On the Edge, But Still Far From Excellence.

Just as public education appears to have lost a great deal of public support, it nonetheless could be on the verge of entering perhaps its richest and most rewarding epoch--if it takes advantage of the moment.

Author and social commentator Lisbeth Schorr predicts we are about to enter "an extraordinary era in education in America." Sixteen years after A Nation at Risk, we could be poised to inherit the accumulated wealth of all that we have learned since that report set so much educational improvement activity in motion.

It is far from a sure thing. But there appears to be an unprecedented focus on what educators and the public alike have wanted all along: better student learning results, intelligently defined. Even this, however, may not be enough to head off the assault on public education. If we wish to preserve it, we must accelerate the pace at which we are adapting and institutionalizing the most promising trends.

Encouraging developments appear in four areas: the rise of the standards movement; a growing maturity in the field of assessment; a genuine shift in the area of staff development; and a sharper focus by school leaders and school systems on measurable evidence of achievement and improvement. This convergence of factors already is making a difference in a growing number of schools. Nonetheless, the forces working against their fulfillment are powerful.

Standards and Assessment

Across the country, states and local districts are making big efforts to develop common learning standards. As researcher Susan Rosenholtz and others have shown, clear, common learning goals-made possible with common standards-are the foundation for what makes any organization successful. Education's historical failure to define common goals for learning is precisely what has kept us from moving forward systematically and coherently toward higher achievement.

Done right, clear standards will rescue us from the easy deceptions of what we have called "common curriculum." In several schools and districts, standards-based assessment systems and criterion-referenced tests are emerging that are better--some are much better--than what we've had. And they're evolving to reflect our demands that students demonstrate the ability to write, infer and solve more complex real-life problems.

Aligned standards and assessments are giving us something that standards and curriculum objectives, by themselves, never have delivered--the ability to see how well we are performing and how much we are improving. In states like Vermont, Michigan, Kentucky, Texas, Maryland and Colorado, we are seeing how standards-based assessment is a key piece in gaining these results.

Unfortunately, the standards movement has created a monster we should have anticipated and guarded against. Its most visible manifestation is the state standards documents, too many of which are written in language that is imprecise, far too exhaustive and hence impossible to assess. By caving in to every special interest and predilection, these documents have thwarted rather than aided us in creating a clear set of essential learnings.

Fortunately, the districts with locally developed, standards-based assessments are growing, despite the complication caused by the state documents. But unfortunately, many districts are in a state of near-paralysis as they try to negotiate the ever-growing mass of topics they are supposed to devote themselves to.

Our first order of business should be to review and pare down the documents to reflect only those most essential learnings--those that we can actually assess. Good news comes from the Third International Mathematics and Science Study, which has taught us that less really is more. The highest-achieving countries teach fewer than half as many topics in math and science as the United States.

Staff Development Rebirth

The alignment of standards and assessments can nourish another opportunity: a revitalized professional development system. Standards and assessment provide clear targets and a compelling justification for staff development and its funding. In this sense, the combination of standards, assessment and staff development are symbiotic when they are aligned. No more powerful weapon exists against low achievement.

This makes the profound shift occurring in staff development particularly exciting. Note the departure from the status quo in the following passage. It is from a publication issued by the National Foundation for the Improvement of Education, whose board includes two former National Education Association presidents. Under the subtitle "Improving the Bottom Line," the report says: "As in other fields, the goal of professional development in schools must be to improve results, not simply to enhance practice.... the goal of professional development for teachers is increased student learning."

Let's unpack this. Note how NFIE has no embarrassment about using language and lessons borrowed from the business sphere ("the bottom line"). By extension, we are moving past the misbegotten notion that measurable results and better education are at cross purposes. Finally we are realizing-and this is the kicker-a very tricky relationship exists between enhancing practice and actually increasing student learning.

If we don't detect a strikingly different view of staff development here, then we haven't been paying attention.

This new understanding of staff development appears to be gaining ground. Consider A New Vision for Staff Development by Dennis Sparks and Stephanie Hirsh of the National Staff Development Council. In it, they express their dismay with traditional teacher training that is evaluated on the basis of a "happiness quotient," that measures participants' "satisfaction with the [professional development] experience."

In its place, they advocate for what they call "results-driven staff development," citing Stephen Covey's eminently sensible emphasis on "starting with the end in mind." They also call for staff development that focuses on "measurable objectives expressed in terms of student outcomes ... that would best serve district and school goals." They cite how this approach has worked even in notoriously troubled settings like Chicago, where some schools made dramatic gains on the Illinois Goals Assessment Program. This new focus being advocated by NSDC can be seen in the name of their new newsletter: Results.

We still are miles from closing the gap between so much of what we call staff development and a true emphasis on predictable gains in student learning. Every day finds us running to another educational fad. Now as much as ever, these fads compete for time and funding, while proven, results-oriented practices wait in the wings for their chance to make a difference.

Leadership and Results

We also should be encouraged by positive trends in school leadership: School leaders are attending test interpretation workshops and more of them are using terms like "data-driven" more comfortably. In some states and school systems such as Chicago, Los Angeles, Detroit, Baltimore and Portland, Ore., leaders are focusing on ways to measure and increase achievement. Some of these districts are already seeing improvements.

These are promising trends. Nonetheless, a hard look at the structures and practices commonly occurring at the school and district level are disturbing. Until we recognize the gap between what we do and the results we want, not much will happen. School boards, school leaders and state departments must more routinely ask themselves: Are we giving sufficient priority to what ensures improvement? Are we providing time and structures to guarantee that teachers interact regularly toward the achievement of student learning goals? Are we protecting our school systems from what Michael Fullan wisely observes as the "fragmentation, overload and incoherence resulting from the uncritical acceptance of too many different innovations"?

A lot of good things are happening out there. We have, in our time, the chance to capitalize on these and to accelerate the best of what good schools and school systems are doing. We have the opportunity to recapture the public's trust and thus to earn their allegiance and support. But it will depend, more than anything, on our organized commitment to making student learning our highest priority.

Mike Schmoker is a senior consultant. He can be reached at 6061 South Lima Way, Englewood, Colo. 80111.