Best Advice for Teachers, Interview with Diane Ravitch

The following interview was conducted by Larry Ferlazzo, an English teacher at Luther Burbank High School in Sacramento, California. Diane Ravitch was keynote speaker at the Missouri NEA Fall Conference in November and is one of the strongest voices for common sense education reform. --Ray

Five Questions for Diane Ravitch

Diane Ravitch is one of the most visible advocates in the United States today for quality public schools, and one of the most outspoken opponents of much that is being done in the name of "school reform."

Ravitch, education historian and author of the bestselling book The Death and Life of the Great American School System: How Testing and Choice Are Undermining Education recently agreed to answer a few of my questions:

What got you interested in education issues -- was there a specific incident or family experience?

I have been interested in education as long as I can remember. My first paper in a political science course in college -- in 1956 -- was a study of the influence of a far-right fringe group on school board elections in Houston, where I attended public school. I have been writing about education since the late 1960s. My first book was a history of the New York City public schools, published in 1974.

In your education career, when were times you felt most discouraged? What got you through those moments?

I have never been more discouraged than I am right now. I have been lecturing this past year, and I have witnessed the profound demoralization of teachers across the nation in response to the vituperative, ill-informed and mean-spirited attacks on them. I am discouraged above all by the absence of any national officials willing to stand up for teachers. The current anti-teacher, anti-public education rhetoric is downright disheartening, and it is painful to acknowledge that both political parties have joined in, as has the national media.

What gets me through these times is my sense of history. I know that this: that many of the "reforms" are ill-considered, that the "reforms" that target teachers are doomed to fail, and that eventually this too will pass. Yet I worry about the lives and reputations that will be ruined before our leaders come to their senses.

In the face of all the policy battles, many of us teachers can feel discouraged. What is your best advice for teachers who might have days, weeks, or even months feeling like that?

I am asked this question whenever I meet with teachers, which is often. I urge teachers to hang in there, to focus on the social value of the work, to remember why they entered the profession, and to cling to their ideals. I also tell them that this is no time to be shrinking violets, but is a time to let your voice be heard. It is a time to write letters to the editor, write comments to blogs, contact your Congressman and your Senators and your local officials. Do not let the forces of ignorance, the wealthy and powerful and clueless "reformers" destroy the profession and privatize public education. Too much is at stake. Don't agonize, organize. Alone, you are only one voice; united with other educators and with parents, you can change the agenda and stop the attacks on education and educators.

Some of your critics say you spend all your time criticizing without offering constructive alternatives. What is your response to that kind of critique?

Public education is under attack; so is the education profession. My critics would prefer that I not say so, but I think it is demonstrably true. I am a historian and I try to ground my critique in history. My critics think that anyone who disagrees with their destructive policies is a "defender of the status quo." I think the "reformers" represent the status quo. It is now 10 years since the passage of No Child Left Behind. This law made testing, accountability and choice the law of the land. The law and the policies it spawned have proven ineffective, divisive and costly. The "reformers" want to change the name of the law -- perhaps call it Students First, Children First, Learning First, whatever -- but continue to fire principals, fire teachers, close schools, and privatize schools. All of this is wrong.

No high-performing nation is pursuing this punitive path. I don't believe in any quick fixes. I have proposed constructive alternatives:

I believe that all children should have a balanced curriculum in the arts and sciences, physical education and health. We must improve schools and strengthen the education profession instead of closing schools and destroying the profession. Every district should offer high-quality pre-K programs for all children. Teachers should have more and better preparation and mastery of their content. They should have good working conditions and adequate resources, including reasonable class sizes. All principals should have experience as master teachers. All superintendents should be highly experienced educators.

Instead of blaming schools for all that is wrong in school and society, we as a nation must take action to improve the lives of children; instead of saying that poverty is just an excuse, we should try to help families and do whatever is possible to reduce poverty and its related disadvantages. None of these is a quick fix, but together they represent constructive alternatives to the present course.

What do you see as the brightest rays of hope -- policies, people, organizations, etc. -- do you see for public education these days?

When I visited San Diego in November, I was very impressed by the collaboration I saw there among different stakeholders. The teachers' union was working together with the district leadership, and the school board, and together they are trying to create a vision of community-based school reform, involving parents and local communities. I saw a spirit of "it takes a village to educate a child." Will it last? I hope so. In Cincinnati, I was impressed by a collaboration of civic and educational organizations called STRIVE. The spirit again was one of people working together to improve education from many angles.

I was reminded in these places that the current "reform" movement is extremely divisive. It sets parent against parent, in battles for space in public buildings, and its sets young teachers against older teachers, and it sets the media and the public against teachers and public education. We won't make any genuine progress until everyone who cares begins to work together towards the common goal of educating children and improving their lives.

School Board Extends Superintendent's Contract

Dr. Ridder's Contract Extension Through 2013-14


Last Tuesday, the Springfield Board of Education voted unanimously to extend Superintendent Norm Ridder's contract through the 2013-14 school year.


Vote of Confidence


This is a nice vote of confidence from the school board, and is perhaps an answer to recent articles that exposed some disparities in the issuance of "quiet" stipends to administrators during salary freezes to teachers and other employees. The disparity in salaries is endemic to all public school systems, but the issuing of stipends for "additional duties" - and having those stipends approved by one board officer, separate from regularly scheduled public meetings - seemed to be clear evidence of an established norm of favoritism toward already well-paid administrators over those that work daily in the classrooms. Board members made no public statements about this, but it's a fair assumption that most of them were clueless that new administrative stipends had been issued. Apparently, there were no objections from the board to either the stipends or the manner in which they were approved.

Airing Out Teacher Salaries and Stipends

In reacting to recent unfavorable news stories and editorials, Dr. Ridder chose to broadcast, via email, all teacher salaries and stipends to parents and teachers in the community - which seemed to expose an incredible insensitivity to how this might be perceived by 1,800 hard-working educators in the district. It's one thing for a news reporter to print public information as part of a story that exposes very real disparities in how administration and teachers are compensated for extra duties. It's quite another for the employer, as an act of defensiveness, to broadcast employee salaries. It was an ill-conceived reaction that only served to highlight clear disparities and raised questions about the motivation for such an extraordinary response. While throwing teachers under bus has been great sport of late for media talking heads and pseudo-reformers with their own political agendas, we expect more of our own superintendent.

Trusting the Educator

Still, the fact that Dr. Ridder has a good working relationship with the elected school board is a fundamental, critical piece for any superintendent, and Dr. Ridder now knows that he has their unequivocal support moving forward. However, based on our daily interactions with teachers across the district over the past five years, Dr. Ridder still has a lot of work to do when it comes to improving district relations with the educators in our school district. Perhaps the shake-up at the administrative level and the expected increase in building/teacher autonomy in 2011-12 will provide an opportunity for improvement. Perhaps a leaner administration will be forced to invest more effort in trusting their professional educators to do their jobs well - without excessive interruptions, distractions and obstacles from administrators that were beginning to behave more and more like bureaucrats in a large corporation rather than educator leaders.

Outsourcing District Representation

During Dr. Ridder's tenure, many positive steps have been taken in support of teachers in the classroom (smartboards, data warehouse, emphasis on formative assessment). But he has also imposed a weathered data-driven business model (CQI/CCI) that has been time consuming and costly to implement - and has proven to be only marginally successful at some sites. He has chosen to emphasize smooth relations with community leaders and his school board while occasionally waving a hand of recognition to teachers along the way. And - perhaps the clearest indicator of how teachers are viewed - he has farmed out district representation at the bargaining table to a third-party attorney who charges an hourly rate and has absolutely no stake in fostering better relations between professional educators and district leadership. [We recall that when Dr. Ridder visited Lincoln, Nebraska last year as one of seven finalists to lead that district, he was one of only two who indicated he would not participate in bargaining. Neither got the job.]

Moving Forward

So, we congratulate Dr. Ridder for the contract extension and hope that he will remain open to exploring innovations to improve our district in its charge to educate the children of our community. In our opinion, that's one of his strong points . . . along with being personable, open to discussion on virtually any subject and, at times, painfully honest. We hope that he will be willing to explore more openness, more trust, and a freer exchange of information with professional educators in our district, who have consistently performed to a high standard for many years.

Administrative Restructuring Plan Announced

Administrative Restructuring Plan Announced

At last night's school board session, Dr. Ridder announced an administrative restructuring plan that cuts over $1 million in positions from central office staff. The cuts include:

- Continuous Classroom Improvement Facilitators (aka ISSI, 3 positions): $235,000

- Deputy Superintendent of Operations: $161,322

- Assistant Director of Facilities: $104,019

- Director of Leadership Development: $98,820

- Community Relations (2 positions): $90,000

- Manager of Human Resources: $77,476

- Coordinator of Attendance: $73,722

- Assistant Director of Transportation: $67,597

- Senior Project Manager: $63,330

- Administrative Assistant--Middle Schools: $49,806

- Associate Superintendent-Title I/Special Education: $47,366

- Board Secretary: $12,789

Dr. Ridder pointed out that these cuts were made in order to focus on the "key elements" of class size and teacher compensation, and emphasized - along with several board members - that the cuts would be temporary in nature until the economy rebounds. Exactly how and where duties from eliminated positions will be distributed to sites and other central office staff is not yet clear.

There were many board comments of concern that these administrative cuts "will directly impact support to staff, students and the entire community", as Dr. Ridder warned in earlier emails to staff. Dr. Hoeman stated that the cuts were in no way a justification that we have too many administrators in our district, and warned that the cuts could affect student achievement. Kris Callen expressed her concern about cuts to Professional Development, stating that the district has a responsibility to help teachers become what they want to be. Tom Prater pointed out that our new teacher attrition rate had been drastically reduced due to the Step Up program. Board President, Gerry Lee, perhaps summed it up best when he stated that, regardless of the cuts, we still have 24,000 students to educate. Lee went on to laud SPS teachers for their hard work in making us a successful district.

District leadership has repeatedly pointed out that Springfield already had the highest student-to-administrator ratio among the five largest school districts in the state. It's interesting to note that St. Louis and Kansas City school districts, both of which are enduring major budget and accreditation issues, ranked among the highest in the concentration of administrators per student. Looking at the administrator/student ratio in districts across the state, SNEA can find no clear evidence to support the notion that simply having more administrators positively affects a district's performance.

However, it is clear that cutting central leadership positions in any large organization will translate into more decision-making and responsibility at the local level - in our case, the building level. It is a virtual certainty that principals, office staff and professional staff will absorb many new responsibilities and possess more autonomy in the daily operation and instruction in their respective buildings. These kinds of adjustments may take some time to play out, but the relatively "gloomy" picture created by some board members about the loss of services and support may prove to be premature. SPS professional staff have proven their resilience through good times and bad in sustaining our high-performing district, and a little more autonomy in the classroom may provide better results than some in district leadership are expecting.

Other Observations and Comparisons

Springfield - the state's largest accredited district - is unique among the state's larger districts on several fronts. While SPS teachers are the lowest paid of the largest five districts (only St. Joseph has lower average salaries of the largest 22 districts) student performance compares very favorably. Our free and reduced lunch population has reached a tipping point of 50%, yet student performance, at least based on state test scores, meets or exceeds those of surrounding districts. Given all these factors, Springfield is certainly a high performing district, and our dedicated professional staff deserves a huge amount of credit for this.

Down by the Levy

Of the five largest districts in the state, Springfield has by far the lowest operating levy and average teacher salaries. Springfield's school tax levy is even low for our tax-stingy corner of the state. Citizens in Nixa, Ozark, Branson, Willard and Republic have all approved higher school tax levies than Springfield's. Further, our district operates with one of the lowest reserves in the state (10% or less). For example, if Springfield had the same reserve percentage as Nixa (an incredible 30% - and they still froze salaries!), SPS would have had $60 million to work with when the economy went south.

There is no question that SPS has always operated a budget that was close to the bone, but that doesn't necessarily mean that there hasn't been room for administrative cuts over the years. The focus has not always been on providing adequate support, financially and otherwise, to the teachers, counselors, librarians, nurses and support staff who work daily with the students. To that end, Dr. Ridder, his cabinet and the board deserve a great deal of credit for establishing that support during these difficult economic times.