I missed this last week, but after The New York Times editorial board came out in favor of attaching tougher accountability standards to the education dollars in the stimulus package, Eduwonk Andrew Rotherham highlighted a major tension at the heart of education reform: Free-market, pro-charter school, and pro-merit pay types want to fire ineffective teachers. But there's a recession going on, so teachers' unions are, quite rightfully, focused on saving jobs.
I've been optimistic about the ability of unions and "reformers" to find some common ground, but this is a big deal. As I wrote in my column two weeks ago about various merit-pay plans, a big difference among them is whether they are conceived of as primarily a recruitment device for talented teachers (Denver's ProComp is a good example), or whether they are sold as one facet of a larger plan including lay-offs (this is what's going on right now in D.C.). The stimulus package focuses the majority of its 100 billion education dollars on stemming budget losses, which means that preventing lay-offs will be a higher priority for most states than fostering innovation and reform -- despite the Obama administration's many supportive hat tips toward performance-pay plans and charter schools.
In reality, the recession represents a set-back for aggressive reformers such as Washington, D.C., superintendent Michelle Rhee. Not only are they facing a less friendly climate in terms of raising the private-sector money their movement depends upon, but they are also facing down unions on their home turf: protecting middle-class jobs in an uncertain economy.
--Dana Goldstein
