Blog, meet thesis

As someone far more comfortable writing 4,000 word essays than 600-word posts, presenting this paper has been an interesting challenge as a communicator. Online or off, communicating effectively has been a ceaseless learning experience. Last summer, I had the opportunity to talk to an economist about a development proposal I had written. He refused to read it until I could give him a 30-second and 1-minute synopsis. It was by far the most important thing I learned in 2007. Blogging is a medium that – for better or worse – unfold minute soundbites from other sources into brief analysis. Recognizing this – I looked at my paper’s blog more as a portal (and the paper “advocacy journalism” rather a report) than traditional “blog”. As I’ve worked to build a sustainable readership for the paper, one of my biggest concerns was how to effectively convey the paper’s message in the online equivalent of 30-second and 1-minute soundbites.

When Bill Marriott launched his blog, one of the first comments was that he substantially reduce the length of his posts to keep his readership. It was not a possibility for this paper, so I went so far as to begin to develop a soundbite page for bloggers, but decided against it, because I believed that if I would have done so, I would have condemned the paper to the same intensely narrow criticism and praise (in ignorance of the totality of the work) that has crippled any project as ambitious as this. As I post my thesis and overarching proposal, I also ask you: is blogging (regardless of its subject) condemned to be the mass-democratization of instant, ever-changing analysis, or can it transform itself into a far more enlightened community and debate? The Becker-Posner blog is a shining example of that promise. Perhaps what we need is a few more specialized mediums to divide the various forms of blogs into proper niches – Twitter has all but eradicated the first attempts at “micro-blogging”; will another product similarly be able to differentiate between journal and analysis?

Thesis

I’ve likened writing the paper to that of a mathematics proof. The work is underpinned by two theses: first by exploring the rupture between the ideal of a dynamic education and the means by which it about, schooling. I posit that schooling – which as Mark Twain put it has only managed to “interfere with my education” – is the result of the misguided triumph of Horace Mann’s common school where an undefinable social order is paramount over Jefferson’s ideal of a meritocratic education.

The policy paper is centered in the second thesis that school reform depends upon the pillars of choice, accountability, and autonomy – which for too long have been forced by politics to position themselves as mutually exclusive. Indeed, choice alone – as witnessed by the consistent failure to adopt voucher programs across the country – will continue to fail. Much the same, accountability (read: NCLB) without school autonomy (or the dynamics provided by a market) continue constrict the ability of schools to extend beyond the teaching to the test.

Proposals
I embrace the duality of universal national standards and system of accountability coupled with complete school autonomy. I write that education is not a state’s right, but a student’s right. Federal involvement in education is a necessary reflection of a united democratic and economic interest. I liken the No Child Left Behind Act to the Articles of Confederation – an assessment of the political environment and the law’s progress thus far suggest that it is time to draft the educational equivalent of the Constitution.

Under this proposal, students and parents are free to choose the school (I envision the rise of smaller, more intensely focused schools) that “fit” for each student. The federal government pays school tuition through a national sales tax – estimated at 7 percent – in the interest of equity. Individual school tuition is determined by the confluence of factors – test scores prominently, but also factors like geography (rural schools need larger transport budgets). I propose market mechanisms that encourage schools to seek out students with disabilities or from poorer performing schools (affording them the flexibility to do so without compromising their overall performance). In addition to their curriculum and policies, schools set their own budgets and pay, allowing urban and poorer schools the opportunity to compete for and attract talented teachers.

Accountability is an important focus of this paper. I propose a dynamic system that allows for yearly variations in test scores without negative consequences, while also taking a broader perspective in assessing a school’s effectiveness through continued improvements elsewhere (AP enrollment, graduation rates, et al).

Throughout my tenure here, I will extend this synopsis in subsequent posts to discuss the rupture between schooling education, meritocracy, choice-accountability-autonomy, and specific proposals from the paper.