Interview: Ellen Winn, Director, Education Equality Project

I spent an hour talking with Ellen Winn today. Ellen runs the Education Equality Project in New York, a non-profit advocacy organization focused on closing the achievement gap.

Our conversation traveled through a few strains and trends in the education reform movement. We took notes together and here’s what I came away with after talking to her:

1. I asked her what she thinks should be altered immediately to create a pipeline of great teachers for our nation’s schools, especially in order to get alternative pathways to teacher certification.

• The easier we can make it to be a teacher, the better. But in the same breath we want to do everything we can to attract and retain the very best teachers in the classroom. We need training and it should be hands-on, and not divorced from the actual goings-on in the classroom. She referenced medical training, which is far more practical then theoretical.
• Alternative certification has proven itself to be a VERY good way to get talent into our classrooms, whether its Teach for American, Troops to Schools, or the various projects run by The New Teacher Project.
• Unfortunately, alternative certification programs are not operating – as they should be – everywhere across the country. We need to focus on the “conditions for success.”
• Just last week the NY State Regents approved a pilot program allowing groups like Teach for America to create their own master’s degree program. This is an exciting development we should watch closely.
• Race to the Top has made alternative credential platforms one of the key reform criteria it looks at when considering state applications. This is a strong vote of confidence from the Administration.

     2. Then we talked about budget procedures: a district like Stamford is perceived as high need but considered also be “high-wealth.” What, if anything, should be done?

• “spending is not correlated with student success. Look at how DC spends very high, but achievement is still very low.”
• Total real spending per student has increased by 23.5% over the past decade and 49% over the past 20 years. NAEP scores have been largely flat or made very small – not proportional gains.
• We should be focusing on equity, equity, equity. Poor kids are FAR more frequently taught by teachers with no real training in their subject area.
• The Education Trust, a close partner of EEP’s, has done strong research on out-of-field teaching: “In high-poverty secondary schools, more than one in three core academic classes are taught by out –of-field teachers, compared to about one in five classes in low-poverty schools. In secondary schools serving the most minority students, almost one in three classes are assigned to an out-of-field teacher compared to about one in five in low-minority schools.” — visit The Education Trust

Ellen talked about a letter she and some other groups are sending to The Honorable Chaka Fattah in support of his bill, the ESEA Fiscal Fairness Act. That bill should fix the “comparability loophole” in Title I of the ESEA. According to the letter, “The bill would ensure that school districts receiving Title I funds provide their high-poverty schools — schools facing the steepest challenges – with a fair share of their state and local resources.”

And further in the letter the signatories point out that the current loophole “allows district to budget and account for funds in ways that shortchange high-poverty schools.”

“So, instead of buying extra support for low-income students, too many school districts use Title I funds to make up fro district-created funding gaps between high-poverty and low-poverty schools. This undermines the intent of the law and makes it a far less powerful tool to boost the achievement of low-income students.”

The letter basically argues that school districts should provide equal funds. “Fair funding could provide added supports even though salaries differ.”

     3. And then we talked about the missing category, the crucial role of parents in advocating for education reform. How do you tackle this problem?

• Parent involvement really functions on two levels.
• There is the work that parents do every day in terms of supporting their children academically – helping with homework, reading together, developing relationships with their kids’ teachers and schools. We know, unequivocally, that parental involvement leads to higher student outcomes. See the Harvard Family Research Project
• Parental involvement, of course, is a two-way street. Schools and districts and even the federal government have key roles to play. Districts need to share critical information about what students are expected to know by grade, what it will take to get into college, and how each student is progressing. New York City is a real leader in this field, publishing a set of very accessible learning guides for parents (these are translated into many languages).
• And districts should be required to publish all performance and spending data annually on their website so that the public can be well informed and so that there is an immediate channel to address performance challenges as spotted by the community at large.
• And the second level is about advocacy. Increasingly we are seeing parents come together as powerful political actors and DEMAND better schools for their kids. The story of the Parent Trigger, led by Parent Revolution in LA is a particularly interesting one.

There is the group that just says we will never fix education until we fix poverty. This group, epitomized by the Broader Bolder Approach to Education (http://www.boldapproach.org/) focuses its energies on non-academic supports (e.g., health care and social work services) and on reforms like fair funding and class size reduction.

Then there is the camp that says we’ll never fix poverty until we fix education. A recent Washington Post op-ed by EEP’s co-chairs (Joel Klein, Michael Lomax, and Janet Murguia) argues this side of the coin.

     4. But what about RTTT? How does EEP feel about the program? Do you think RTTT helps focus on the students?

“It’s become clear that RTTT is not a popularity contest. It was designed to help a handful of states make important gap-closing reforms as examples of what is possible.”

“EEP strongly supports the RTTT framework of high standards, data-driven improvement, great teachers for kids that need them most, and aggressive action to improve or replace low performing schools. These aren’t popular ideas with defenders of the status quo, but they are proven to be best for students not being well served today. RTTT should be about these student issues not adult issues.”

Ellen is doing great work and we can all learn from her approach to the Herculean task she faces. Right now, much of the education debate is getting polarized between two camps on either side of the Media River.

Ellen and her crew see the forest for the trees and the trees for the forest, and realizes that real systemic change is necessary before teachers can be paid more and districts can heal. A lot of this centers around a need for transparency and equity.

Ellen is right in the middle of this need for transparency and equity, offering it with a shrewd eye for detail; a practiced hand at policy and an ability to dissect problems for what they are – problems, without judgment, that need to be fixed.

Categories: Education News EEP News