SwampFox

Recognizing the problems in public education is necessary but not sufficient for the transformational change we need

Recently, David Boulton, a learning-activist and technologist, came to Greenville to share his ideas on transformational changes needed to make education more effective. He discussed how humans evolved spoken language over a long period of time. In human history, literacy is a very recent phenomena, which is a symbolic, artificial representation of what we speak. Some children, especially those in poverty, grow up in an environment learning a very limited spoken vocabulary compared to their peers. They stand almost no chance without some aggressive remedial help of mastering the much more complex tasks of literacy at the same level as their peers. Once children fall behind in literacy, the gap we are all familiar with inevitably grows.

Most who heard David found his ideas about education very compelling. The question, though, is what to do about it. Numerous times David reinforced that the current education system we have is obsolete.

Our education system was designed in the 18th century to produce factory workers for the industrial revolution. In business circles, the consensus that education is important is based on it being "work force development," not on education being the means of developing the full human potential of all children. That paradigm no longer works in a world where people will change jobs and even careers several times over their lives. The most important thing we can teach students to be successful in the world they will live in is to think and to learn.

Because the education system otherwise lacked accountability, in recent decades we have developed a system of high stakes testing on the premise that if we cram enough facts into students heads they will be prepared to succeed. This system is profoundly broken. Ken Robinson articulately describes how schools kill creativity. Not only do we not view students as creative individuals, the system we have today squanders the creative potential of teachers to develop innovative solutions to our most intractable problems.

We are not educating children for the 21st century global, creative economy in which they will live. The best public schools are obsolete. Who I hear this from the most are professors in our honors colleges, who say they best and brightest students are not being taught to think. In South Carolina, the more educated a student's parents, the greater the gap in SAT scores compared to US peers with similarly educated parents. Perhaps Bill Gates captured this best:

America’s high schools are obsolete.

By obsolete, I don’t just mean that our high schools are broken, flawed, and under-funded – though a case could be made for every one of those points.

By obsolete, I mean that our high schools – even when they’re working exactly as designed – cannot teach our kids what they need to know today.

The worst public schools fail the children they serve, especially those in poverty. Lots of people in the public education establishment say that if parents were more involved, the public schools could educate poor children. A mother in poverty, who did not have a successful educational experience herself, and at best is working two jobs and at worst is zoned out, is not going to be as involved as two income, educated parents of students at Riverside High, where my kids when to school. Blaming the failures of public schools on children in poverty and their families does not solve the problem. Education is the path out of poverty, not the other way around.

One of the people attending the session with David Boulton talked about successful transformational innovations in education, like the Harlem Children's Zone and KIPP. These are examples of innovative programs created by people outside the education status quo. Transformational innovations across industries almost always come from people on the periphery. The last people to adopt transformational innovations are people who benefit most from today's status quo.

Trying to cram an innovative solution, like David Boulton's ideas, into an old model almost never works. Until we get serious about the structural reform required to change the culture of public education, initiatives like this one are noble by highly unlikely to improve much the inadequate education system we have. Transformational change never comes by first creating a broad consensus for change. It always comes from tenacious, passionate champions promoting transformation ideas, often in the face of entrenched resistance. These champions have the ultimate accountability. If they are successful, they attract more resources to grow, and if they are not successful, they go away.

We spend more money on education than anything else state and local governments in South Carolina do. In Greenville that is over $10,000 per student, and the total spent is higher for students in Title 1 schools. If 20 students are in a classroom, that is $200,000 or more per class. If the average teacher had control over even half of the money that was spent on behalf of her students, imagine the transformational change that would be possible. Money alone is not the problem. How education dollars are spent is at the core of the problem and the solution.

Teachers, parents and students are not the problem, they are inherently at the core of the solution too. Our education system must empower teachers, parents and others to attract the education dollars we spend so they can be as innovative and entrepreneurial regarding education as we expect others in our society to be. I agree with David Boultin that, "South Carolina is uniquely positioned to help demonstrate an explicit shift in the focus of education." We should set our sights on creating the best universal, publicly funded education system in the United States. We need a cultural change in how education is viewed for that to happen, to realize the full creative potential of both students and teachers. That is only possible if we empower passionate, tenacious educational champions in our community to lead the transformational change that is necessary.

The last time I wrote about the need for transformation change in public education, a leader of K-12 education I admire greatly wrote me, "Great article, John, well said. Right now, though, I feel like we should start a 'Cassandra League'. No one is listening." I feel that sense of helplessness too about creating the high quality education system we need. I don't know what else to do but to continue to try to build a consensus for the transformational change we need.