Jonathan Raymond, superintendent of the Sacramento City school district, has some lessons for New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman.
Friedman recently raved about the success of Race to the Top, claiming that it was preparing students for the high-skill jobs of the new economy.
Raymond says this is wrong. Race to the Top is divisive and subjects schools to derision.
It is top-down, heavy-handed and undermines the collaboration needed to make genuine improvement.
States that promise to comply with Duncan’s heavy handed mandates are “winners” while those making progress without Duncan’s script are losers.
He adds:
Meanwhile, school districts that are making real, tangible strides to increase student learning are left behind in this “race.” In Sacramento City Unified, we are turning around seven low-performing schools (called Priority Schools) through research-proven strategies for raising student achievement. Six of the seven schools have shown dramatic increases in student achievement and dramatic improvements in school culture and climate. These strategies include relevant professional development for principals and teachers; collaborative teacher planning time; data analysis and inquiry; and building strong family and community engagement. With federal funding, we could take this pilot program to scale statewide. California districts could build on each other’s successes and the gains of districts across the country. This is exactly what federal dollars should be spent on.
Yet Race to the Top’s scripted approach effectively discounts these reforms because they do not fit into the neat categories created by the prescriptive program. Moreover, forcing school districts to compete for badly needed resources is like offering a starving man food but only if he agrees to whatever strings may be attached. This is certainly the choice that school districts like ours face in California.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Jonathan, Maybe it’s not a good idea to take the wonderful work in Sacrament “state-wide, ” Maybe just invite folks to visit and talk about how it might fit their locales.
Mr. Raymond,
Could you talk to Mr. And Mrs. Rhee Johnson, too ?
If Kevin wasn’t in Bridgeport, CT lobbying on behalf of mayoral control of the school board, he might have gotten the message. Perhaps in the not too distant future, when they are both serving time they can reform the prison educational systems. One hopes that is not to far off.
I wonder if CA has the fingerprint test in order to enter a public school and if so, would KJ pass?
They’re allies… While this statement is wonderful, beware the wolf in sheep’s clothing.
The kicker is Raymond is an Eli Broad Academy alum:
http://broadacademy.hellodesign.com/fellows/53_Jonathan+Raymond.html?page_filter=0
Just so people know.
Here’s a quote of his. He gets it.
“There is no one magic solution to fixing any broken organization, including a public school system. The solution will require both the strategic and tactical aspects of leadership and management. That means having a vision of what the schools should be, and having the ability to communicate that vision in a compelling way to all constituencies—teachers, parents, kids, elected officials, union leaders, the media. It means doing the hard work of driving improvements in performance, without forgetting that education isn’t the same as manufacturing millions of widgets that are exactly alike.”
How did he ever get admitted to the academy? Broad doesn’t enroll people there unless he expects something in return.
I’d just be wary of anybody who has that kind of background.
You are correct. He and his PR consultant are very smooth and gentlemanly – that’s the Broad business model. Mr. Raymond, with the support of the School Board, is breaking the union contract by “protecting” priority teachers from layoffs (seniority). Yes, the union is going through the grievance procedure and will, ultimately, seek relief in court. But, the seniority system is being eroded on purpose by Mr. Raymond. As more independent charter schools are permitted to open in Sacramento, and fewer students attend the district schools, fewer teachers will be needed. Primary classes are now up to 31students in all but the “priority” schools which is around 25. More teachers are needed in the priority schools and fewer in the regular ones. More experienced and more expensive teachers are laid off in favor of cheaper and, in some cases, younger teachers who fear losing their jobs and will do anything they are told to do. The “job protector” is becoming the school district – NOT the union. The plan is to convince teachers to abandon their unions. Privatization and Paternalism – the education model of the Broads and their ed reformer friends.
By the way, Prop 32 on the Nov. ballot will, if passed, prohibit unions from collecting dues through pay-roll deduction. Guess which folks support and fund it? Prop 30, if passed will provide more money for education from kindergarten through college. Guess who opposes it?
So he is trying to make it look like he cares, but he is playing both side while stripping teachers of their profession? Is that correct?
Sounds like Bill Gates failed ” Knowledge Works” propaganda. We wasted three years on his convoluted “vision.” He gets it? Please explain what he “gets?”
Wow. There’s great information being shared here. Is there a state, regional or national network of forums where best practices are being shared that the average dude like myself can connect to?
I’m very much into social systems, and empowering young people to reassessing them and finding ways to make them better. In order to do that most effectively, I’d like to learn more about the discourse on education that seems to be available in some part here.
Thank you!
oakritchie,
I suggest keep reading here and other websites, schoolsmatter.info, Gary Rubenstein’s blog, my website where I am reviewing and discussing Noel Wilson’s “Educational Standards and the Problem of Error” @ revivingwilson.org. There are many other sites, hopefully others will chime in on some of the sites they read.
Duane
Thank you, Duane! I’ll be looking into those recommendations, and hope to be able to cut through the jargon to see what the truth really looks like for the future of education and American education more specifically.
The series I am doing research on center around this question, which I would benefit greatly from hearing from folks here:
If you could architect an entirely new educational structure without concerning yourself with the transition logistics nor the politics, and it was fully funded, what would you design?
(*I stress that the current structures of administration should be reassessed as though they NEVER existed*)
Of course Friedman loves RTTT he loved the Iraq War too and deregulating Wall Street and NAFTA and WTO and every other terrible bipartisan policy in the last 20 years
“We don’t believe the tests are reliable,” Weast said. “You don’t want to turn your system into a test factory.”
My favorite sentences of the day!
To Florence,
I didn’t realize it would be on the edge of the page. Repeat:
So he is trying to make it look like he cares, but he is playing both side while stripping teachers of their profession? Is that correct?
Yes.
It’s not so fantastic in Raymond’s so-called “priority schools,” either. Most of them have had enormous teacher turnover in the past few years, because the supe’s new hand-picked principals got rid of anyone who didn’t toe the party line.
And those gains Raymond is so proud of? Well, they’re based exclusively on the CST, so there’s a lot of gaming of the system happening. One school organized their schedule to offer “core” English/history classes — and then taught nothing but English, since the English CST counts for more. The same school has a grading scale where 60% earns you a C, and you have to have below 40% to fail — to “align grades with CST performance.” Coincidentally, their number of students with Ds and Fs (another metric the district looks at) is amazingly low!
Finally, I find it ironic that Raymond is critical of Duncan’s “heavy-handed, top-down mandates,” given that administration and staff at Raymond’s priority schools were given exactly zero input into the transformative strategies he’s so proud of. I, for one, find Raymond’s approach to be just as oppressive as Duncan’s.