Dr. John Jackson Lecture - Advocacy and Education

I just got back from a lecture by Dr. John Jackson, the current President of the Schott Foundation for Public Education. The speech was sponsored by the Center for Evaluation and Education Policy, so thanks to them.

Just a few reflections to share:

1. Dr. Jackson spoke of making education a fundamental right, as a legal matter (Dr. Jackson is also a J.D. from U. of Illinois). I really feel the movement to make education a fundamental right is growing. He is not the first person I heard speak about this lately and don't be surprised if in a few years there is serious progress toward that goal. (Also see my earlier post about the Great Civil Rights Issue of Our Time).
   
2. Dr. Jackson also addressed the way we define "drop-out" or "graduation rate" within NCLB and the need to establish a federal definition of those terms. Presently, these terms are addressed state-by-state, so the definitions tend to vary. This variance is hiding drop-outs in many cases. He offered the possible definition of measuring drop-outs by the number of kids that enter as freshmen in high school and the number that graduate after 4 (or 5) years. Seems reasonable, right? Well, although any definition would have to be more complicated to account for various issues such as transfers, etc., the fundamental principle of counting how many kids are leaving the system is a valid one, and one I would hope would be included in this round of NCLB. Perhaps the federal governmental could adopt some different language (other than the politically charged "drop-out" or "graduation rate" language) to achieve the same goal.
   
3. The next two points are related. First, Dr. Jackson made "advocacy" a central theme of his presentation. That everyone has their place to advocate within this system and that it is part of their role as educators or educational leaders. I cannot stress how much I agree with this point. The educational system is built upon democratic systems. Democratic systems, in their very nature, rely on voices of the people (without the people and their voices, there would be no government - that is the point). If the people's voices are not heard, the system ceases to function effectively. Will many competing voices cause conflicts? Of course, but conflict is encouraged within democratic systems. If advocacy was encouraged more and made a central function of the job of educators, education would be much better off.
   
4. There is a reason I agree with Dr. Jackson on point 3, above. It is because we have similar backgrounds in law and education. If you have not had the pleasure of law school (avoid at all costs), it is hard to know what goes on there. But, let me just say this - there is no way you can make it through law school without a deep understanding (although, perhaps, still be unable to articulate it) of how power works in a capitalist-based democracy. A few days working with the education system and even a young lawyer will quickly realize why there is so little power in the system. For the most part, educators don't even know there is a game, let alone the rules of the game, and very, very few educators actually play the game in any meaningful way. Legislators, lobbyists, CEO's and others with power in the system are free to ignore the education system, and, especially educators, who are not even on the sidelines watching the game (take a poll of the educators in your local school tomorrow to see how many know NCLB Reauthorization Hearings are going on right now). So, wanna know how to play the game? Advocacy.