By Laurie H. Rogers, author of "Betrayed"
Columnist EducationNews.org

"We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people."
-- John F. Kennedy

My philosophy toward authority generally centers around one word: Accountability. In my view, there are two main kinds of accountability: small "a" accountability and capital "A" accountability. In public education, there is a great deal of one and almost none of the other.

Small "a" accountability is accountability to the system. There are statistics, reports, numbers, factoids and figures. These numbers bounce around the organization, heading farther up the chain and occasionally shooting out to the public in the form of headlines. It's possible that change takes place because of these numbers, but the public usually isn't involved. The numbers are often supportive and positive about the overall effectiveness of the system.

Capital "A" Accountability is accountability to the public. Administrators speak the truth, even if it feels nasty to hear it or to say it. If things aren't working, they say so. Employees are encouraged to speak freely and aren't forced into silence nor bullied into compliance. People are held responsible for their actions and their performance. Records are made public. Pertinent information is welcomed. Administrators acknowledge their mistakes and learn from others. As long as the public remains engaged in capital "A" Accountability, then small "a" accountability is likely to follow.

Public education is a bureaucracy, however, and on the whole, bureaucracies tend to be impermeable and self-serving. In public education, the "public" has been purposefully blocked from the process. The establishment spends billions of dollars each year studying students, teachers, schools and families – dutifully reporting its picked-over version of reality and probably cutting down an entire rain forest of trees to publish the results. All the while, it fails to tell the public it's in a dark place where high-school students drop out or require extensive remedial help before moving forward with their lives.

Capital "A" Accountability helps maintain corruption-free environments. Articulate, well-reasoned debate keeps the nation strong. I'm willing to fight for that.

In January 2007, I went to a Spokane Public Schools board meeting to ask about test scores. I was told politely that board meetings are business meetings and no discussion would take place. My name was passed to the superintendent, and the meeting went on without me. Later that month, I was invited to meet privately with the superintendent and curriculum director. There, I was told that everything was great – going so well that other states look to Washington for guidance.

In an October 2007 PTA meeting, I asked a board member and the acting superintendent (Dr. Nancy Stowell) how parents have two-way conversations with the entire school board in a public forum. It can't be done, PTA members were told, but we were invited to attend board meetings or to call board members at home.

I've asked several people if the public can ever have two-way conversations with the entire school board in a public setting, and the consistent answer is, "No." In a February 2008 interview, Dr. Stowell acknowledged that students and parents don't have many ways to be "engaged' in the process.

In March 2008, in a rare display of "glasnost," the school board invited the public to two forums regarding finalists for the position of district superintendent. One candidate was Dr. Stowell. The candidates had to answer questions publicly (although no follow-up questions were allowed). My question was: How do we get more public forums?

Dr. Stowell laughed a bit when she said, "Well, we aren't doing this again!" Then she said she supported the concept of better communication between the district and the parents. She asked the group for ideas.

Here's my idea (which I've technically passed on to her three times). Have more forums. Listen to questions, answer the questions, listen to follow-up questions and answer those. Administrators should do it because it's respectful. Mostly, they should do it because it's their role in providing capital "A" Accountability.

I wish I could tell you how board members answered public questions at those two forums, but none did. They milled around the edges of the group, talking privately with individuals.

In a September 2008 "online chat," I asked Dr.

Stowell again about "creating opportunities" for the public to communicate with administrators and the school board. Board meetings are insufficient, I said, since discussions usually don't take place, and private meetings are insufficient since they aren't in public.

Dr. Stowell repeated that I could attend school board meetings. She added that board members sometimes go into the public "to solicit input" on topics such as bond projects and the budget.

In October, public meetings were held to discuss bond issues. The format was a presentation followed by small-group discussions. I asked the district's director of communications and community relations if I could go to the forums and ask questions that are unrelated to bond issues. She said the forums were just for bond issues, but that I could take my questions to a school board meeting or I could make an appointment with an administrator.

And there you have it. Over 22 months, I have come full circle, and I have gotten nowhere at all.

Other Things I've Heard From the Education Establishment in Spokane and Washington State

  • It's "elitist" to say that children achieve at different levels, to have programs for the highly capable, or to form classes for similar types of learners.
  • Parents only want a traditional approach because it's what they had as children. Students find it boring and would rather "discover" thousands of years of math in groups and by inventing their own concepts and methods.
  • Not all children can learn traditional math. Having everyone learn "alternative" methods first gives them "something to fall back on."
  • People who complain about reform math just "don't get it." For example:
    • Parents aren't math smart. They're obstructionist and stuck in the past.
    • Teachers have their own "issues." They might not be all that talented.
    • Students have lousy upbringings, raging hormones, short attention spans and poor priorities. Math might not be their strongest subject.
    • Engineers don't know how to communicate, and math professors don't know how to teach to children.
    • Advocates are extremist and hypercritical. They have a "hidden" agenda.
  • Parents are not qualified to comment on curriculum choices, but curriculum coordinators who have an education degree and a minor in the specific subject are qualified.
  • Statistics show that things are getting better. We're upping enrollment in "honors" classes, increasing the "rigor," "raising the bar" and moving to "the next step." We're doing so well, other states look to us for guidance.
  • We don't need to worry about the highly capable students because they'll learn anyway. They can work in groups with the struggling students – not to "teach" them, but just to "show" them how to do things.
  • No one needs to learn algebra because not everyone will go to college.
  • Students can pick up any algebra they need in Grade 11 or 12.
  • 60% pass rates might be good depending on where the group began.
  • Children need "21st-century math." Calculators and computers help them learn math and can even take the place of long division and other arithmetic.
  • We can fix everything with billions more dollars for incentives, technology, instructional coaches, teacher development and initiatives for the disadvantaged.
  • We listen to all feedback. Parents can:
    • present questions at board meetings. (The Spokane Public Schools board won't answer questions at board meetings.)
    • talk to administrators. (Spokane administrators politely say everything is fine.)
    • talk with their child's teacher. (Some teachers in Spokane are afraid to be frank, or they're politically careful, or they're too busy to see the whole picture.)
    • talk with principals. (Ditto.)

I've been asking questions in Spokane for 22 months, and I have more questions now than when I began. I'd really like to start getting some answers.

Published October 24, 2008