Using NCLB To Retool Struggling Schools

By Eliza Krigman  

Steve Barr

Founder and chairman, Green Dot Public Schools

NJ: If you were in charge, what are the first three things that you would do to turn around low-performing schools nationwide?

Barr: First of all, you have to close a school and retool the plan. That doesn't mean you fire all the teachers -- you're retooling the plan. The culture and the vision and mission have changed. But you've got to say to those adults: If you think that all kids can learn, and go to college ready and work ready, and you believe in this mission, then please reapply and let's retrain you. Some will be reinvigorated by that. If you don't think all kids can learn, which is in some cultures the reason why kids fail, then this is not the place for you.

No. 2, we need some protection for these teachers. I don't think it can be done with non-union labor, but unions have to join us in the mission. Their reaction to that mission has got to be a lot more creative than what's happened in the past.

The third thing is you've got to go mobilize the parents. You can't do it to them, you've got to do it with them. They are ready. My experience has been, in the poorest areas of Los Angeles and the South Bronx, that parents have never been asked to be involved, and when they are asked to be involved, it's usually in something that doesn't have that much meaning to it. I think we have a different population where parents really care, every parent cares for their kids' education. They are willing to roll up their sleeves.

So: parent involvement, unions as partners and getting everybody on the same page at the school site.

NJ: How can we use NCLB reauthorization to help turn around the lowest-performing schools?

Barr: What really needs to happen -- and it's in the Race to the Top stuff, it's pretty consistent -- is the buck's gonna stop. It's federal money: If you don't want it, keep doing what you're doing, if you want it, it's pretty black and white. Failure is no longer acceptable; we can't lose half of our kids anymore.

NJ: What specific policies would you change in NCLB?

Barr: If a school continually fails, you've got to close it and start over. I think that's the most important thing. There's got to be that place and time where we stand up and say "enough."

NJ: That should be legislated in No Child Left Behind?

Barr: I think so, yup.

NJ: What advice would you give to Education Secretary Arne Duncan for dealing with pushback from the National Education Association on Race to the Top requirements?

Barr: I think there are a lot of good conversations happening with the NEA about this. I think the secretary's been incredibly consistent on where they want to go. That's important, because usually what happens is, there is a lot of bending. History hasn't been great about education reform sticking their guns. He seems to be very focused and consistent. Hopefully this will bring the necessary conversation about unions evolving with us.

I didn't read the 26-page comment [that NEA submitted to the Education Department about Race to the Top], but it's somewhat predictable. This a sea change, this is a liberal Democrat coming in, becoming president, changing their focus and bringing in somebody who's been very consistent in Chicago. Somebody who had good results working with unions.

I think the message is that we can't do it without them -- it's a 100 percent unionized industry. The way to look at unions and reform is to understand that union contracts and union philosophy is based on a reaction to really bad systems. An urban education steeped in bad centralization, decisions made farthest away form practitioners, a lot of turnover of ideas, and a lot of grownups working downtown that shouldn't be there anymore. The reaction to that system is going to be horrific, so the union contracts are horrible in the sense that they are reactions to bad systems. So we need to change the systems, which I think is the way the secretary looks at it and the way I look at it.

You know, Green Dots got a system where we are pretty subservient to the teachers; they're our product. So we try to get as many dollars to them, as much resources, as much training as possible. We live and die by the ability for them to connect with kids, and we cut out the middleman, which is the bureaucracy. We create more of a service group for the teachers. So, the reaction to that, as far as the union contract, is less steep. You improve working conditions by having smaller schools, you have a clear vision of where you want the school to go so there is no gray area, you reward teachers ultimately with tax dollars giving them a classroom. But you also ask them to be accountable, and performance has got to be part of it. If you are consistent with that, I think there is a lot in there for teachers and teachers unions.

Their biggest argument is that "we have no say in what goes on in front of us, we're overwhelmed by the amount of kids, and there's not enough money in the system." Well, let's make the money work now and build public confidence up.