Big-City School Reforms: Lessons From New York, Toronto, and London Paperback – 30 Apr 2014
- Choose from over 13,000 locations across the UK
- Prime members get unlimited deliveries at no additional cost
- Find your preferred location and add it to your address book
- Dispatch to this address when you check out
Frequently Bought Together
Customers Who Bought This Item Also Bought
Enter your mobile number below and we'll send you a link to download the free Kindle App. Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
Getting the download link through email is temporarily not available. Please check back later.
To get the free app, enter your mobile phone number.
About the Author
Michael Fullan, Order of Canada, is professor emeritus of the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education at the University of Toronto.
Alan Boyle is director of Leannta Education Associates where he designs professional learning for education leaders.
Most Helpful Customer Reviews on Amazon.com (beta)
In England, national policy has steadily reduced the influence of local authorities to the point that they now have very little control over individual schools. In the U.S., the 14,000 or so districts (mostly very small) still provide the bulk of funding and are powerful players. Canada's 400 or so districts are in between. In Canada and the U.S., principals and teachers are employed by districts, but in England individual schools employ their own staff. In England, funding for schools comes primarily from national government, with most flowing directly to individual schools. In the U.S. 44% of funding comes from local districts, 43% from states, and 13% from the federal government. In Canada, provincial governments provide essentially all the money for schools.
Curriculum is set national in England, provincially in Canada, and by the state or locally in the U.S. Assessment of students occurs nationally at ages 11 and 16 in England, and in Canada most provinces test students at two or three grade levels and by some high school exit exams.
NYC's reforms focused on restructuring (eg. initial centralization, with mayoral control, followed by decentralization opportunities - earned through performance) and directly improving pupil outcomes, not re-culturing. The 32 community school districts, each with their own school boards, were replaced. Many teachers resented the prescribed curricula via young Ivy League non-educator leaders. After a year in control, 29 high schools (including three charters) formed the 'Autonomy Zone' in 9/04. In exchange for increased funding, budgetary freedom, and school-based management, principals voluntarily signed 5-year contracts specifying performance targets (test scores, attendance, graduation rates). Missing targets for a 2nd year brought a new principal, and after a 3rd year the school was to be closed. A new teachers' union contract in 2005 ended 'seniority bumping' under which principals were forced to hire teachers by seniority if they applied for a vacancy at their school. After 2005 principals could appoint the best applicants, regardless of seniority and teachers who lost their jobs through budget cuts or school closures and unable to get another appointment were offered substitute teacher positions. A new position of 'Lead Teacher' ($10,000 more pay) was created - the beginnings of a merit focus. In the 2005-06 school year, another 19 schools joined the zone.
January 2006 brought a focus on cutting $200 million from central and regional administrative budgets and freeing at least another 150 schools from oversight, provided they met their goals. The following year all schools were invited to attain the autonomy. Schools within the autonomy zone formed networks to provide themselves support, guidance, and advocacy. Soon afterwards, schools were allowed to choose between three types of school support and pay for their services from their increased budgets (the former administrative budgets had been devolved down to them). Responsibility for monitoring schools was transferred to the new Office of Accountability.
Fullan sees a change leader's first requirement as that of challenging the status quo, then conveying a high sense of urgency (via data), and then having the courage to intervene and attend to sustainability.
This book is bound to be mandatory reading in education schools all around the world, and the first case study -- New York City -- will be studied as a textbook example of how not to implement systemic education reform. When Michael Bloomberg came into power in NYC, his ambition was to push market-driven education reforms down the throat of the corrupt and stagnant NYC education bureaucracy. Authority over education was devolved from the state level into the mayor's hands, and the mayor immediately brought in a team of outsiders (US Justice Department lawyer Joe Klein and a young energetic team of Ivy League-educated management consultants) to implement reform. From the outset, Mike Bloomberg and Joe Klein considered public school teachers to be public enemy number one, and their slogan "Children First" suggested that they thought public schools teachers were not at all whole-heartedly committed to their students. They adopted a number of important, wide-ranging initiatives -- such as the promotion of charter schools, smaller schools, and accountability ("testing") -- that garnered a lot of praise in the media, and eventually spread nationally (with the help of the Gates Foundation and other education "reform" advocates). But as a number of critics (such as Diane Ravitch) have pointed out, these reforms accomplished almost nothing, and were even arguably counter-productive. By shutting down failing schools, Joe Klein merely shifted the burden of failing students to other students. And ultimately by alienating those most responsible for implementing reform (the teachers), Mike Bloomberg guaranteed that his reforms never really had a chance.
The counter-example to Mike Bloomberg's business-oriented, market-driven, top-down approach in NYC is the London Challenge (under the leadership of Sir Mike Tomlinson). On the surface, there were a lot of similarities between NYC and London's approaches. Both were fundamentally committed to bringing accountability and assessment into an out-of-control chaotic system, and both believed that good schools could overcome bad backgrounds. But there were key differences at the implementation level that made all the difference in the world. First, the people asked to oversee the reforms in London were experienced educators that had the respect and trust of London's teachers. Second, London Challenge didn't have the dictatorial powers that Mike Bloomberg had in NYC; in fact, they had a great deal of authority, but very little power, so they focused their efforts on advocacy, lobbying, and building consensus. Finally, London Challenge never considered closing failing schools -- for them, it wasn't a viable strategy to shift the burden of failing students from one school to another. Instead, they created a framework for schools to support each other, and encouraged working groups of teachers to share their resources and expertise to help the neediest students.
For Fullan and Boyle, effective systemic reform requires a combination of what they call "push" (top-down leadership) and "pull" (bottom-up consensus building) to counterbalance each other. They also argue that given the complexity of any large system, educators need to focus on identifying a few simple core principles that can be implemented systemically (something they call "simplexity").
The ideas in the book are solid, and are backed by decades of education, social science, and psychological research. But I am sometimes put off by the authors' all too eagerness to extrapolate and generalize based on a few case studies.
Look for similar items by category
- Books > Education Studies & Teaching > Education Management & Organisation > Administration & Organisation
- Books > Education Studies & Teaching > Education Management & Organisation > Strategies & Policy
- Books > Education Studies & Teaching > History of Education
- Books > Education Studies & Teaching > Philosophy of Education
- Books > History > Cultural History > Local & Urban History
- Books > Science & Nature > Education
- Books > Society, Politics & Philosophy > Education Studies