What Works?

With the semester ending in two weeks, reflections on the value of our academic experience we paid $30,000 for are inevitable. Unfortunately, looking back, I can't help but be filled with a sense of disillusionment – I came to one of the best education schools in the world hoping for answers, and I'm leaving with the sick realization that perhaps, there aren't any answers to be had.

As we studied the history of educational reform, I realized that there are no truly original solutions, merely reiterations and evolutions of basic theories of change. And even if there were an original solution, the realities of educational politics means that it has to adapt and lose some of its boldness to gain the currency it needs to be implemented. And so standards for excellence become standards for minimum competency, bold pure choice systems become a tiny add-on to the existing system. While the names and taglines change, the substance within remain practically the same, and it all seems to be old wine in new bottles.

Ultimately, what happens within the classroom has changed little in comparison to the swirling changes at the policy level. And until what happens within the classroom changes, there will be true education reform. But how can we change instructional practice, when most policymakers and even some education researchers treat the classroom as a black box? How can we design effective reforms, when the people in charge of designing our policies barely know what goes on in the heart of education? How can we successfully implement change, without the buy-in of the people who are most crucial to the education of our children – our teachers?

Until we can trust our teachers – and until we manage to recruit teachers we can trust – any education reform that relies on teachers for implementation will have limited success.

Accountability in Higher Education

Accountability has truly moved into the world of higher education. Not only are advocates pushing for more accountability of what students are actually learning in colleges, many are looking at Harvard as the example of what to do and waiting for their move (Wertheimer, 2007). Two recent articles show how Harvard is in the spotlight of accountability and standards: “Testing Harvard” in the Boston Globe (at http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/04/22/testing_harvard/) and “Harvard Task Force Calls for New Focus on Teaching and Not Just Research” in the New York times (at http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/10/education/10harvard.html?ex=1336449600&en=b78842d9d28a84c8&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss). While a move to know where students’ money is going when investing tens of thousands of dollars in higher education, the worries for what this type of focus on test results could do to higher education. Many worry that this would be the end of liberal education in that professors would be forced to ‘teach to the test’, much in the same way that is necessary in many of our K-12 schools at this time. Current and relevant issues are pushed aside in order to prep students for standardized tests. In addition, due to the huge diversity of studies going on, both at the undergraduate and graduate levels, at a institution like Harvard it may be hard to find a test that gives reliable and valid results on student progress and achievement (Rimer, 2007).

Tests that test problem solving and critical thinking are being suggested, and used in some parts of Harvard, in order to assess students. While many professors and educators feel that assessing students is a good move in order to see the value added of their teaching, the potential of making the results is troublesome(Wertheimer, 2007). Advocates for public results argue that the consumer would have more information while some educators argue that tests may be misleading as progress could not be measured for all students. Instead students would just be compared to other students at their level.

The federal government has done a poor job in instituting a standards and accountability movement in the area of K-12, so I think they should concentrate on improving this before tackling higher education, if at all. Also, in agreement with interim president of Harvard Bok, the potential for pressure to be put on the University may push the administration and education to preemptively start assessing and improving their teaching. This would be a happy result as many know that Harvard is not known for their undergraduate teaching satisfaction. While consumers may need may information about what goes on inside the black box of prestigious universities, I doubt government control over a such a system will lead to great changes. Similar to what happened in many schools with NCLB, institutions will most likely fulfill the requirements in a way that fits their needs and not really change anything about the way students are educated.