By Moira Cullen, DFER Colorado State Director
As many may already know, Colorado was recently granted a waiver from NCLB by Secretary of Education Arne Duncan. We think the waiver makes sense given the development of Colorado’s improved local accountability. However, exercising this accountability may lead to a developing tension as to whether education reformers should favor school choice or school quality. Moveover, what happens if the Feds emphasize quality while a state favors choice?
In many ways, the tension between choice and quality is actually a contest between principle and pragmatism. A long slew of education advocates see school choice as a central and fundamental principle of reform. School choice, and the accompanying market mechanisms, will lead to better schools. Quality will be self-correcting, as schools with poor results will fail to attract families. Choice is paramount to quality.
On the other hand, pragmatists believe that our education institutions – be they at the local, district or state level – have a responsibility to ensure that children are receiving a quality education. Parents sometimes make bad choices, and there needs to be standards to protect students. They believe quality is paramount to choice.
NCLB waivers grant states the ability to provide their own accountability standards. But what happens if the accountability granted in the NCLB waivers is applied to further the principle of school choice and not the pragmatism of school quality?
Up until recently, the tension between choice and quality was largely hypothetical. However, in large part thanks to the efforts of education reform, quantitative metrics of quality are increasingly available. The ability to objectively compare schools has made the tension between choice and quality less abstract. Partly under pressure from Federal mandates such as NCLB, many districts are now considering closure of chronically low-performing schools.