School Choice Versus Systemic Reform
The elementary and secondary education paradigm of the 20th century is no longer applicable. While it may not be necessary to wholly dismantle extant educational structures and systems, it does make sense to reconfigure the existing infrastructure in ways that can lead to formats that are useful for teaching and learning in the 21st century. By integrating the best of systemic- and market-based reforms into our schools, we can produce models that accommodate the needs of young people in our urban, suburban, and rural communities nationwide. The combination of systemic and market reforms should move us closer to a public education landscape that ensures equity and access for every student. Both approaches must continue to be employed concurrently in order to create avenues of change within and without our school districts. Market (or choice) reforms are needed to force us to examine nontraditional means of school enhancement, while systemic reforms are needed to implement necessary changes within existing school structures. Market-based initiatives provide us with greater freedom and choice beyond traditional public schools, whereas systemic improvements complement the choices already available to us.
Where public schools do not respond to new systems, standards and structures, market choices must be available to families as a means of filling the void that is the result of systemic weaknesses in schools. Similarly, choice models that neither improve academic results nor meet standards comparable to those being applied to existing schools must be eliminated. The execution of both market and systemic reforms is fundamentally a checks-and-balances process that enables the testing of school prototypes while employing innovative systems within the existing infrastructure. The influx of fresh ideas from practitioners and various other noneducation organizations makes the education marketplace much more competitive and should translate into improved schools and higher academic performance from students on a large scale. The application of relevant systemic reforms and the inclusion of viable choice alternatives can lead to an education landscape that responds to the diverse needs of many students while also moving us closer to understanding and resolving our public education quagmire.
Where public schools do not respond to new systems, standards and structures, market choices must be available to families as a means of filling the void that is the result of systemic weaknesses in schools. Similarly, choice models that neither improve academic results nor meet standards comparable to those being applied to existing schools must be eliminated. The execution of both market and systemic reforms is fundamentally a checks-and-balances process that enables the testing of school prototypes while employing innovative systems within the existing infrastructure. The influx of fresh ideas from practitioners and various other noneducation organizations makes the education marketplace much more competitive and should translate into improved schools and higher academic performance from students on a large scale. The application of relevant systemic reforms and the inclusion of viable choice alternatives can lead to an education landscape that responds to the diverse needs of many students while also moving us closer to understanding and resolving our public education quagmire.
Comments