We’re awash in tenth-anniversary takes on New Orleans’ schools after Hurricane Katrina. Sadly, some bring us no closer to the complicated truth. A recent New York Times column by business journalism professor Andrea Gabor provides a telling case in point.
It raises a few legitimate points, some of which emanate from within the reform movement. But it provides little support for its central thesis — that the creation of an all-choice system has “hurt” New Orleans’ most vulnerable children.
It drew a forceful response and debunking. Gabor went on to answer her critics. She makes five points. The first three are cautions to keep in mind while analyzing the system’s recent success. The last two raise legitimate issues about the extent to which New Orleans residents, especially low-income black ones, have had a say in the reforms.
None of those points addresses the central flaw of her original argument. A wide range of empirical measures show New Orleans children are better off now than before the storm. There’s a long way to go, but results keep improving. Gabor offers no real support for her claim that changes have “come at the expense of the city’s most disadvantaged children.”
There is work left to be done. Some students still fall through the cracks. Parents could use help navigating the their options in a city where charter schools have largely become the system. Many reformers hope to ensure the next 10 years of change are done “with” rather than “to” the New Orleanians who were most harmed by the old system.
Some critical voices are worth listening to. They helped push for changes to special education, discipline, unified enrollment and other equity issues. But others are simply trying to smear the very idea of systemic reform, to stop it from spreading to other cities.
In the wake of a tragedy, New Orleans school officials managed to cobble together a model that fuses a triumph of liberal urban reform with conservative entrepreneurialism and is spawning new programs focused on the whole child. Critics can help make this new approach more equitable and inclusive, but only when they’re on point.
Meanwhile…
CNN, Slate and Campbell Brown and President Obama visit New Orleans and talk education. Andrew Rotherham calls attention to the real heroes.
The ACLU sues to shut down Nevada’s path-breaking parental choice program. More commentary here.
Why did Mark Zuckerberg’s donation to Newark public schools seemingly vanish into oblivion?
A New York charter school saw its scores spike… after grading its own tests.
Poverty in America’s school districts is growing worse.
Mississippi’s first charter schools open.
ICYMI, this week on redefinED:
We looked at how Florida’s Hispanic students are disproportionately choosing charter schools, why letter grades don’t tell the whole story about why parents choose schools, why school boards matter, how Florida lawmakers are rekindling their efforts on charter school accountability, and the teachers union’s latest legal arguments on tax credit scholarships.
Tweet of the Week:
Reading the #nolaed stuff convinces me many in edu world are so ideological that they can’t celebrate (incomplete) progress despite facts.
— Joel Klein (@JoelIKlein) August 29, 2015
Quote of the Week:
We must be open to all methods of improving student achievement, including exploring potential parental choice programs. Choice programs are not meant to mask student achievement. They are research-proven methods of raising engagement and achievement. Choice programs provide cultural and economic diversity, but more importantly, they offer individualized educational services without displacing students. The more personalized school becomes, the more students become engaged.
-Mike Grego, superintendent of Florida’s Pinellas County schools, responding to the Tampa Bay Times ‘ recent “Failure Factories” investigation.
We want you to become engaged. Send tips, links, suggestions and criticism to tpillow[at]sufs[dot]org.
