Editor’s note: This commentary is by Margaret MacLean, an employee of the Rural School and Community Trust and a member of the Vermont State Board of Education. The views expressed are her own.
When it comes time to remodel your treasured century-old home, you start by surveying the landscape, considering the assets you have and carefully planning how you will incorporate the features needed for 21st century living. You consider what you can afford, how you can maintain structural integrity and which possibilities will stand you in good stead for the future. You act as a wise steward.
In this legislative session, a number of structural issues with our school governance system have been surfaced. Do we adjust our governance system in light of currently declining enrollment, or do we continue to have local school boards control spending for local circumstances? What ways can we streamline governance for fiscal efficiency? Can we do a better job of effectively gathering statewide comparative data? How do we develop and retain strong school leaders? And most importantly, how do we enhance opportunity for our young people? Lets consider what time could do to inform our thinking.
The model that H883 describes, which replaces school boards with principal-appointed advisory councils, comes straight from Massachusetts in 1994. It does not fit Vermont values. I imagine a skilled architect would suggest that we have the opportunity to leapfrog over this dated thinking and create a design tailor made for our foundation, which is built from a community base and values local input and decision-making.
If we embraced the idea that legislation cannot do this alone and that parents, community members, school boards members and teachers must be viewed as an integral and valued part of the process, we might be on to something. Steps of the design/implementation could be viewed as a learning exercise rich in opportunities to gather information, revisit preconceived notions, build multi-level connections and modify implementation as needed. With time we could hold a series of well-facilitated regional community conversations to capture the knowledge, thinking and wisdom community members have to offer. Our resulting system will be so much richer for creating thoughtful process. This would build understanding of the need for change, allow multiple solutions to surface to our common problems, forge agreements around the outcomes needed and the multiple ways the expressed goals could be attained.
How exactly will changing governance enhance opportunity? Opportunity is personalized and individualized to the student level, schools are implementing personal learning plans and multiple pathways, it can be argued small schools are better able to be responsive to individual student needs than larger ones.
We could survey the landscape and take a big picture view. International experts in the field of school governance are creating governance systems similar to ecological systems, they point to Finland, Hong Kong and, closer to home, to Ontario for on the ground examples. These systems have decentralized to capitalize on local strengths, while centralizing resources and support services. They have clarified and shifted roles and responsibilities at all levels in the system and have moved beyond top down hierarchical models to develop collaboration between schools and middle level governance, this approach is better suited for 21st century learning. In these governance structures, decision making about teaching and learning is made close to the child, at the school level, not at a supervisory union level. For example standards are set at the state or national level but curriculum development, the craft of teaching to meet the standards, is a local decision. If we had time before moving to action, we could examine the best governance systems internationally and perhaps invite speakers to Vermont so we can consider what they might suggest to reach our goals.
It is useful that we have a laboratory to learn from in New England. It is an example of what not to do and it comes from the six-year battle over consolidation in the state of Maine. As in Vermont the movement in Maine began with a small group of well-intentioned legislators. In 2007, Maine’s legislature enacted a law mandating school district consolidation with the goal of reducing the state’s 290 districts to approximately 80. Researchers from the University of Southern Maine, who have studied this effort, point to lessons learned in policy and process. Their research paper is worthy of full consideration in Vermont and includes:
- Ample time should be allowed for public discussion of options, stakeholder input, and consensus building for the policy.
- Avoid a “one-size-fits all” approach and instead allow flexibility for districts to achieve the goal of efficiency in different ways.
- Penalties may backfire by creating negative reactions or noncompliance.
It is not exaggerating to claim that progress in terms of educational reform in Maine has stalled over the last seven years as many have been consumed by the debate. Maine is so close we would be foolish not to take the opportunity to learn from their experience. Lets invite these folks over to Vermont so we can avoid their mistakes.
And then there is the issue of opportunity which has been talked about a lot in the Legislature but which remains fuzzy to almost everyone else. How exactly will changing governance enhance opportunity? What are we talking about here? Opportunity is personalized and individualized to the student level, schools are implementing personal learning plans and multiple pathways, it can be argued small schools are better able to be responsive to individual student needs than larger ones. All high schools do not need to offer Arabic, but students interested in studying Arabic should be able to access Arabic classes. Technology not bussing may be the answer. We need clarity on what we are talking about around the issue of opportunity. With clarity local solutions will emerge.
In Vermont we can do better, but only if we pause for thought and take the time needed prior to beginning construction. Let’s get the best advice we can, consider the research, and structure community conversations to propose viable solutions. Let’s work together to get this right. In other states they may look at century-old homes and write them off, razing them to the ground to build ill-considered McMansions that do not fit the landscape. In Vermont we can and do know better.
