Thanks to Leonie Haimson, whose comment brought this excellent article by Rachel Cohen to my attention.
There is a political battle going on in D.C. about school data and who controls it.
Another article on the same subject was written by Ruth Wattenberg, a member of the D.C. State Board of Education, who argues that the Mayor must not be allowed to control the data.
Some City Council members have proposed an independent research collaborative, housed in the D.C. Auditor General’s Office, but the Mayor is opposed. She wants to maintain control.
Whoever has the data must be independent, nonpartisan, and trustworthy.
Cohen writes:
In the wake of a series of DC Public Schools scandals, Ward 3 Councilmember Mary Cheh came forward with an idea: an independent research collaborative that would conduct studies on the city’s public schools, including charters. This collaborative, outlined in draft legislation, would have an advisory board comprised of 16 education stakeholders who would drive the research agenda.
Cheh’s concept has precedent. Other cities, like Chicago, San Diego, and Houston, have similar research collaboratives, commonly referred to as “research practice partnerships” or RPPs. Local education advocates and Cheh’s colleagues on the Council have come out in strong support of her proposal.
But Cheh’s plan also has detractors, and many of them are the appointees of Mayor Muriel Bowser. At a six-hour public hearing held on July 13, several officials tapped by Bowser spoke out against this so-called “Education Research Collaborative.”
And at the same hearing, the public learned that the executive branch was exploring the launch of its own separate education research consortium with the Urban Institute, a national think tank located in D.C. The news sparked concerns that Bowser was seeking to undercut the Council’s push for independent oversight.
At the core of all this politicking: Who gets access to data about D.C.’s public schools, and how do they get to use it?
Cheh’s bill, introduced in April, has eight other co-sponsors, a Council supermajority which could override a potential veto from the mayor. The Council set aside $500,000 in its most recent budget for the auditor to “incubate” this pilot research consortium. (That funding becomes available in October, when fiscal year 2019 begins.) It would be launched initially in the Office of the DC Auditor, an agency outside of the executive branch. Supporters say that after a few years they would look for a new home—be it a local think tank, university, or its own independent agency.
The chair of the education committee, At-Large Councilmember David Grosso, has not yet taken a position on the bill, but in May he tried to steer the dedicated $500,000 to after-school programs instead. His effort failed 12-1.
The research collaborative was conceived of in response to the host of education scandals which emerged over the last year, including news that high school graduation rates were massively inflated and that the public schools chancellor knowingly violated a school choice policy he himself wrote. While local and national leaders have long looked to D.C.’s education reforms as a model for the nation, today many parents, community members, and even elected officials have voiced a lack of confidence in the gains reported by the school system, fearing information has become too politicized under mayoral control.
“I call the information that we get from our education agencies ‘PR,’” says At-Large Councilmember Robert White. “It can be very difficult to get hold of unbiased data….”
“Our hope is to get accurate, reliable, credible data, and then to use this data in a research partnership to understand whether the policies we are pursuing are really working,” says Cheh.
The Mayor’s office is fighting the proposal to house the agency in the Auditor’s office. She and her allies claim it would politicize the data and the research. Supporters of the proposal say that it would politicize the office if it is controlled by the Mayor.
The person in whom I have the greatest trust in D.C. is Mary Levy, who has been tracking D.C. data for many years and faithfully reporting what she finds without fear or favor. She opposes letting the mayor control the data.
Mary Levy, a longtime budget analyst for D.C. schools, is more blunt. “This idea is an infant in the cradle,” she tells City Paper. “And if you don’t put it in the auditor’s office it’s going to die in its cradle.”
If the agency controlling the data and research is not trustworthy, the money will be wasted and the residents of the city will remain in the dark.
It is bizarre that D.C., which claimed to be “data-driven” after the onset of the Michelle Rhee era and mayoral control in 2007, continues not to have reliable and accurate data more than a decade later.
Diane Ravitch's blog 