You Might be Surprised: What Teachers, Parents, School Leaders, and the Public Really Think about Public Education Today

Speech given to the National School Public Relations Association; announces Education Insights.

Thank you very much for the invitation to address your annual meeting. I am so pleased to be here, to be in Boston, and to be speaking to a group of communications professionals. You are the people who "tell the story." I have spent my career in communications -- first in advertising, then as president of The Advertising Council in New York City, then with an international public relations firm, and now with an organization whose mission is to give voice to the public's view -- Public Agenda.

I suspect that few of you would disagree that 20-plus years after the release of A Nation at Risk, American schools are facing an infinitely more complex environment. The stakes for the country and for the young people you are educating couldn't be higher. Nor could the challenges be tougher.

And, while you know better than I just how tough the going has been -- and will be -- I am hoping I can add a useful dimension to your work. I also want to have an open and frank discussion with you about what Public Agenda's national research has found about the attitudes and underlying values of the many groups with a stake in school reform.

For those who are not familiar with us, Public Agenda is a nonpartisan, nonprofit research and citizen education organization. Our calling card lies in our expertise in exploring different points of view, in probing beneath the surface to capture underlying values and concerns. As one of our founders, Daniel Yankelovich, puts it, Public Agenda gets the "opinion beneath the opinion."

Dan and former Secretary of State Cyrus Vance created Public Agenda 30 years ago to help leaders and experts better understand public priorities and concerns, and to help the public understand more about the problems facing the country and their communities.

Public Agenda has made its reputation by listening carefully to the voices of the American people and making certain that the authentic voice of the public is part of policy debates on issues ranging from health care and welfare reform to crime, social security, and foreign policy, among others.

Republicans, Democrats, independents, and especially journalists have characterized our work as thorough, fair, and balanced. Our research is independent, thought-provoking, and always in the public interest.

I also want to put in a plug for our Web site, publicagenda.org, which is used daily by thousands of teachers, students and journalists. Time magazine has just named us one of the "50 Coolest Webites," drawing attention to how we cover dozens of political and social in a lively, nonpartisan style.

For well over a decade, Public Agenda has focused intensively on education and the public schools. We have conducted:

• Dozens of quantitative national, state, and local surveys
  
• Hundreds of qualitative focus groups
  
• And literally thousands of individual interviews with corporate leaders, policy makers, school principals and superintendents, public school teachers, students, parents, college professors (including those who teach in the schools of education), and of course, the general public.
  

So after all of this research, what have we found? What is on the mind of educators and the public these days? As a group of communications professionals, you won't find it surprising that people have a lot to say about many issues. But what you might find surprising is that much of what troubles teachers, school leaders, and parents is not always what the traditional education "experts and pundits" are buzzing about.

While standards and testing are critically important to all, there is a lot more than testing on the minds of teachers, school leaders, parents and students.

No Child Left Behind

First, let's address the 800-pound elephant in the room. In light of the ongoing controversies in Congress, statehouses, and local districts over the specifics of No Child Left Behind, Public Agenda and others continue to document a nearly-unanimous support among Americans that we need a serious, standards-based education reform agenda. The basic premise of No Child Left Behind resonates with Americans because it is based on common-sense fundamentals that are consistent with what people have experienced in their own lives.

Large majorities of parents, teachers, employers, and college professors are convinced that most youngsters achieve just a small part of their educational potential. They believe and that if you expect more of students, you will get more. By about 2 to 1, teachers, parents, and students also say inner-city youngsters should be expected to reach the same standards as children from more affluent backgrounds. And among various groups of parents of high school students, for example, nearly 80 percent of Latino parents (a higher percentage than among any other ethnic or racial group) believe a college education is absolutely necessary and as important as a high school diploma used to be.

Nearly all students themselves say they are not working as hard as they could. But they take testing in stride, and only a mere handful -- just 5 percent -- say they feel overwhelmed by the pressure. More than eight in 10 Americans consider scores on statewide tests a very useful way to evaluate how well their students and schools are performing. Majorities continue to support the concept of a high school exit exam. For the most part, tests are thought of as pretty routine and as a reasonable way to measure what students are accomplishing.

All in all, there is broad public support for the concepts and values behind the standards movement and the principles underlying No Child Left Behind. Most communities now have some experience with what the standards movement really means, and so far, parents are giving their schools a thumbs-up. Majorities of parents, teachers, employers, and professors say their own school district has been "careful and reasonable" in putting standards in place.

Parents and teachers are nearly unanimous -- around 90 percent -- in saying that students who fail the standardized test should either attend summer school or repeat the grade. Among those who know that their districts are working to raise standards, only 2 percent of parents and employers and 1 percent of teachers and professors say local schools should discontinue their current efforts.

Bottom line? There is no nostalgia anywhere for returning to the pre-standards policies of the past.

Teachers

But beneath the surface, trouble is brewing, particularly among teachers, who feel caught between a rock and a hard place, and administrators, who feel overburdened by mandates over which they have no control. I don't have to tell you that American public school teachers are devoted to their work and to their children. They believe in higher standards and accountability. But almost half say they want some adjustments. A majority feels they are unfairly being held accountable for raising student achievement when so much that affects learning is beyond their control.

Teachers' frustration is fueled by lack of support from both school leadership and parents. Seventy percent of teachers say they are often left out of the loop in their district's decision-making process, and that district leaders don't consult with them to get a sense of their issues and concerns.

Over 80 percent of teachers say that parents who "refuse to hold their kids accountable for their behavior or academic performance" are a serious problem at their school. To make matters worse, fear of litigation is confirmed by nearly eight in ten teachers, who say students are quick to remind them that they have rights when disciplined, and that their parents can sue.

As one Arizona teacher said to us, "I cannot make these kids show up. I can't go to their house, get them out of bed, and help them when they have dirty laundry. I'll call their parents: 'Why aren't they here today?' The kids will come back the next day and say, 'I got out partying last night. I was too hung over to come to school."

Large majorities of teachers express deep passion for their profession. But they also say they are unnerved and angered by expectations they consider unrealistic. They feel at the mercy of administrators they don't trust, students who won't try, and parents who just don't seem to care. As one St. Louis teacher complained, "In many cases we'll have students who will come into high school with an inability read. They can't add or subtract. And we're supposed to perform miracles and bring them up to speed and make high performers out of them. If we don't, then we're held accountable."

A 100 percent success rate is an unusual expectation in any occupation. Teachers know this, and they worry about not being able to get through to all kids. Only about 10 percent of teachers are confident about the hardest-to-reach kids in their class. "Most children, yes," one teacher told us, " . . . because, as a teacher, I will not give up. But every child? There is a big difference between saying 'most' and 'all.'"

So it is not surprising that teachers say they need their unions to protect them against capricious administrators and out-of-the-blue accusations by students or parents. Over 80 percent say that without their union "teachers would be vulnerable to school politics or administrators who abuse their power." Four out of five say that without their union "teachers facing unfair charges from parents or students would have nowhere to turn." As one suburban teacher observed, "We live in a world where all they have to do is whisper that we hit them, and we're gone."

Nearly three-quarters of the teachers we surveyed work in districts that make tenure available after three years or earlier. And most teachers say that when teachers gain tenure in their district, it is no guarantee that they have "worked hard and proved themselves."

Teachers also recognize that tenure sometimes protects the incompetent. Nearly eight in 10 say there are at least a few teachers in their building who "fail to do a good job." And over a third say that it is too hard for administrators to remove any but the very worst.

But again, vulnerability and fear of politics and cost-cutting seem to outweigh any inclination toward change. Almost six in ten say "tenure protects teachers from district politics, favoritism, and the threat of losing their jobs to newcomers who could work for less."

Principals and Superintendents

As for superintendents and principals, they make no bones over how overwhelmed they are by mandates, bureaucracy, and red tape, especially the demands of complying with No Child Left Behind. But, while they may be unhappy with some of the specifics of No Child Left Behind and say that the law will require many adjustments, almost nine in ten superintendents -- and about that many principals -- believe that the era of testing and accountability is here to stay.

Almost 90 percent of superintendents and nearly that many principals say their district has experienced "an enormous increase in responsibilities and mandates without getting the resources necessary to fulfill them." On top of that, they say that the overwhelming bureaucracy and paperwork reduce their capacity for responsible decision-making. Commenting on layer upon layer of mandates, one frustrated superintendent told us, "Some items are well-intended, but most lawmakers don't have a clue. . . . I really don't think they read most of them."

Another superintendent reeled off for us a list of mandates he has to cope with. By law, he said, his schools have to provide dental health instruction and information about organ donation. He has to be sure his schools celebrate Freedom Week. He has to form parent involvement committees with a paid facilitator. He has to put the body mass index of each child on each report card. "Oh, by the way," he said, "remember No Child Left Behind?"

But to be clear, the education leaders we've surveyed say they believe in being held accountable for results. They are willing to step up to the plate and take responsibility for the achievement of the students in their schools and districts. But free us, they say, to make the tough decisions so we can get the job done.

Employers and College Professors

But what do those who use the "products" of public education have to say about the state of reform? Sadly, we have found no more profound gap in perception and understanding than that between parents and students on the one hand and employers and professors on the other regarding how well our students are performing.

Nearly 70 percent of parents and three-quarters of high school students believe that a diploma from a local high school means a youngster has mastered at least basic skills. But just about 40 percent of employers and fewer than one-in-three professors agree.

And about three-quarters of employers and professors gave youngsters fair or poor ratings for grammar and spelling and for their ability to write clearly. Two-thirds also find these youngsters lack basic math and good work habits, such as being organized and on time and even motivated and conscientious.

Discipline

But now let me get to a subject that, to my mind, is the poster child for where there are gaps in perception between educators and the education policy elite. And that is the lack of attention being paid to the unruly, disrespectful, and sometimes violent atmosphere in American schools. I am not talking about outright and immediate dangers such as drugs and guns. Most schools have drawn a line in the sand here, even if it means having armed officers in their schools  which more than half of teachers say is the case.

Rather, I am talking about a pernicious, malevolent level of rowdiness and disrespect that pervades many schools. I am talking about bullying, acting out, lateness, and loutishness. These short-of-criminal misbehaviors -- usually only caused by a few -- are poisoning the learning atmosphere of too many public schools.

It is hard to overstate the depth of teachers' concern about poor student behavior and lack of parental and administrative support when problems occur. An astonishing 97 percent of teachers -- as high a number as we have ever seen in polling -- say that good discipline is essential for a successful school. But nearly four in 10 say they spend more time keeping order than teaching. And nearly eight in 10 say they could teach better if they didn't have to spend so much time dealing with troublemakers. "You can have one kid blow up a whole class," a Florida teacher told us.

"What I find amazing," a New Jersey middle school teacher said, "is the lack of morals. There's just a disrespect for classroom materials. They'll write all over things. The gum chewing, the yawning or putting their feet up on the desk. Like they didn't know it was inappropriate."

Kids, too, are aware this is a problem. Only about a third of students say kids in their own high school treat each other with respect. Only about one in five kids say teachers in their school are treated respectfully.

Now, if an orderly atmosphere is a prerequisite for learning, and if teachers and students together identify an out-of-control environment as a serious issue in their school, where is the outrage?

There is certainly no outrage among the education reform elite, who rarely raise discipline and classroom environment as important issues. Isn't it odd that fostering decent conditions for learning based on order and mutual respect is not considered a vital component of education reform?

It is clear from talking to teachers, principals, and students that reclaiming the hours lost trying to maintain order may offer the single biggest opportunity to improve student achievement.

Why the lack of attention? Some seem concerned that more discipline means a lurch backward, a soul-crushing, rigid environment. Others worry that zeroing in on repeat trouble makers might mean we are writing them off.

But parents and teachers don't want a return to whacking away with metal-edged rulers. And they are keenly aware that most kids can be helped, can learn, and are not lost causes. Far from it.

Better discipline simply means a little more order in school, fewer disruptions, more cooperation, and a little more courtesy and respect all around. That doesn't seem too much to ask.

On the Horizon

When we have a chance to talk, I want to hear what you hear when you have your ear to the ground. But clearly, the next major wave of reform is going to aim at high schools. As you know, in February, the National Governors Association convened a first-ever National Education Summit on High Schools, which focused on restoring the relevance of a high school diploma, increasing the graduation rate, closing the achievement gap, and aligning high school, college, and workforce expectations. The summit attracted such business leaders as Bill Gates of Microsoft and Kerry Killinger of Washington Mutual, and a host of others.

And Public Agenda is now pleased to be working with the National High School Alliance, a new partnership of over forty organizations representing different interests but sharing a common commitment to promoting achievement for high school-age youth. The Alliance has just issued A Call to Action, consisting of core principles and strategies for preparing the nation's youth for college, careers, and civic participation.

Meeting the New Challenges

The challenges confronting you and your colleagues are steep and real. You should be proud of the progress that American public schools have made. But the work is getting harder, and reform may be at a critical juncture where trends could go either way.

We are at a point where reform policies have been hammered out and have started to be implemented. But what is missing is attention to the human element -- to the people in the classroom, in the school building, and in the community who are charged with carrying out this difficult work.

Reforms now being undertaken require a new professional culture among educators and a new set of expectations among parents and kids. We may agree on overall goals, but different groups often see the path to success through very different lenses. Confusion, fear, doubt, the sense of being ignored, or, worse, the sense of being targeted -- all of these drain the energy and drive that education reform badly needs.
There is, as I have mentioned, widespread support for the underlying values of No Child Left Behind. But we cannot assume this support will translate into consensus on specifics, especially when the public and parents have very little knowledge or understanding of various aspects of the legislation.

Will teachers, principals, students, parents, and taxpayers really begin to think in new ways? Will they act purposefully on a new vision of schools and learning? Or will good intentions unravel as people cling to "we've always done it this way?" Will the human energy that should go into improving learning instead be misdirected into in-fighting and second guessing?

As reform moves into new territory, where there is far less unanimity and clarity, misunderstandings and controversies are likely to increase. And misunderstanding and controversy will prevail unless we make some real efforts to close a number of gaps.

To address these risks, I am pleased to tell you that today, Public Agenda is announcing a new initiative -- Education Insights -- an initiative that will partner with foundations, reform groups, education associations, and communities nationwide to address the problems of poor communication and lack of consensus that could slow progress on improving schools.

We are launching this initiative to address the undercurrent of miscommunication, confusion, and resentment that we have uncovered in our research. Majorities of superintendents and principals, for example, have told us that some mandated reforms are simply not practical in real life. Teachers have told us that they feel like scapegoats and feel left out of the loop when it comes to school decision-making. And schools simply aren"t going to be able to introduce and maintain changes of the magnitude being demanded without more involvement and a buy-in from parents and the community-at-large.

Education Insights will expand Public Agenda's work by engaging educators and community residents in dialogue about what kinds of changes local schools need. We will also work to inform the larger education reform movement about areas where miscommunication or lack of support could get in the way of progress.

Does this approach work? Based on our experience, it most certainly does. Let me, for example, describe some recent work we have done in Nebraska. In Nebraska, the State Board of Education wanted to develop a set of standards on what constitutes an "essential education" for the state's students. Rather than try to guess the public's mind, Doug Christensen, the State Commissioner of Education, asked Public Agenda to engage the public and hold conversations around the state to see what resonated with citizens.

It turned out that ordinary Nebraskans' views were generally consistent with the State Board's thinking. So, late last year, Nebraska approved its essential education goals, knowing that that it had the solid underpinning of public support.

One key component of Education Insights is the 2005 re-launch and expansion of "Reality Check," Public Agenda's signature tracking study of Americans' views on public schools. "Reality Check 2005" will show whether parents, teachers, principals, and superintendents are seeing progress on a broad range of school issues such as:

• Academic standards and college and workplace readiness
  
• Preparation, training and support for educators
  
• Closing gaps in achievement between low-income and higher-income students and between white and minority students
  
• Parental involvement
  
• Support for struggling students
  
• Reducing problems such as dropping out, truancy
  
• School and class size
  
• Adequate resources
  

Conclusion

In recent years, confidence in leadership across the board and in the nation's institutions has been slipping. Gaps in honest communication between leaders and the public are many. We need to get beyond the habit of pointing at fingers at each other. We need to get better at helping each other wrestle with thoughtful alternative solutions and weighing pros and cons of various approaches. We need to get to a place where we don't feel we are simply targets of spin.

And this is where you and your fellow communications professionals have a crucial role to play. You are the interface between the schools and the public. What people learn about their schools often comes from you. And you are also instrumental in getting what's on the community's mind on the plates of teachers and principals. You can reach out to community and education leaders and talk about the urgency of addressing the human elements in reform. You can drive this home when you make presentations and speeches, when you engage the public through articles, op-eds, or personal interaction.

There are no easy answers, and we can't wait for perfect solutions. But it is important to give people time and opportunity to absorb new information and ideas and to listen to their responses with respect.

Public Agenda's co-founder, Dan Yankelovich, has observed that our culture too often favors debate, advocacy, and conflict over dialogue and deliberation. Adversarial activity has its uses, but it is not always the best way to cope with the some of the tough gridlock issues we face.

I hope you will continue to spread the word about the benefits of workable education reform. I hope you will help each constituency listen to and learn about the concerns of the others. And it will be no small challenge to help the media do the same.

Let me conclude with expressing my heartfelt admiration for America's educators. In our research, we have learned that Americans who work in public schools are dedicated professionals with enormous talent, commitment, and a genuine commitment to educating our children. While many deserve credit, it is those of you working in public education every day who in the long run will make meaningful education reform work.

Thank you and I would be glad to take any questions.