Pop quiz:
American education is:
- Irreparably dysfunctional and needs to be torn down and rebuilt from the ground up;
- Dysfunctional but capable of reform;
- Both (A) and (B)
The answer is C, according to (Corwin, 2021), by Teachers College鈥檚 Thomas Hatch, with (Ph.D. 鈥�20, M.A. 鈥�13) and (M.Ed. 鈥�20).
Searching for models that could inspire transformation or reform of American schools, the authors compare high-performing education systems in the United States with schools in Norway, Finland, Singapore, South Africa, Pakistan and Liberia. None of these systems is perfect, write Hatch, Professor of Education and Co-Director of 麻豆原创鈥檚 National Center for Restructuring Education, Schools and Teaching (NCREST); Corson, a 麻豆原创 graduate and assistant professor at Stockton University; and Gerth van den Berg, a current 麻豆原创 doctoral candidate. But all suggest ways that the United States can create more equitable and effective schooling.
Spoiler alert: it won鈥檛 be easy. Educators and education stakeholders will need to dig deep for answers, whether they鈥檙e looking to transform or reform.
鈥淚n order for educational systems to change, we must reevaluate deep-seated beliefs about learning, teaching, schooling, and race that perpetuate inequitable opportunities and outcomes,鈥� the authors write.
The book examines the core principles, beliefs and conditions that, in any setting, prevent or hamper fundamental change. Perhaps its key takeaway is that reform and transformation are not only both possible, but also both necessary and interdependent.
It鈥檚 about trying to help people to understand that we can鈥檛 afford either to merely improve the schools we have or simply blow up the system. We actually have to do both and embrace that contradiction.
鈥擳homas Hatch, Professor of Education
Addressing that apparent paradox is about 鈥渢rying to balance optimism and despair,鈥� says Hatch. 鈥淚t鈥檚 about trying to help people to understand that we can鈥檛 afford either to merely improve the schools we have or simply blow up the system. We actually have to do both and embrace that contradiction.鈥�
Large-scale changes in education policy can be too large, the authors warn, particularly because so often they are implemented on communities rather than with community members鈥� buy-in (think: the federal No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top programs). Then, too, 鈥渢hose who seek to improve educational outcomes have to confront the fundamental reality that the more radical their approaches are, the more difficult it will be for those approaches to take hold and to spread across many schools and communities,鈥� the authors write.
Yet change can be too small if it fails to recognize the myriad cultural, economic, political and social factors, inside and outside of classrooms, that perpetuate or combat inequity.
Each of the book鈥檚 six parts asks and answers a key question about education.
Is there anyone except those in the very elite鈥攁nd even some of those people鈥攚ho think schools 蝉丑辞耻濒诲苍鈥檛 change?
鈥攆rom The Education We Need for a Future We Can't Predict
The first, 鈥淲hy should schools change?鈥� is answered with another question: Given the widespread inequity in access to quality education, 鈥渋s there anyone except those in the very elite 鈥� and even some of those people 鈥� who think schools 蝉丑辞耻濒诲苍鈥檛 change?鈥� It鈥檚 not enough to simply make the inequities highly visible, they suggest. What is required is a reversal of power of rich over poor that makes it impossible to give each child the 鈥渟pecific educational supports they need.鈥�
Part 2 asks, 鈥淲hy 诲辞苍鈥檛 schools change?鈥� The answers lie in what the scholars David Tyack and Larry Cuban call 鈥渢he grammar of schooling鈥� 鈥� the web of conservative forces that help maintain conventional learning environments, such as 鈥渆gg crate鈥� buildings that separate students into different grades, classrooms where individual teachers do most of the talking, the study of standardized subjects like the 鈥渘ational language鈥� and mathematics, and outcomes measured primarily by grades and test scores.
Designed a century ago to meet the needs of an industrializing economy, the 鈥済rammar of schooling鈥� has failed to keep pace with advances in understanding of child development and human learning, note Hatch, Corson and Gerth van den Berg. Even so-called 鈥渞eform鈥� efforts today, because they are largely shaped by the 鈥渟ame policy elites who have always been in charge (overwhelmingly white, male, and wealthy)鈥� are not designed to challenge systemic racism and racist beliefs about children, the authors assert.
Many small-scale alternative schools and programs do succeed, but they often fail when they challenge the 鈥済rammar of schooling鈥� on a larger scale. 鈥淚t鈥檚 an invisible force that always pushes back,鈥� the authors write.
Schools can and do change, albeit slowly, and the changes work for some students. But as reform policies and initiatives become more broadscale, their success is jeopardized by greater pressure to show quick success and accommodate increasingly complex societal, economic and educational needs.
And yet, as often as education policymakers have made these mistakes, they have not learned from them. They continue to enact policies that are too big and too expensive, and promise sweeping changes across schools and communities that disregard local needs and conditions. Like the Race to the Top program launched during the Obama administration, which among other things tied federal funding of state and local school systems to student achievement and teacher performance measures, they fail.
Part 3 of The Education We Need considers these large-scale failures and asks, 鈥淗ow can schools improve鈥�? The authors chronicle educational efforts in settings from Pakistan and South Africa to Texas and New York City that have succeeded in making 鈥渃oncrete, incremental improvements鈥� on a local scale, by reflecting a 鈥渒een sense of what matters to people鈥� derived from a 鈥渃areful analysis of multiple problems and continuous reflection on the process of addressing them.鈥�
Importantly, this attention to local needs and assets can lead to the 鈥渜uick wins鈥� that can help build local support and 鈥減ropel organizational and social changes in many sectors.鈥�
Part 4, 鈥淗ow can education change?鈥�, suggests that, in order to succeed, policies aimed at changing the status quo need to address 鈥渉igh-leverage problems鈥� 鈥� those that really matter for students鈥� lives and affect their educational opportunities and long-term learning 鈥� with 鈥渕icro-innovations鈥� that fit the values and trends of the school and community in which they are being implemented. Small changes will never produce fundamental, large-scale change, but they can demonstrate the possibility that learning experiences can be transformed in 鈥渘iches, rather than across entire school systems鈥� from which 鈥減owerful learning experiences can take root.鈥�
鈥淲hat does it take to change school systems?鈥� the authors ask in Part 5. Their answers, drawn from examples of substantial research on schools in Finland, Singapore and Norway, include investing in teacher development, with costs paid largely by the government; putting high-quality materials in well-equipped schools; and using 鈥渁 small set of high-quality curricula and assessments.鈥� It also requires staying alert to opportunities to exploit major shifts in other aspects of society.
And speaking of major shifts: the manuscript of The Education We Need was nearly complete when schools began shutting down in March of 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. On lock-down at home in the summer of 2020, Hatch wrote a preface to the book and updated the book鈥檚 concluding section to address the question: Has the pandemic鈥檚 disruption of most aspects of society provided opportunities to truly transform education?
On the down side, Hatch writes, the pandemic has exposed and widened already deep divisions between haves and have-nots in American schools and around the world. Learning disruptions tied to remote instruction over the past 14 months have taken a larger toll on low-income and students of color, who have less access than wealthier peers to learning technology and whose communities have suffered disproportionately from COVID-19.
By listening for and addressing key concerns in their own communities, educators can create the foundation for the social movements that can shift our perspectives on learning, schools, and education altogether.
鈥攆rom The Education We Need for a Future We Can't Predict
Yet, extraordinary turmoil in education 鈥渕ade visible the fact that many communities already have the capacity to address at least some of these inequities.鈥� Many educators, parents and students have taken extraordinary and innovative steps to try to keep students engaged in learning. Educators were forced to admit that learning could, and does, take place outside of schools. Those efforts, combined with regular reminders of racial inequities in American society at large, could create the conditions 鈥� or zeitgeist, as the book calls it 鈥� needed to make meaningful, durable change.
Transformation 鈥� even reform 鈥� is not guaranteed, and it will not take the form of one silver-bullet program or innovation. But 鈥渂y listening for and addressing key concerns in their own communities, educators can create the foundation for the social movements that can shift our perspectives on learning, schools, and education altogether.鈥� It will require, Hatch writes, a 鈥減aradoxical mix of confidence and humility.鈥�