PDK International | Phi Delta Kappan: Rose V78 N10 pp 765-768 June 1997

Find more Kappan articles in the
searchable PDK Publications Archive

The Future of the Public Schools:A Public Discussion

By Lowell C. Rose and Dana Rapp

How to engage the public in a discussion of the future of the public schools should be at the top of every community's agenda, according to Mr. Rose and Mr. Rapp. Forums such as those described here offer one way of reaching that goal.

ENGAGING the public in a discussion of the public schools is a challenging, difficult, and potentially promising activity. This is the conclusion drawn from the 28 forums that Phi Delta Kappa, in cooperation with the Center on Education Policy (CEP) and the National PTA, conducted during the past year. The undertaking is challenging because a great deal of time and energy are required to bring people together in a situation in which productive discussion can be held. It is difficult because people are reluctant to spend the time required to engage in substantive discussion, because some see the effort as a means of defending the status quo and are reluctant to participate, and because building the database needed to support informed discussion is not easy. It is promising because the public, once engaged, demonstrates a keen interest in the public schools, a willingness to discuss the issues presented, and a sincere desire to make the schools better.

Background

Engaging the public in discussion is not a new idea for Phi Delta Kappa. In 1989 a Phi Delta Kappa commission submitted a report suggesting that the organization engage the public at the community level in discussions designed to build support for the public schools. The centerpiece of those discussions was to be an easy-to-read publication tracing the history of the public schools and the contributions they have made to America. The Phi Delta Kappa board of directors appropriated funds to underwrite the effort and asked Ralph Tyler to produce the proposed publication. Unfortunately, Tyler's health did not permit, and, when other efforts to get the publication written proved unsuccessful, the project languished.

Those at Phi Delta Kappa were, therefore, delighted when Jack Jennings, executive director of the Center on Education Policy (CEP), came forward in the fall of 1995 to ask about Phi Delta Kappa's interest in publishing a booklet, Do We Still Need Public Schools? This publication did exactly what the original Phi Delta Kappa commission had hoped: it detailed why public schools were established and then asked whether those reasons are still valid.

Plans for engaging the public at the community level were quickly revived, and CEP was invited to be a partner in the effort. Jennings, a strong believer in the need to reach out to the public, became an enthusiastic advocate for the project. It was through his efforts that the National PTA became a partner and agreed to provide some funding, support for the forums, and administrative leadership where needed. With this support and major funding provided by Phi Delta Kappa and the Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation, the project was ready to go forward.

The Intent

The planning committee, consisting of representatives of Phi Delta Kappa, Jack Jennings of CEP, and Shirley Igo of the National PTA, resolved to conduct a series of forums in which a widely representative group of stakeholders would come together to discuss the future of the public schools. How to do that became the focus of planning. The committee believed it was charting new ground and quickly determined that the initial effort should be regarded as a learning experience.

The committee began its work by developing a rationale for the effort. It felt it best to recognize from the start that the three sponsoring agencies would be identified as organizations that believe that the public schools are better than they are given credit for being. However, the committee considered that fact largely irrelevant since these organizations also freely acknowledge that the public schools are not nearly as good as they can be or need to be. The committee also concluded that, whatever the success of the various reform efforts, the demographics of American education are such that the overwhelming majority of American children are going to be educated in the public schools for the foreseeable future. Thus the committee deemed it logical to set about making these schools as good as they can possibly be. And that became the intent of the forums.

Identifying Forum Sites

The initial goal of the project was to conduct 25 forums during the 1996-97 school year. An invitation was issued to all Phi Delta Kappa chapters to serve as local sponsors and organizers. The chapters were urged to reach out to involve other institutions and organizations as co-sponsors. Information distributed to the chapters also stressed that the forums were to be invitational and should include a broadly representative group of stakeholders, probably no more than 30% to 40% of them educators. The initial proposals received from chapters led to the selection of 22 sites.

A review of these sites led the planners to conclude that urban centers were underrepresented. Thus an effort was made to locate sponsors in the nation's cities, and Chicago, Los Angeles, and Ft. Lauderdale soon joined the list of forum sites. At the same time, the National PTA accepted responsibility for planning forums in Atlanta and Miami.

Preparing for the Forums

Our initial efforts in preparing for the forums focused on developing materials that would be used to support the discussion. The planning committee determined that the forums would be structured around three questions:

What are the purposes of the public schools?

How effective are the public schools in achieving those purposes?

What changes are necessary to make the public schools as effective as we want them to be?

It was determined that two separate manuals would be developed, the first providing instructions for planning and conducting a forum and the second including the activities that would be used in actually conducting a forum. Jack Frymier, senior fellow at Phi Delta Kappa, accepted the responsibility for preparing these manuals.

The committee also decided to take steps to produce a videotape that could be used to introduce the discussion on the purposes of education. This video is based on Jennings' pamphlet, Do We Still Need Public Schools? It runs 15 minutes. The two manuals, Jennings' pamphlet, and a companion publication, The Good -- and the Not-So-Good -- News About American Schools, were the primary materials that Phi Delta Kappa provided for each forum. Phi Delta Kappa also compiled a summary of national data on the public schools regarding such factors as graduation rates, dropout rates, test scores, and so on. Local forum sponsors were to supplement this information with state and local data.

A very important step in preparing for the forums was bringing the local forum directors to Phi Delta Kappa headquarters to participate in a pilot forum that tested the materials and procedures that had been developed. This meeting was held in May 1996. The experience of the pilot forum led to extensive revision of the materials and to changes in the procedures. It was an interesting meeting in that the group struggled with problems during the first part of the session, reconvened so that individuals could provide their own input, and concluded with enthusiasm and the expressed feeling that all were participants in a truly important effort.

Another key decision in preparing for the forums was that, on request, Phi Delta Kappa would provide moderators for the forums. One of the reasons for making this offer was to put the sponsoring groups in a position to observe and evaluate the forums. Members of the planning committee agreed to accept the responsibility to serve as moderators. It was also thought that providing experienced moderators would bring a degree of uniformity to the forums and would contribute to the overall success of the effort.

It is interesting that, at the time of the pilot forum, many local directors expressed the need to modify the recommended format to meet local conditions. A number also said they preferred to have a local person fill the role of moderator. The planning committee encouraged such adaptations in the belief that it would be valuable to test a wide variety of formats. However, as it turned out, few modifications were ultimately made, and moderators provided by Phi Delta Kappa were used exclusively.

Implementation

The first of the scheduled forums was conducted in Nashville, Tennessee, in October 1996, and the last was held in Miami, Florida, in February 1997. Forums were actually held at all but two of the original 25 sites selected. Local sponsors in Sacramento and Minneapolis were forced to cancel when they were unable to build interest on the part of other groups in the community. In both of these cases, there was some indication that similar planning efforts were already under way. As the forums proceeded, other parties desiring to conduct a forum emerged, and additional sites were added to reach the final total of 28.

As each forum was held, the moderator submitted a report to Phi Delta Kappa headquarters. These reports were analyzed, and new recommendations were made to those whose forums were still to come. One of the lessons learned early on, for example, was that the best physical arrangement consisted of one large room with the participants seated eight to 10 to a table. In this setting, it was easy to move from plenary session into small-group activities and back, without interrupting the flow or losing time. Another early lesson was that participants wanted feedback on what they were doing as quickly as possible. The original idea of having one summary session occur at the end of the forum was abandoned, and at most of the later forums feedback was provided as soon as summary data for each part of the forum could be compiled.

After the first few forums, it became obvious that simply sending out invitations to potential participants would not produce the kind of representative group desired. The forums that succeeded made multiple contacts with invitees. This led to a recommendation that personal contact be made before the invitations were mailed, that the letters of invitation then be sent, and that the invitations be followed by personal contact with those who did not respond right away.

Not surprisingly, we quickly learned that participants wanted to talk and were somewhat wary of receiving information that might seem to bias their views. The original plan had been to start the discussion of purposes with the videotape summarizing Do We Still Need Public Schools? After the initial reactions to this practice, some forums did not use the tape at all, and others viewed it after the discussion of purposes had been completed rather than before.

What Are the Public's Attitudes?

The results of the 28 forums already conducted are now in the process of being compiled. It is possible, however, to draw some preliminary conclusions as to what the participants believe. Before doing so, though, we need to acknowledge that 28 forums do not provide a sufficient basis for drawing conclusions that can be generalized to the public at large. These forums were the first in a series, were subject to all the problems described herein, and were to some extent a learning experience. Many of the forum groups were not as representative of the public as we would have liked. Still, given these caveats, the preliminary results are interesting.

Insofar as the purposes of the public schools are concerned, forum participants reflected considerable agreement. They identified preparing graduates to be responsible citizens and to be economically self-sufficient as the primary purposes of the public schools. This was true across the country.

In many forums there was much discussion of teaching "the basics." Clearly, forum participants believed this to be a primary function of the schools. The discussion suggested, however, that there might not be consensus as to exactly what "the basics" include. The ability to be lifelong learners and proficiency in the use of technology were two items often added to the list.

Forum participants tended to place less emphasis on such goals as improving self-concept, helping students learn to live happy and productive lives, and addressing issues related to diversity. The discussions seemed to indicate that participants thought these purposes were important, but that they believed they would take care of themselves if the schools turned out students who were well-grounded in the basics and prepared to be good, economically self-sufficient citizens.

With regard to the effectiveness of the public schools in the forum communities, the results were less clear. When assigning grades to the local schools, participants tended to give them even higher marks than respondents to the annual Phi Delta Kappa/Gallup polls typically do. However, in discussing the question of effectiveness, participants often expressed frustration. They did not feel that they had the necessary information or expertise to make an objective evaluation, and they seemed to feel that they lacked criteria for defining what an "effective school" would be.

Phi Delta Kappa had prepared information from a national database on such selected factors as dropout rates, average scores on the SAT I, and graduation rates. Local planners were to have supplemented these data with data for the local schools. In practice, this step proved problematic. Questions were raised as to how dropout rates, graduation rates, and so on were calculated. Forum participants were also quick to recognize that knowing the average SAT scores for local students was not very helpful without some means of predicting the kinds of scores a given student body could be expected to produce. One participant summed up the frustration by saying, "I think we have pretty good schools, yet the voter turnout in the elections in this community is really low. Does that mean we are not graduating students with acceptable citizenship skills?"

On the matter of what we need to change in the public schools, almost all the suggestions dealt with improving and strengthening things that schools are already doing. One suggestion common across all forums was the need to provide even more opportunities for parent involvement. Another common suggestion was that higher achievement standards be put into place. Ideas such as a stronger core curriculum and professionalization of teachers also surfaced frequently.

Perhaps the most interesting and significant conclusion from this series of forums is that the participants clearly believed that the changes needed to move the public schools to the desired level of effectiveness can be made within the present structure. There was no indication that the public is ready to abandon the public schools or even to change them dramatically. The participants in the forums gave strong indications that they want the schools to improve, but they just as clearly indicated that that improvement should start with and build on what we now have.

Even in those forums that were truly representative of an entire community, ideas for reform that involve alternatives to the public schools (e.g., voucher plans, charter schools, private contracting) were seldom mentioned. Neither were the various initiatives undertaken by the federal government. When the subject of responsibility was raised, it was clear that participants felt that dealing with the problems of the public schools was a state and local matter. Indeed, in most cases, the emphasis was squarely on the local.

What Have We Learned About Engaging the Public?

Although much significant information surfaced in these 28 forums, their major value may well be in what they tell us about the process of engaging the public. Here are some of the lessons we learned about that process.

Once they are persuaded to participate, stakeholders in education at the community level respond enthusiastically to the opportunity to discuss the future of the public schools. The evaluation reports from all the forums indicate that the participants left with the feeling that they had been a part of something important, useful, and worthwhile -- something that could lead to school improvement.

Participants indicated that they left the forums better-informed but that they had not changed the opinions they brought to the forums.

The format used in the forums, as it evolved, is a productive means of engaging the public. Alternating between discussion in a plenary session and discussion in small groups provides the means of moving toward consensus while offering ample opportunity for individual input. Frequent reporting back to the group on decisions taken helps to keep the discussion focused and moving forward.

The three questions on which the initial series of forums focused are appropriate questions that catch the interest of participants. Dealing first with the purposes of the public schools, then with current effectiveness, and finally with the changes needed provides a logical flow to which participants respond well.

But the lessons we learned from this series of forums also present us with challenges that must be addressed by planners as they go forward.

The success of a forum depends on involving a broadly representative group of stakeholders. A forum does little good if it is dominated by educators. Parents, community leaders, students, the business community, and school critics all have a stake in the public schools and must be involved. Accomplishing this goal is hard work and means that the local planners must go beyond simply issuing invitations. One successful strategy is to broaden the sponsorship at the local level so that a forum is regarded as a community activity rather than a school activity.

The component of the forums that seeks to evaluate the effectiveness of the local schools must be improved. A simplified, thoroughly documented database is one obvious need. However, this will not be the entire answer. This area of forum activity needs to be carefully evaluated and revised in preparation for future forums.

Increased attention needs to be given to what happens once a forum is over. In their original proposals, the local sponsoring groups for the first series of forums included plans for follow-up activity. And some good things are happening. At one of the original sites, those who planned the forum have since conducted two additional forums for individual school districts. At several forum sites, plans have been made for participants to reassemble to discuss the next steps to be taken. However, as future forums are planned, expected outcomes and follow-up steps need to be more clearly defined and more widely pursued. Virtually all participants in the original 28 forums indicated that they would attend another session and would recommend the forums to others.

Next Steps

These 28 forums are intended to be but the first step in an ongoing activity. Phi Delta Kappa, the Center on Education Policy, and the National PTA are committed to keeping this effort going. Phi Delta Kappa has already issued an invitation to each of its chapters to assume the responsibility for sponsoring a forum in 1997-98. External funding to support this effort is currently being sought from those foundations that have made engaging the public a priority. However, whether or not such funding is secured, the original sponsoring organizations will carry the effort as far as possible with their own resources.

The materials prepared for the first series of forums will be revised to take account of the lessons learned. The revised materials will be used in the next series of forums and will be made available to others who wish to sponsor forums. Phi Delta Kappa, CEP, and the National PTA hope to sponsor 50 forums during the 1997-98 school year. In addition, they will sponsor a national forum in Indianapolis on 23-25 October 1997. This national forum will give participants the opportunity to take part in a meeting that will produce conclusions and recommendations; share information on the status of the public schools, their strengths, and the areas in need of improvement; and prepare them to plan and conduct forums in their local communities.

The forums that Phi Delta Kappa, CEP, and the National PTA have conducted and plan to conduct provide an important way of engaging the public. While such forums are obviously not the only way, they do offer a tested means of engaging the public that is supported by materials and a process that has been shown to work. As the forum effort goes forward, we hope that others will decide to use the materials and the process to plan and conduct their own forums. If the local forum activity is as successful as the sponsoring organizations expect, it should reach the point where it can go forward on its own momentum in each community.

Whatever the future holds, the goal of engaging the public is one that must be embraced and accepted by every community and its schools. Jack Jennings has noted that school improvement must start on a school-by-school and community-by-community basis. And the public is the vital element in that process. How to engage the public in a discussion of the future of the public schools should be at the top of every community's agenda. Forums such as those described here offer one way of reaching that goal.

LOWELL C. ROSE is executive director emeritus of Phi Delta Kappa International, Bloomington, Ind., and director of the Public School Forum project. DANA RAPP is a doctoral student in education policy studies at Indiana University, Bloomington.