TIME: Almanac 1993/TIME Almanac 1993.iso/time/042991/0429120.000

Text File | 1992-08-28 | 9KB | 184 lines

                                                                                EDUCATION, Page 52

A Revolution Hoping for a Miracle


George Bush announces an ambitious plan to provoke radical change
in America's troubled schools -- but without the money that
might really make a difference

By RICHARD N. OSTLING -- Reported by Sam Allis and Ann Blackman/
Washington and Katherine L. Mihok/New York


    George Bush may be the savior of Kuwait, but in 1992 the
voters will want to know what he is doing to save America. One
early promise was to be "the education President," but his marks
for that endeavor have been decidedly mixed. The President has
apparently been doing his homework. Last week, striving to
fulfill his promise to launch a major domestic initiative, he
presented an ambitious national plan called ``America 2000: An
Education Strategy" to improve troubled U.S. elementary and
secondary schools. Bush spoke of bringing about "a revolution
in American education." The goal is lofty enough, but the
President hopes to perform a miracle: he is offering relatively
little federal money to back up his plan.

    Even so, there was a sense of relief that he was planning
something. The blueprint, says California education
superintendent Bill Honig, "is comprehensive, long-term and hits
the important issues." Albert Shanker, president of the American
Federation of Teachers, calls it "a historic turning point in
American education" and the boldest education initiative ever
to come from the White House. If not a turning point, America
2000 is at least a talking point that forces attention on one
of the country's most serious problems. After his lackluster
domestic performance to date, Bush intends to push broad
educational changes through the power of the Federal Government
and the clout of new Education Secretary Lamar Alexander.

    Though revolution is too strong a term for the plan, it
does call for firm steps to shake up the muscle-bound education
establishment. It also aims to encourage creativity and
competition among schools and make them more accountable to
parents and taxpayers. The most controversial ideas:



    ACHIEVEMENT TESTS. A panel backed by the nation's
Governors is already working to set standards for what
youngsters need to know in the traditional core subjects of
English, geography, history, math and science. Bush then wants
to monitor performance through nationwide tests, beginning with
fourth-graders in 1993; eighth- and 12th-graders would be
included later.

    Although test taking would supposedly be voluntary, Bush
hopes that the scores will become a routine part of college and
job applications, pressing students and schools to do better.



    REPORT CARDS. The government will exert further pressure
by compiling results of these tests in public reports. This
will allow comparisons of the performance of states and of the
nation's 110,000 public schools. Again the idea is that citizens
will demand progress.



    NEW SCHOOLS. The President wants to "reinvent the American
school." Federal grants of $1 million each would go to start 535
brand-new experimental schools by 1996, with at least one in
each congressional district. Meanwhile, businesses would
contribute $150 million or more to a research-and-development
fund. The schools would "break the mold," says Bush. Sponsors
could be public or private. Once reforms are working, he hopes,
a populist ground swell will demand that they be imitated.

    Much of the rest of America 2000 is either conventional,
cosmetic or fuzzy. Bush reiterated his desire that states
replace public school monopolies with parental "choice" among
competing public and private schools. The report recycled some
widely used remedies -- merit pay and alternative-teacher
certification, for example. The President also urged greater
efforts to improve adult literacy and job skills, and he
recognized -- without promising big money -- that community ills
must be addressed if pupils are to perform.

    The President plans to ask Congress for $690 million to
carry out his new strategy in fiscal 1992, but that money will
simply be shifted from existing programs. To boost the use of
choice, Bush wants Congress to give the currently allotted $6
billion in federal aid for learning-disabled students to parents
rather than to school districts. Federal funding provides only
7% of public school spending -- and Bush intends to keep it that
way.

    Both Bush and Alexander believe more money will not repair
U.S. education. In 1983 a report titled A Nation at Risk
shocked the country into big spending increases by warning that
mediocre schools threatened the future of the U.S. Since 1980,
per-pupil spending has gone from $2,272 to $4,639, a huge jump
even allowing for inflation. But by most measures, overall
student performance has barely improved and in some respects
worsened.

    Obviously, something was needed besides the budget boosts
and back-to-basics plans of the 1980s. To address the education
crisis, Bush in 1989 summoned all the nation's Governors for the
first meeting of its kind since the Depression. As a result, the
Governors last year agreed on six ambitious -- and probably
unrealistic -- education goals to be met nationwide by the year
2000, among them purging all schools of drugs and achieving a
90% high school graduation rate. The new plan is aimed at
meeting all six goals.

    Fortunately, Bush now has an able team committed to
tackling his program. In the 50-year-old Alexander, the
President chose an energetic, politically wired secretary who
plumped for educational progress as a two-term Governor of
Tennessee, then ran the 40,000-student state university system.
Alexander put together America 2000 following his selection for
the job in December. His deputy secretary will be a front-rank
businessman, Xerox chairman David Kearns, with seasoned educator
Ted Sanders as No. 3. The research assistant secretary will be
Diane Ravitch, a clearheaded Columbia University scholar. "For
the first time, there is real leadership at the national level,"
says Thomas Kean, former New Jersey Governor and president of
Drew University.

    Some congressional Democrats, who traditionally guard
education as their special province, felt outflanked by Bush's
initiative, but not Senator Edward Kennedy, who last week rammed
a $472 million education bill through committee. Other Democrats
appear willing to give Bush's new ideas an open hearing, but
insist that increased social help for the disadvantaged is
essential to boost education.

    "Choice" is especially controversial. Arkansas Governor
Bill Clinton is worried that Bush seems to want almost
unlimited aid vouchers for private school parents. Secretary
Alexander (who has two children in private schools) goes further
yet. He believes that "a child ought to have a choice with
public dollars of any school that is willing to be publicly
accountable." Aid for students in religious schools, he says,
is "as American as apple pie." Alexander contends that increased
school options will benefit poor families the most, though many
educators question whether those families will know how to work
the system to their advantage.

    As for accountability, there are sure to be furious
debates about who draws up the exams and what they contain.
Minority groups, upset over the ubiquitous SAT, are worried by
super-tests. Educators grumble about "teaching to the test"
instead of full-orbed instruction. Says Mary Futrell of George
Washington University, "We're on a fast track to a centralized
curriculum in this country. It will be bad if the test wags the
curriculum."

    The most glaring fault in the Administration's plan is
that it says next to nothing about helping classroom teachers.
"If you're going to make the schools better, you're going to
have to make the teachers better too," says Thomas Wolanin of
the House education committee staff. Or as respected Chicago
principal Marva Collins puts it, "We need those already teaching
to admit that it has to be done differently." That will not be
easy, nor will the various aspects of the plan produce quick
results. "There will be no great transformation by the next
presidential election," says Secretary Alexander. "You should
settle in for the long haul." That appears to be what he and the
President expect to do.