Weak arguments against state’s Fort Worth ISD takeover ignore a crisis | Opinion
Skepticism about a state overhaul of Fort Worth schools is appropriate. There is much we don’t yet know about the takeover, and we have no guarantee that it will be effective.
But knee-jerk opposition or resistance ignores the most obvious and crucial fact: What the school district is doing isn’t working — and it hasn’t in a long time. Fort Worth ISD needs a big jolt, particularly at the level of the school board.
Anyone with even cursory knowledge of the district’s performance has known for years that a crisis had settled in. Too many kids can’t adequately read or understand math, and young students are set up for failure throughout their education. The district has lost enrollment for a decade, and while many factors drive that, everyone knows that people with other options will spend more on housing and tolerate longer commutes to get their children into other schools.
That’s the thing about Fort Worth ISD: Everyone knows. Everyone has known. Yet it took Fort Worth Mayor Mattie Parker stepping up publicly last year to get any movement.
And even then, the school board still lacked a sense of urgency. Trustees cashiered the superintendent they had hired less than two years before. But looking back, it’s clear that was perfunctory, a way to buy time. It took months more for any plans resembling reform to come into focus, and then, the catalyst was new Superintendent Karen Molinar, not the board.
Three reasons cited for opposing Fort Worth ISD takeover
Opponents of Texas Education Commissioner Mike Morath’s oversight decision offer three chief arguments: that it’s anti-democratic, that the problem in schools is too much focus on testing and that poor state funding is why FWISD schools underperform. Let’s take them in reverse order.
If state spending on schools is the culprit, why is Fort Worth consistently behind other districts? It’s not like FWISD has been singled out for cuts or mistreatment. The enrollment decline does reduce state allocations, but money alone cannot explain — or fix — what ails FWISD.
The backlash to standardized testing is in its second decade, and it’s not entirely without merit. But here again, Fort Worth is in the same boat as other districts. Among them are Dallas and other large, urban districts with huge numbers of disadvantaged students. Fort Worth lags behind all of them, and there’s no law requiring more or different testing on this side of DFW.
The argument against testing has a certain shoot-the-messenger quality. Most acknowledge the need for measurement and accountability, but the case often boils down to: Write us checks, let us grade our own progress, and don’t ask questions.
Sorry, that’s not good enough. We must evaluate educational achievement by comparing districts, states and, in a competitive global economy, nations. We spend far too much money on public education to not have precise data on what’s working and what’s not. Ask any business leader if he or she funds a department or division and doesn’t demand regular progress reports.
And then there’s democracy. A loss of local control is not to be taken lightly. But it’s not as if the Fort Worth ISD board is a robust example of governance. Voters pay almost no attention. Turnout in elections is pitiful, with trustees representing tends of thousands of voters often winning office with fewer than 3,000 votes.
With the current crisis and debate raging, five board seats were on the ballot in May. Two incumbents drew no opposition. The other three won without breaking a sweat.
Perhaps democracy ultimately means that voters can, if determined or neglectful enough, allow their institutions to crumble. But Texas’ constitution and laws obligate the state to ensure adequate public education. If the chief obstacle is public indifference to who gets elected to run the district, it falls to the state to intervene.
Besides, Morath and his team answer to elected leaders, too. If the Texas Education Agency oversteps or underperforms, the governor and the Legislature have to address it.
State officials will demand school accountability
These arguments against the takeover contradict each other. State (or federal) money does not come without obligations. If lawmakers demand performance information and accountability, they’re going to get it, because they control the purse strings. And shifting more of the financial burden to the state, as so many want, will only give the Legislature more leverage.
Opponents need a reminder of what exactly is happening here. When two-thirds of third-graders can’t adequately read, when more than 60% of students miss grade level across subjects, those are not just statistics or snapshots. That’s a specific number of students every year whom we’ve all failed — most of them poor and from minority groups.
Every year that our school board twiddles its thumbs, more 7- and 8-year-olds take a step back in life. Thousands have their futures diminished while we argue about funding, tests and which level of elected government runs the school district.
It’s an emergency and should be approached like a house fire or car wreck — save the children first.
