Back to School

The Obama administration claims that its blueprint for the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, now called No Child Left Behind, is grounded in research. A new book, the first major project of the National Education Policy Center (NEPC), disagrees. Or rather, it disagrees that it is grounded in quality research.

The Obama Education Blueprint: Researchers Examine the Evidence offer six reviews, one of each of the research summaries that the administration released in May as an evidence base for its blueprint. These reviews were written by independent scholars, including a woman who is now a household name: Diane Ravitch.

While each review has its own findings, overarching themes emerge, including: low quality research, extensive use of non-research and advocacy sources and a focus on problems rather than on research supporting conclusions. In addition, there were some important omissions. There was no support for the administration’s proposed accountability system, or rationale for increasing reliance on competitive grants. And support for the four intervention models that must be used when turning around struggling schools was found to be “undeveloped.” Yet these three policies are among the centerpieces of the administration’s agenda–and are the subject of great debate among education stakeholders.

These findings come as no surprise to many in the education community. They have been pointing out the weaknesses in the evidence base ever since the release of the blueprint. These university-based scholars just confirmed what we already knew.

So the question is, now what? As Grover J. “Russ” Whitehurst , director of the Brown Center on Education Policy at the Brookings Institution and head of the Institute of Education Sciences during the G.W. Bush administration, points out in EdWeek, “It’s almost always the case that policy formation and implementation is out in front of the evidence base. You can’t sit on your hands and do nothing if you think something needs to be done and you have been elected to do something.”

That is true. We know very, very little about what truly works in education. And we know that what we are doing now isn’t working for every kid. To top it off, we also know that ESEA needs to be reauthorized, and fast. We don’t have time to develop a robust evidence base prior to that happening.

But we—the royal We, everyone in education and in policy, since it is certainly not only the Obama administration making decisions based on low-quality evidence these days—need to be honest about the limitations in what we propose. If we can’t recognize those limitations ourselves, then as they are pointed out to us we need to have the strength and integrity to reexamine our positions, to ensure they are based on the best information that is available.

This administration is hopefully doing that. They plan to release a revised blueprint in the next few months. And they are working to strengthen the evidence base so that in the future we will have a larger supply of quality research from which we can draw. That is hugely important, because if our number one concern is truly the education of our children, we need non-biased, methodology-sound examinations of what works–and what does not.

Similar Posts:

• A Review of the Administration’s Blueprint for Education with Secretary Duncan by Dan Domenech
• UF offers new microbiology degree at Fort Pierce research center
• Reading is Fundamental
• What Do Employers Want From Your College Student? A Liberal Education
• Two Important Words: School-Based