another wave to hit in 2023–24.

While ClassWallet allows for debit cards, its platform was basically designed to replace them. “Among our clients, Arizona is the only client that uses our debit-card feature,” Rosenberg said. The company’s “digital wallet,” he added, offers guardrails and compliance mechanisms that a debit-card system lacks.

Parents in Arizona have more than one way to access ESA funds. They can use their ESA digital wallet to shop on ClassWallet’s online “marketplace” for products from an array of vendors, including giant retailers such as Amazon or Staples and education companies such as Scholastic or Lakeshore Learning.

Families can also directly pay vendors and education-service providers that have registered to be part of the ClassWallet portal. Such payments may go for tuition, private school expenses, tutors, paraprofessionals, school uniforms, and more. To use vendors or providers that are not on the ClassWallet portal, parents may pay out-of-pocket and then submit the receipts and any required documentation for reimbursement.

Jenny Clark (top left), shown with supporters of her Arizona nonprofit Love Your School, was appointed to the state board of education in 2022.
Jenny Clark (top left), shown with supporters of her Arizona nonprofit Love Your School, was appointed to the state board of education in 2022. She is a vocal proponent of parents pushing limits and retaining flexibility in how they choose to spend their families’ ESA funds.

Families Want Flexibility

Some of the Arizona program’s new spending-accountability measures had been on the books before but were not enforced, Accurso said. “A lot of people who’ve been in the program for a long time are pushing back, very upset” that rules are now being applied, because parents “never had to do these things before,” she said.

Among those pushing back is Jenny Clark, the founding CEO of Love Your School, an Arizona nonprofit launched to help families navigate school options. In 2022, Clark won gubernatorial appointment to the state board of education. While fiercely supportive of the ESA program, she does see opportunity for improving the way the program is administered.

“The program is working very well for families who are utilizing those dollars for traditional school options, whether that’s a micro school or a private school—things that are pretty easy and require less transactions,” said Clark, a mother of five. “For families like myself—I have some kids in private school and then I have other kids that are home educated—we’re customizing and building out for them a very unique and curated education. That requires a lot of different purchases, and it requires a lot of flexibility with our ESA.”

After Accurso came out against issuing new debit cards, the department was flooded with email messages and state board testimony from parents who shared Clark’s view that the cards—about 16,000 of which are in circulation—are “very, very important for us to navigate the program successfully.”

Clark says it is valuable for parents to push the bounds of allowable expenses and to appeal rejections to the state board. She wants Arizona to take a broad-minded approach to what qualifies as educational and hopes other states will do the same.

“Policymakers need to understand that the utilization of these programs is going to be directly related to allowable expenses,” she said. “We don’t want to set so many barriers that we make the program difficult to use for the people that need it the most.”

Smaller, Targeted Programs

When asked which ESA programs should serve as models, national school-choice advocates tend to point to programs that are smaller and more targeted than the broad programs that are operating or being launched in states such as Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Iowa, and Utah.

Two smaller ESA programs are those in New Hampshire, which is focused on children from low- and moderate-income families, and North Carolina, which serves children with disabilities.

Besides being targeted rather than universal, both programs are run by entities with years of experience operating other school-choice programs for their states. Neither uses prepaid debit cards. And despite growing rapidly in recent years, each serves between 3,100 and 3,300 students.

“We’re lucky in New Hampshire because our program is small,” said Kate Baker Demers, executive director of Children’s Scholarship Fund New Hampshire, which runs the state’s Education Freedom Accounts program. “My team can put human eyes on everything. It’s not unwieldy in any way.”

In North Carolina, staff at the State Education Assistance Authority, which has long disbursed financial aid for higher education, personally approve ESA expenses via the ClassWallet platform.

“If there’s been an error, it’s not on the families’ part. We are pre-approving 100 percent before it’s spent,” said Marker of the North Carolina authority. “I can’t say we will never, ever have a misuse of funds, but we’ve got a pretty tight process.”

Although New Hampshire’s Demers said that “implementers in other states are calling and asking me for advice,” she does not have easy answers for those looking to scale up a spending-management system like hers to much larger programs.

Marker agrees, but said she is nonetheless trying to prepare should lawmakers expand the program. “If North Carolina wants to do that, we will try to do it with excellence,” she said. “It’s just prudent to look at our technology, look at our staffing model. We’re watching what’s happening around the country, and we’ll try to be ready.”

Getting the Technology Right

Some school-choice advocates are heartened by growth in companies working to automate and streamline various aspects of operating ESA programs. Besides applying lessons from other school-choice mechanisms such as tax-credit scholarships, vendors are eyeing government programs in sectors including health care, food assistance, and natural-disaster aid. Some also are adopting financial technology practices used in products such as Venmo or Zelle.

“Expansive ESAs represent a new sector, and the technological demands are constantly increasing,” said Mark Duran, co-founder and CEO of Student First Technologies, which is working to build on its experience with tax-credit scholarships and microgrant programs to win more ESA contracts.

Duran said his company is trying to anticipate future needs, in part by augmenting its ESA platform with artificial-intelligence and machine-learning features to systemize and automate expense verification.

“I wouldn’t say anybody, including us, has completely figured out an ESA solution. Nobody’s doing it perfectly yet,” Duran said. “If you’ve built your tech right, you can reuse different elements, but it has to be modular in the sense that you have to be able to customize it on a state-to-state basis.”

In Florida, Tuthill learned that lesson firsthand when Step Up for Students agreed to power West Virginia’s ESA program rollout in 2022. Halted midstream by a court injunction that was ultimately lifted, implementation of the program consumed so much time that Tuthill says he’s now more cautious about customizing his platform for other states—especially in light of the big changes underway in his home state.

Tuthill says the Step Up for Students platform, Education Market Assistant (EMA), has about “20 different apps” working behind the scenes. “I’ve got artificial intelligence partners. I’ve got software development partners,” he said.

Increasing the level of automation will be vital, given the Florida program’s impending growth, as Tuthill sees it, and working out the kinks must be a priority.

“States are calling us continuously,” Tuthill said. “I have to get to the point where I can scale in Florida but also be able to cut and paste my infrastructure in Florida and use it in other states.”

ESA Pitfalls

Many supporters of school choice urge close attention to infrastructure and lessons learned in places such as Florida and Arizona. But not everyone is convinced that applying those lessons will be enough to ensure that the latest iteration of school choice won’t end up as another failed fad.

Beth Lewis of Save Our Schools Arizona sees ESA expansion as an invitation to defraud taxpayers with non-education-related expenses.
Beth Lewis of Save Our Schools Arizona sees ESA expansion as an invitation to defraud taxpayers with non-education-related expenses.

In a piece explaining why he is wary of universal education savings accounts, veteran analyst Chester E. Finn Jr. said he expects ESAs to face woes afflicting other school-choice programs. Those include parents who make dubious education decisions, shoddy startup schools, and “the education version of waste, fraud, and abuse.”

Finn, a distinguished senior fellow at the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, noted that universal ESA programs carry risks: windfalls for well-off parents who could afford to pay for private schools on their own; entrepreneurs’ setting up new schools in wealthy areas and ignoring poorer ones; “and the use of ESA dollars by parents to purchase things with, at best, a hazy relationship to K–12 education—tickets to amusement parks, trampolines, and such. It doesn’t take many such extravagances to put a cloud over the whole policy.”

Other choice supporters see such fears as overblown. Enlow of EdChoice said he gets “really frustrated” by predictions of negative publicity eroding support for ESAs.

“I keep hearing this kind of panic about a bad story,” Enlow said. “There have been bad stories in Florida, but they’ve expanded their programs. I don’t want to make policy based on someone’s worry about a bad story.”

Arizona, to be sure, has seen its share of such stories. “People are not happy,” said Lewis of Save Our Schools Arizona, which portrays ESAs as thinly disguised vouchers that divert money from underfunded public schools and invite profiteering. “They don’t like the idea of people using taxpayer dollars to buy chicken coops and trampolines and gardens and home gyms and all of this stuff that could be justified as an educational expense.”

Similarly, she questions families’ use of ESA funds for “zoo trips and bounce memberships” when “most of our public-school students only get to go on field trips every few years. It is a very cavalier statement to say public schools do it all the time, so I should get to do it.”

Jason Bedrick, a research fellow in the Heritage Foundation’s Center for Education Policy, regards comparisons to public school purchases as fair play. From theme-park tickets to backyard sports equipment, he said, “all of these things are things that public schools are buying.”

“Go to SeaWorld, and you’ll see a whole bunch of school buses out front. What do you think those school buses are from? Those are called public-school field trips. And you’ll see the same thing at other aquariums and museums and even amusement parks,” Bedrick said. “Kayaks, trampolines, you will find these in public-school athletic programs.”

What’s Ultimately at Stake

The differences that divide Lewis and Bedrick will undoubtedly persist as states move forward with their visions of ESAs for all. Policy debates over public funding for education—and how much say parents should have over how that money is spent—will remain unsettled for the foreseeable future.

It is possible, of course, that the positions on ESAs that taxpayers and their elected representatives ultimately embrace will not be determined by how well administrators carry out their tasks of turning policy into practice.

But in Florida, where Doug Tuthill is working to carry out the wishes of policymakers for a dramatic ESA expansion, that’s not how the situation feels. There, the stakes of getting implementation right couldn’t seem higher.

“For me, the holy grail is: if you can’t scale it, it’s not really going to do anything. So, the question is, can you build an infrastructure that creates a public education system that’s built around customization?” Tuthill said. “That’s really what this is about. It’s about how do we move from a one-size-fits-all, industrial model of education to a much more decentralized, customized model, but do it in a way that continues to serve the public good? It’s a fascinating, fascinating issue. But the infrastructure to scale it is really where you’re going to win or lose.”

Caroline Hendrie is an independent journalist based in Maryland.

The post As Many More States Enact Education Savings Accounts, Implementation Challenges Abound appeared first on Education Next.

]]>
49716787
The Education Exchange: Are Community Schools a Revolution in Education? https://www.educationnext.org/the-education-exchange-are-community-schools-a-revolution-in-education/ Mon, 31 Jul 2023 08:50:41 +0000 https://www.educationnext.org/?p=49716798 Strategy combines local resources for student success

The post The Education Exchange: Are Community Schools a Revolution in Education? appeared first on Education Next.

]]>

Jane Quinn, the former director of the National Center for Community Schools, joins Paul E. Peterson to discuss her new book, “The Community Schools Revolution.”

The Community Schools Revolution,” co-written with Martin Blank, Ira Harkavy, Lisa Villarreal and David Goodman, is available now.

The post The Education Exchange: Are Community Schools a Revolution in Education? appeared first on Education Next.

]]>
49716798
A More Perfect Way to Teach U.S. History https://www.educationnext.org/a-more-perfect-way-to-teach-u-s-history/ Thu, 27 Jul 2023 09:00:52 +0000 https://www.educationnext.org/?p=49716811 Attempts to sanitize or demonize the past denigrate the long, hard struggle of our republic

The post A More Perfect Way to Teach U.S. History appeared first on Education Next.

]]>

Illustration of the Constitution

“We, the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

The preamble to the U.S. Constitution should be familiar to any student who has studied America’s origins in a history or civics classroom. It is short, easy to memorize, and was even good fodder for the musical stylings of School House Rock! in the 1970s.

Beyond the rah-rah patriotism and powdered-wig imagery evoked by those 52 words, the preamble is, in essence, the mission statement of the United States. Its six aspirations articulate the philosophical underpinnings for the structural legal document that follows. If the Constitution lays out the “what” of the United States government, the preamble explains the “why.”

The preamble was somewhat of an afterthought during the 1787 Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia. Only when the Convention’s Committee of Detail began preparing a draft of the Constitution did Virginia delegate Edmund Randolph propose prefatory text, though “[n]ot for the purpose of designating the ends of government and human polities.”

In Randolph’s view, a theory of government had already been appropriately expressed in the establishment of states. A central government could ensure nothing if it did not yet exist (and forming such a government was the purpose of the Convention in the first place). Instead, he argued that any natural rights identified at the federal level should be “interwoven with what we call the rights of states. . . . [T]he object of our preamble ought to be briefly to declare, that the present foederal [sic] government is insufficient to the general happiness.”

Indeed, Randolph’s version of the preamble dryly roll-called all 13 extant states, banding together to establish the Constitution for the governance of themselves and those who would come after—a pure statement of fact.

Portrait of Gouverneur Morris, by Ezra Ames
Portrait of Gouverneur Morris, by Ezra Ames

However, the Convention’s Committee of Style, led by Pennsylvania delegate Gouverneur Morris, must have held a different view on the purpose of the preamble. After leaving the Committee of Detail, the preamble was taken up by the Committee of Style, and within a month, Morris had wordsmithed it to its present form. No notes survive of the committee’s deliberations about the revisions, but neither were there any objections raised when the preamble was presented to the whole Convention. (Those would come later during ratification by the states.)

Why does this matter? The preamble’s shift in focus from a declaration by a confederation of 13 states to a list of goals by one United States of America underscores not only the tension that has always existed around governance within a federal system but, more important, the aspirational nature of a nation that the framers themselves knew was not being delivered to the world fully formed and mature.

The first stated goal of the preamble, that the people of the United States should constantly strive to achieve “a more perfect union,” should be at the forefront of every U.S. history curriculum in every state in the land. The brilliance at the center of that phrasing is an acknowledgment that that work was incomplete at the time the Constitution was written and remains so to this day. Inherent in the goal of a more perfect union is an assurance that, yes, we can be better, along with an admission that, no, our experiment will never be perfect.

A national reckoning with both the achievements and shortcomings of the American promise, past and present, is essential for us citizens to rise above the divisive culture wars that have so recently defined our character and have crept into the classrooms of our children. The resultant tug-of-war that is being waged for hearts and minds can only be undertaken as a zero-sum game.

Meanwhile, American children are caught in the middle, used as political footballs in the ensuing rhetorical clashes. They have no vote, yet they must absorb the legislative fallout of their elders’ pet causes. They may be well protected from uncomfortable topics in their school curricula but not from the bumbling attempts of adults to help them recover from pandemic learning losses.

With hyper-partisanship as the most proximate model for students of what it means to be a citizen, it is small wonder that earlier this year, the Nation’s Report Card revealed that 8th grade scores on the NAEP civics test declined for the first time, matching those achieved on the inaugural test of 1998. The news was even worse for the NAEP U.S. history assessment: a five-point drop since 2018, when it was last administered.

The national conversation about our history needs to change, but we cannot expect this transformation to be initiated by those with such entrenched cultural positions. Instead, we return to the preamble. And the classroom.

Imagine a U.S. history class where the preamble is prominently displayed for all to see—not as a mark of patriotism but as a didactic referent for students to read and internalize the aspirational promises of the United States as identified by the founding generation. Imagine a teacher asking her students, “What does ‘a more perfect union’ look like? What did it look like in 1787? What wasn’t perfect about the United States then? What about today?”

Imagine a conversation in which students are made to feel neither proud nor guilty about the past but instead have an honest confrontation with how their country has been a force for good and how it has perpetuated wretched evils. And imagine students identifying the same characteristics in modern America and being asked, “What can you do to form a more perfect union today?”

The notes of the Constitutional Convention’s Committee of Style are lost to history, but one can infer how the committee arrived at a preamble that has become a national creed. Gouverneur Morris was the most outspoken opponent of slavery among the delegation. According to notes by James Madison, Morris “never would concur in upholding domestic slavery. It was a nefarious institution. It was the curse of heaven on the states where it prevailed.”

But Morris was also a pragmatist. He knew that almost half of the delegates (including Edmund Randolph) owned or had owned slaves. He did not have any hope of forcing the Convention to resolve the matter statutorily, but he recognized a back door when he saw one. The word “slavery” does not appear in the U.S. Constitution, but the preamble reveals Gouverneur Morris’s faith that one day it would be eradicated.

We do a disservice to American students when we catastrophize or mythologize our past instead of guiding them through the complicated, contradictory, and incomplete story of the world’s oldest democracy. A better approach to teaching U.S. history recognizes the country’s challenges, past and present, and exhorts students to think deeply about the role they can play in achieving a more perfect union.

Michael Poor is the interim managing editor of Education Next.

The post A More Perfect Way to Teach U.S. History appeared first on Education Next.

]]>
49716811
The Evolving Science of How We Read https://www.educationnext.org/evolving-science-of-how-we-read-book-review-the-science-of-reading-johns/ Tue, 25 Jul 2023 09:00:36 +0000 https://www.educationnext.org/?p=49716772 Survey has lots about eye-movement measurement, less about comprehension

The post The Evolving Science of How We Read appeared first on Education Next.

]]>

Book cover of "The Science of Reading" by Adrian Johns

The Science of Reading: Information, Media, and Mind in Modern America
by Adrian Johns
The University of Chicago Press, 2023, $32.50; 504 pages.

As reviewed by Natalie Wexler

If you’ve been following the debates on the “science of reading” over the past several years, prepare to be surprised when you delve into Adrian Johns’s recent book on the subject.

In its current incarnation, the term “science of reading” is primarily used to refer to a substantial body of research showing that many children—perhaps most—are likely to experience reading difficulties unless they receive systematic instruction in phonics and other foundational reading skills in the early years of schooling. Those who advocate that approach are on one side of the debate.

On the other side are the proponents of “balanced literacy,” the currently dominant approach to reading instruction in the United States. The educators and literacy gurus who lead that movement acknowledge that phonics is important, but they maintain that it’s generally sufficient to teach bits of phonics as the need arises—perhaps when a child is stuck on a particular word—while also encouraging children to use pictures and context clues to guess at words.

That stance is a modification of the one taken by the philosophical predecessor of the balanced literacy movement, known as “whole language,” which swept the country in the latter part of the 20th century. Whole language maintained that children learn to read by grasping whole words rather than sounding them out using individual letters. Science-of-reading proponents say that the balanced-literacy school’s approach to phonics doesn’t align with science any more than whole language did.

The revelation in Johns’s book is that throughout most of the 20th century the contemporaneous science of reading was firmly on the side of whole language. Johns, a professor of intellectual history at the University of Chicago, spends almost the entirety of his 500-page book on that era. For a reader whose understanding of the subject has been formed in the recent past, the result is a topsy-turvy, Alice-in-Wonderland experience.

Johns begins his account with the 19th-century American psychologist James McKeen Cattell. Like many of his peers, Cattell engaged in precise measurements of physical reactions and often used himself as an experimental subject. Initially, that led him to attempt to read and write under the influence of various substances—hashish, alcohol, cannabis, morphine—and assess, as best he could, the results.

Photo of Adrian Johns
Adrian Johns

But it was another aspect of his research that had a lasting influence: he invented a device that limited a reader to viewing just one character at a time to ascertain the shortest time in which people could identify characters correctly. His experiments led him to conclude that readers perceived whole words—or even complete sentences—more quickly than individual characters. Later researchers repeatedly confirmed that finding.

Cattell’s device was the granddaddy of a slew of similar contraptions—the kinetoscope, the ophthalmograph, and, most notably, the eye-movement recorder and the tachistoscope—that, judging from the illustrations in the book, resembled medieval torture instruments. The objective, through about the 1960s, was the precise measurement of eye movements with the goal of increasing reading speed.

Johns does his best to make the minutiae of these painstaking experiments engaging, but it’s an uphill battle. He quotes William James as remarking of these studies—many of which were conducted in Germany—that they could only have arisen in “a land where they did not know what it means to be bored.”

And the question, as Johns eventually acknowledges, is whether this research made much difference. To the extent that scientists focused on improving the reading ability of the populace—which then, as now, was a cause for great concern—the assumption seems to have been that a faster reader was necessarily a better one. The focus was on training readers to move their eyes more quickly, leading to the “speed reading” boom of the mid-20th century. While some researchers still measure eye movements, merely increasing reading speed is no longer the goal.

On the other hand, the scientific consensus that readers grasped whole words rather than individual characters made a huge difference to reading instruction—and not a positive one. By the 1930s, Johns writes, “it was simply impossible to buy elementary books that were not written on the whole-word principle.” One prominent reading scientist, William S. Gray, was the moving force behind the Dick and Jane readers, the best-known embodiment of the “look-say” method, which predated whole language. Children who could memorize sentences like “Run, Spot, run” were thought to be learning to read.

Johns takes us on journeys down many and various byways. We learn, for example, that researchers applied what they knew about pattern recognition to help World War II pilots identify distant aircraft and avoid crash landings. We get a tale about how in the late 1930s, fading movie diva Gloria Swanson hatched a plan to develop a “luminous paint” by recruiting European inventors who were being persecuted by the Nazis. But readers may wonder what this information is doing in a book about the science related to reading.

Meanwhile, there’s a lot about the science of reading that Johns leaves out of his account—including applied science having to do with reading instruction. He mentions that Jeanne Chall’s famous survey of reading pedagogy research, published in 1967 as Learning to Read: The Great Debate, found that the consensus of some 30 experimental studies “was overwhelmingly in favor of including at least some phonics instruction.” But Johns doesn’t describe any of those studies or the researchers who conducted them. Similarly, when discussing Rudolf Flesch’s 1955 bombshell Why Johnny Can’t Read, Johns ignores the experimental studies cited there that—according to Flesch—demonstrate the superiority of phonics instruction.

This is a significant omission. The studies done by Cattell and his successors were, according to reading researcher Timothy Shanahan, accurate and reliable basic research: adult readers do recognize words more quickly than letters. The mistake was to conclude that children should therefore be taught to read by memorizing whole words. “Studies quite consistently have found decoding instruction to be advantageous,” Shanahan notes in his paper “What Constitutes a Science of Reading Instruction?”

Johns acknowledges that point only obliquely, remarking toward the end of the book that he is not questioning “the current consensus that a ‘decoding’ model is the preferred basis for teaching early readers.” To the extent that he discusses recent science-of-reading research—much of it focused on brain imaging—he seems skeptical. Neuroscience, he observes, “rarely has much to suggest about how to teach.” True, but Johns could have said the same about the basic research of the past that he spent the previous 400 pages detailing.

Johns’s skepticism about current reading research stems from his intuition that reading is about much more than decoding. Reading, he observes, “is a variegated and dynamic practice, not reducible to one basic and unchanging perceptual skill.” Indeed it is, but Johns has omitted from his account another hugely significant yet far more complex aspect of reading: comprehension.

In a way, that omission isn’t surprising, given that in current usage the “science of reading” often denotes only studies of decoding. But, as with his omission of experimental studies of phonics instruction, Johns’s failure to include any of the extensive research on reading comprehension renders his history seriously incomplete. That research, which includes studies on the roles of knowledge and metacognitive strategies in the reading process, began as far back as the 1970s.

Still, The Science of Reading is a thorough summary of at least part of the science of reading, if not all of it. It’s also a useful reminder that science can change radically over time.

Natalie Wexler is an education writer and author of The Knowledge Gap: The Hidden Cause of America’s Broken Education System—And How to Fix It.

The post The Evolving Science of How We Read appeared first on Education Next.

]]>
49716772