forum
Education Next
talks to
Virtual
J O H N C H U B B,
T E R RY M O E ,
and
L A R RY CU BA N
Schools
Will education technology
change the nature of learning?
Can new education technologies short-circuit change-resistant politics and
remake our schools? Or are well-intended advocates once again overhyping the abil-
JOHN CHUBB
ity of electrons and processors to solve thorny problems of teaching and learning?
In this Education Next forum, John Chubb of Edison Schools and Stanford Univer-
sity political scientist Terry Moe make the case for the transformative power of today’s
technology. Twenty years ago, this duo coauthored the debate-changing Politics,
Markets, and America’s Schools. Their new book, Liberating Learning: Technology,
Politics, and the Future of American Education, lays out a bold vision of the future.
A more skeptical view of technology’s potential impact on education is offered by
Larry Cuban, professor emeritus of education at Stanford University and author
TERRY MOE
of Oversold and Underused: Computers in the Classroom.
EDUCATION NEXT: How likely is it and costless, put vast storehouses of informa-
that technology will make advances tion within reach of everyone on the planet,
in education in the next decade that and in countless other ways transformed how
go far beyond any changes that have life is lived. Technology is destined to trans-
taken place in the past? form American education as well. The driver
of change is simple enough: technology has
John Chubb and Terry Moe: The world- enormous benefits for the learning process,
wide revolution in information technology and they promise to change the nature of
has globalized the international economy, schooling and heighten its productivity. Cur- LARRY CUBAN
made communication virtually instantaneous ricula, teaching methods, and schedules can
ILLUSTRATION / THIRD EYE IMAGES, LONNIE BUSCH/CONRAD ZOBEL
www.educationnext.org W I N T E R 2 0 0 9 / E D U C AT I O N N E X T 43
all be customized to meet the learning styles unions—that are extraordinarily powerful in
Technology is and life situations of individual students; politics, and are even now taking action to
education can be freed from the geographic prevent technology from transforming
going to have constraints of districts and brick-and-mor- American education.
transformative tar buildings; coursework from the most Such resistance is not new. Technology is
remedial to the most advanced can be made just the latest target of their politics of block-
effects not only available to everyone; students can have ing. The key question is whether this resis-
on education, but more interaction with teachers and one tance can be overcome. And the answer, as we
another; parents can readily be included will later explain, is yes. Technology is going
also on politics— in the education process; sophisticated data to have transformative effects not only on
effects that will systems can measure and guide perfor- education, but also on politics—effects that
mance; and schools can be operated at will weaken the opponents of change and
weaken the lower cost with technology (which is rela- open the political gates. This is the real crux
opponents of tively cheap) substituted for labor (which of the story. In the years ahead, it is the polit-
is relatively expensive). ical transformation that will make the edu-
change and open But the advance of technology is also cational transformation possible.
the political threatening to powerful education groups,
and they will resist it in the political process. Larry Cuban: Technology is linked to
gates. Precisely because technology promises to progress in the American mind and has a
— JC and TM transform the core components of school- rich history in the culture. Because both
ing, it is inevitably disruptive to the jobs, rou- public and private schooling have been
tines, and resources of the people whose deeply embedded in society for the past
livelihoods derive from the existing system. three centuries, educational technology (by
And these people are represented by orga- which I mean the various communication
nizations—most prominently, the teachers and information devices and processes that
Virtual School,
120
Real Growth
(Figure 1)
Course enrollments (in thousands)
100
The Florida Virtual School
has seen course enroll- 80
ments grow dramatically,
from 77 at its 1997 incep-
60
tion to 113,900 course
enrollments in the
2007–08 school year. 40
While nonpublic school
students account for most 20
middle-school enrollments,
the much larger enroll-
ment in high school 0
97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
courses is driven by public
Year
school students.
44 E D U C AT I O N N E X T / W I N T E R 2 0 0 9 www.educationnext.org
forum
ED TECH CHUBB, MOE, & CUBAN
administrators and teachers use to make EN: What can we learn from tech-
schooling efficient and effective) also has a nological adoption in education in
rich history (e.g., textbooks, chalkboard, the past?
film, radio, computers).
U.S. school reformers have a tradition LC: In tracking such technological innova-
of overselling and underusing technological tions as film, radio, television, videocas-
innovations. Thus the chances of widespread settes, and desktop computers over the past
adoption in schools of new classroom tech- half century, I found a common cycle. First,
nologies in the next decade are in the 70 to the promoters’ exhilaration splashes over
90 percent probability range, but the prob- decisionmakers as they purchase and deploy
ability of routine use in most schools for equipment in schools and classrooms. Then
instruction is much lower, in the 10 to 20 academics conduct studies to determine the
percent range. Through social networks of effectiveness of the innovation as compared
policymakers, researchers, practitioners, and to standard practice; they survey teachers U.S. school
tech promoters, pace-setting urban and sub- and occasionally visit classrooms to see stu-
urban districts adopt innovations and then dent and teacher use of the innovation. Aca- reformers have
adapt them to fit the local context and goals. demics often find that the technological a tradition of
Over time, laggards go through the same innovation is just as good as—seldom supe-
process, retaining parts of the innovation, rior to—conventional instruction in con- overselling and
and then move on to the next one. In pub- veying information and teaching skills. They underusing
lic schools, changes occur piecemeal and also find that classroom use is less than
incrementally. Regardless of what technolog- expected. Formal adoption of high-tech technological
ical enthusiasts predict, no “revolutions” in innovations does not mean teachers have innovations.
technology use have occurred in U.S. schools total access to devices or use them on a daily
and classrooms. But evolution does. basis. Such studies often unleash stinging — LC
100%
90
Share of courses and sudents
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Middle school High school Middle school High school
Courses Students
Charter school Home school Private school Public school
NOTE: Values are based on pooled enrollment data from the 2004–05 and the 2005–06 school years.
SOURCES: Florida Taxwatch
www.educationnext.org W I N T E R 2 0 0 9 / E D U C AT I O N N E X T 45
College Students Learning Online (Figure 2)
The percentage of students at U.S. postsecondary institutions taking at least one online course
doubled between 2002 and 2006.
25%
Percentage of students 20
15
10
5
0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Year
SOURCE: I. Elaine Allen and Jeff Seaman, “Online Nation: Five Years of Growth in Online Learning,” Babson Survey Research Group, October 2007
rebukes of administrators and teachers for to these questions, perhaps the predictable
spending scarce dollars on expensive cycle might be interrupted.
Technological machinery that fails to display superiority
over existing techniques of instruction and, JC and TM: It is a mistake to view previ-
innovations of even worse, is only occasionally used. ous technological innovations—television,
the past are in a Few earnest champions of classroom say—as telling indicators of how informa-
technology understand the multiple and tion technology will affect the nation’s
different league— complicated roles teachers perform, address school system. Yes, television has done lit-
by many orders of the realities of classrooms within age-graded tle to change public education. And yes, the
schools, respect teacher expertise, or con- failure to put it to more creative uses does
magnitude—from sider the practical questions teachers ask highlight how weak the incentives are
the revolution in about any technological innovation that a among educators for throwing off the chains
school board and superintendent decide to of tradition.
information adopt, buy, and deploy. Is the new technol- But television is a simple, one-way con-
technology. ogy simple to use? Versatile? Reliable? veyor of information that allows for no inter-
Durable? How much energy and time will action or input. Its potential for education
—JC and TM I as a teacher have to expend to use the new was limited from the outset. The fact is, tele-
technology for what net return in enhanced vision and other technological innovations
student learning? Will the innovation help of the past are in a different league—by many
me solve problems that I face in the class- orders of magnitude—from the revolution in
room? Providing teachers with economic information technology. This revolution is
or organizational incentives to use technol- not a reform. It is a new social reality.
ogy won’t answer these practical questions. Today’s public educators are part of soci-
Were policymakers, researchers, designers of ety. They want to use computers and mod-
the innovation, and business-inspired ernize their schools, and evidence suggests
reformers to ask and then consider answers they have been moving in this direction.
46 E D U C AT I O N N E X T / W I N T E R 2 0 0 9 www.educationnext.org
forum
ED TECH CHUBB, MOE, & CUBAN
But absent competitive pressure, they have We agree that these forces will allow vir-
incentives to make only the most incremen- tual schools to get a foothold in public edu-
tal of changes, those that don’t threaten any- cation, and thus that there is something to
one’s jobs or disrupt established routines. learn from private industry. But public edu- Few earnest
Their approach to information technology cation is part of government, and is not sub- champions
is rooted in the status quo: it is about mak- ject to the competitive dynamics of the mar-
ing the existing system work better without ketplace. The teachers unions and their allies of classroom
really changing it. In the new social reality, will be wary of contracting out educational technology
however, this isn’t going to cut it. There will services, even to help groups that are cur-
be competition. There will be pressure. There rently underserved, because they know where understand the
will be change. it all leads. Their incentive is to resist. And multiple and
they will try to use their power to keep the
EN: What, if anything, can we learn lid on, and maintain control over, the num- complicated roles
from the processes of technological bers and types of cyberschools that can move teachers perform.
change in other industries? into the field. That’s why, in the end, it all
comes down to politics—and whether the —LC
JC and TM: Dramatic advances in infor- opponents can block.
mation technology have transformed the
products we buy and the business firms that LC: Manufacturing, banking, and commu-
make them. An illuminating perspective on nications are a few of the industries that
how these changes have come about in pri- have been transformed technologically.
vate industry can be found in Clayton Chris- While public schools and such industries
tensen’s work on “disruptive innovation.” have common characteristics (e.g., leaders,
Apple, for instance, successfully introduced headquarters staff who coordinate and con-
its personal computer as a toy for children, trol people, bureaucratic rules, planning for
thus not directly competing with DEC (Dig- the future, building budgets, providing ser-
ital Equipment Corporation) and other vices), they differ in substantial and funda-
established makers of mainframe and mini- mental ways. First, their purposes differ.
computers. Its market was “nonconsumers”: Industries seek profit while tax-supported
people not being served by the big manufac- schools are expected to convert children into
turers, and for whom the alternative was adults who are literate, law abiding, engaged
nothing. In so doing, Apple did not pro- in their communities, informed about issues,
voke the opposition of the big boys, and economically independent, and respectful
personal computers soon flourished. of differences among Americans. Schools
In Disrupting Class, Christensen and are held publicly responsible for achieving
coauthors Curtis Johnson and Michael Horn those ends; industries are responsible to
argue that technology will triumph in pub- shareholders only. Second, in deciding poli-
lic education in the same way. Virtual schools, cies, schools are accountable for democra-
for example, can offer AP physics or remedial tic and public deliberations; even with recent
math or Mandarin or whatever else local revelations of corrupt practices among CEOs
districts are not offering. And they can cater and boards of directors and meltdowns in
to constituencies—students who are gifted, the mortgage lending community, minimal
live in rural or inner city areas, need extra public oversight of corporate governance
credits for graduation, and so on—that are currently exists. Finally, the criteria for suc-
underserved by the current system. In so cess differ. Businesses have earning reports
doing, virtual schools can compete against and stock prices as measures of success;
nothing (see “How Do We Transform Our schools seeking multiple purposes—see
Schools,” features, Summer 2008). And above—are expected to show immediate,
because of budget constraints and parent-stu- midterm, and long-term results, many of
dent demand, districts and states will wel- which are hardly reducible to numbers.
come these new suppliers and won’t see them One industry that is outside of K–12
as threats to be snuffed out (see Figure 1). education yet similar to it in its multiple
www.educationnext.org W I N T E R 2 0 0 9 / E D U C AT I O N N E X T 47
public purposes and has unreservedly students in 2003 to 2 or 3 million by the end
embraced computer-based technologies is of the decade. The slight uptick would be due
higher education (see Figure 2). Because to both the availability of technology and a
higher education is not compulsory and far broader menu of choices for parents.
adults enroll voluntarily in colleges and uni- Online college curricula and offerings from
versities, market incentives come into play. for-profit entrepreneurs give home-school-
Colleges and universities look for a com- ing, anxious college-driven, and rural par-
petitive edge that will give them an advan- ents new options. Even though cheerleaders
In the future, tage in their market niche. Both public and for distance learning have predicted whole-
private institutions seek to attract students sale changes in conventional site-based
American education and faculty and increase their prestige among schools for decades, such changes will occur
will become a blend similarly situated schools. Moreover, higher at the periphery, not the center. Most parents
education is largely nonunion. will continue to send their children to brick-
of “home schooling” Whereas some of these institutions go for and-mortar public schools and expect those
—differently the working adult market (e.g., University of schools to achieve the many goals men-
Phoenix) with extensive online course offer- tioned above. I do not predict that most
construed—and ings, most colleges and universities remain high school students will enroll in online
brick-and-mortar research and teaching organizations with schools. Yes, many will take a course here and
online courses that are marginal to their there, but the comprehensive high school
public schooling. core operations. Still, nearly every professor in most suburban districts and prolifera-
—JC and TM and student has at least one computer avail- tion of small high schools in urban systems
able daily (many have two or more). For will continue to enroll the vast majority of
universities and four-year colleges, comput- eligible teenagers.
ers have transformed academic research and
analysis in the natural and social sciences, JC and TM: With the advance of technol-
humanities, and professional schools. ogy, home schooling is destined to
The puzzle is teaching, which has not increase—and decrease. It will increase
been transformed. Classroom instruction because distance learning will offer a vast
for large groups of students (25 or more) array of new opportunities, and learning
across community colleges, state universities, from “home”—from anywhere but the
and elite institutions differs little from what school building—will gain dramatically in
occurs in secondary public schools. That popularity. Many more students will take
fact suggests that even with abundant access all their classes through virtual schools. But
to new technologies, competitive market more important, the great majority of Amer-
pressures, no union interference, and enor- ican students will ultimately choose to take
mous encouragement from institutional some of their classes remotely and some
policymakers, constancy in patterns of teach- through brick-and-mortar schools.
ing sets the education context apart from On the other hand, far fewer kids will be
those industries that have experienced top- home schooled in the traditional sense. In
to-bottom technological transformation. the past, home schooling meant that parents
taught their kids at home. But in the com-
EN: Do you think that technological ing years, almost all the kids who study
change is likely to increase signifi- entirely “at home” actually will be “going to
cantly the amount of home school- school”: schools that have well-developed
ing? Why or why not? curricula and bona fide teachers and admin-
istrators, but operate at a distance.
LC: Cyberschools and distance education In the future, then, home schooling as we
have increasingly connected isolated rural know it will largely cease to exist, and the
students and home-schooled children to boundaries between learning at home and
teachers and resources that were heretofore public schooling will essentially break down.
unavailable to them. Slight increases in home American education will become a blend of
schooling may occur—say from 1.1 million “home schooling”—differently construed—
48 E D U C AT I O N N E X T / W I N T E R 2 0 0 9 www.educationnext.org
forum
ED TECH CHUBB, MOE, & CUBAN
and brick-and-mortar public schooling. Most It will occur faster and more consequentially
students will do some of their academic in districts and states where unions are
coursework outside the brick-and-mortar weak, where parent demand and involve-
setting—making home schooling a very ment are high, where unmet needs are
mainstream activity—and traditional home greatest, and where budgets are tightly con- The bedrock of
schoolers will be more fully integrated into the strained. But as the tide begins to rise, and
larger education system (see “Home School- as the balance of power in politics begins to schooling remains
ing Goes Mainstream,” features, p. 10). shift with it, the other districts and states an organizational
All of this will be resisted by the unions will eventually follow.
and their allies, because today’s home school- structure introduced
ers are not part of current education budgets, LC: Except for those public charter schools, in the mid-19th
and as they join the system they are competi- magnets, and theme-driven schools that
tors for scarce resources. But long term, as advertise themselves as using technology, century: the age-
technology changes the balance of political including those operated by for-profit and graded school, where
power, the resistance will fail. nonprofit organizations such as High Tech
High, Edison, and Mosaica, I have not found each teacher has
EN: Are charter schools, private charter or private schools (a highly diverse her classroom and
schools, or afterschool programs sector made up of elite independents and
likely to adopt innovations more sectarian and nonsectarian schools) more students of roughly
rapidly than traditional district open (or closed) to technological innova- the same age have to
schools? tions than public schools. Increased compe-
tition from charter schools may have mod- learn a chunk of the
JC and TM: The early adopters will arise est to strong effects in urban districts (but curriculum before
from outside the traditional public school not suburban or rural ones), where a criti-
system. Most important are charter schools cal mass (one-third or more) of students being promoted
that deliver education entirely over the Inter- attend these schools full-time. The same to the next grade.
net. Nearly 200 of these virtual schools have rationale for adoption of computers (e.g.,
already sprung up in 19 states, serving almost improve achievement, transform teaching —LC
200,000 students, and the trajectory is and learning, and as preparation for an ever-
sharply upward. Some individual schools changing labor market) prevails across pub-
have grown spectacularly fast, such as PA lic and private school sectors. The critical
Cyber, which enrolls 8,000 students only issues remain teacher involvement in deci-
eight years after opening. sions about buying and using devices and
As students enroll in cybercharters, they available funding, rather than openness to
stimulate a growing market for more and technological innovation. Afterschool pro-
better online technologies and content. grams are another category, since they are
They also put competitive pressure on tra- tangential to regular public schools and often
ditional public schools to innovate or lose use technology as an inducement to get stu-
students and revenue. These high-tech new- dents through the door once the last school-
comers add to the competitive pressure day bell rings.
already created by some 4,000 brick-and-
mortar charters operating in 40 states, EN: How much of schooling can
broadening the constituency for charter technology really displace?
schools beyond families disaffected with
inner-city public schools. LC: It is a mistake to assume that if schools
Competition from early adopters, cou- just adopt classroom technologies, acade-
pled with performance pressures arising mic achievement will improve, teaching will
from accountability reforms, will force all change dramatically, and students will be
schools—including private schools and better prepared for the 21st-century work-
low-tech charter schools resting on their place. Evidence for each reason to adopt
laurels—to consider technological solu- technology is at best skimpy and at worst
tions. Change will not be even or uniform. missing altogether.
www.educationnext.org W I N T E R 2 0 0 9 / E D U C AT I O N N E X T 49
Many administrative activities can be (and But as students grow up and gain the skills
have been) computerized (e.g., purchasing, to work independently, the time with tech-
scheduling, accounting, personnel data). nology will increase and the time with teach-
Collecting student performance data and ers will decrease.
making it easily and readily available to Technology will differentiate segments of
Brick-and-mortar teachers and principals has potential for the learning process. Teachers will often be the
schools will be very delivering lessons and individual help to first source of instruction, helping kids mas-
students “just in time.” But to achieve the ter core concepts and skills. Then, technology
different places than important purposes of tax-supported pub- will provide customized remediation for stu-
they are today: using lic schooling, especially in urban districts, the dents not able to grasp the core and acceler-
bedrock of schooling remains an organiza- ation for students ready for specialized and
more technology, tional structure introduced in the mid-19th enriching extensions. Programs to teach liter-
staffed by fewer but century: the age-graded school, where each acy skills, from the essentials of decoding on
teacher has her classroom and students of up, already exist. So, too, do programs to teach
more able teachers, roughly the same age have to learn a chunk math skills, from basic to advanced. More
working with much of the curriculum before being promoted to effective differentiation means narrower gaps
the next grade. in achievement. It also means a far greater
better information, Advances in new technologies have number and variety of course options—AP,
and delivering hardly made a dent in this permanent struc- IB, and even university-sponsored—available
ture. Charters, for-profit schools, cyber- to all kids, regardless of the community in
instruction better schools, and private schools embrace the which they live: technology as equity.
matched to same organizational format. All of the pre- For some students, particularly those
dictions for a technological Nirvana assume who are older, who have special learning
student needs. that the age-graded school will melt away. It needs or academic interests, or whose sched-
—JC and TM hasn’t so far because strong social beliefs ules or locations make it difficult for them
about schooling and deeply embedded polit- to attend brick-and-mortar schools, the core
ical and economic structures keep it alive and instructional process will be online. School
kicking. It is within the age-graded school communities, with lots of interaction among
that the individual teacher’s knowledge, skill students and teachers, will be built virtually.
repertoire, and experience matter in con- Brick-and-mortar schools will be very dif-
necting to her students. That relationship ferent places than they are today: using more
continues to be the moral, social, and cog- technology, staffed by fewer but more able
nitive centerpiece for teaching and learning teachers, working with much better informa-
to occur and cannot be replaced by tion, and delivering instruction better
machines, however cleverly constructed. matched to student needs.
Until the age-graded school and funding
mechanisms change, the use of new tech- EN: What are the most promising
nologies for classroom instruction will innovations in education technology?
remain peripheral.
LC: Since the 1990s, school boards and super-
JC and TM: Technology will do more than intendents have generally moved swiftly to
bring high-quality information to bear on the adopt technological enhancements to admin-
education process. It will change the educa- istrative functions by placing them online
tion process itself, transforming and some- and automating many routine procedures.
times replacing the role of the teacher, and The collection of individual student achieve-
altering the core means of instruction. Most ment data is now possible technologically,
schools of the future will be hybrids, with stu- and its dissemination to teachers swiftly offers
dents still taught by teachers in classroom set- many opportunities for intervention, reme-
tings—for parts of the day. But students will dial work, and enrichment. For classroom
spend much more time learning directly and instruction, many school boards have also
often remotely through technology. Young adopted interactive whiteboards, student
students will require more personal attention. clickers, and handheld devices for teachers and
50 E D U C AT I O N N E X T / W I N T E R 2 0 0 9 www.educationnext.org
forum
ED TECH CHUBB, MOE, & CUBAN
students to collect data for field projects or for interactively, with students constantly engaged
what is happening in a classroom. Some and providing input. Technology can cus-
highly motivated individual teachers have tomize instruction literally for every student.
created imaginative uses of computers for Kids could have substantial amounts of cus-
students to learn. Such efforts are promising tomized remediation or acceleration, and
innovations that can incrementally improve even entire courses. Education could be dra- The majority
teaching and learning. For-profit schools, matically differentiated. of public school
that is, schools run by businesses (e.g., Edi- Until recently, schools were in the Stone
son Schools), often give students and teach- Age of information—knowing almost noth- teachers view
ers abundant access to machines and integrate ing about the achievement of their students technological
technology use in their overall school design. or the success of teachers in promoting it.
The majority of public school teachers, Today, accountability systems require annual innovations as
however, view technological innovations as student testing in reading and math, and burdensome
burdensome add-ons. Teachers need to be provide objective and reliable (if limited)
directly (not as tokens) involved in adopting measures at least once a year. Moreover, tech- add-ons.
and using technological innovations and in nology is fast making it feasible to monitor —LC
establishing on-site technical assistance and student progress with online assessments
facilitating teachers-helping-teachers use that can be integrated with curricula
existing technologies in daily lessons (e.g., throughout the school year. Information sys-
Apple Classroom of Tomorrow experience tems can help teachers adjust their instruc-
in the 1980s and 1990s; Berkeley [CA] tion on the fly, reteaching skills that haven’t
Teacher Led Technology Challenge project been learned, easing up on skills that students
in the late 1990s). Such involvement can master quickly, and customizing by student.
lead to teachers creatively integrating the Administrators can become more effec-
innovation into routine classroom instruc- tive as well. Information systems can imme-
tion. Unfortunately, this approach remains diately show principals and district officials
distant from the current mind-set among which classrooms are succeeding and which
policy elites and vendors anxious about get- are struggling, which parts of the curriculum
ting new devices into classrooms. are being learned and which are going over
kids’ heads. Sophisticated statistical pro-
JC and TM: The most promising innova- grams can help administrators draw vital
tions can be grouped into two broad cate- inferences about the learning process, espe-
gories, instruction and information. As it cially about the extent to which each teacher
is, schools are universally organized for kids is providing “value-added” to students (after
to get all of their instruction in classes of 20 allowing for differences in student back-
to 30 led by a teacher. Technology is treated grounds and other influences on learning
as an add-on to this structure. Elementary that teachers can’t control). As information
kids typically visit a computer lab once a becomes available, it will be impossible to
week. A few computers also sit at the backs ignore, even if it speaks the unspeakable
of classrooms, for kids to use, if time allows, secret that some teachers are highly effective
after the teacher is finished teaching the core and others are not. As schools are forced to
lesson. At the secondary level, computers deal with the truth—and pressured to
are largely for word processing and Internet improve—students will benefit.
research and have little to do with core
courses. It need not be this way. EN: What role will school boards and
Every educator knows that kids need indi- teachers unions play in using tech-
vidual help. Each student is not going to nology to reform schools? In short,
understand material through the same pre- what are the politics of adopting
sentation, with the same exercises, or at the technology?
same pace. Technology can teach from mul-
tiple angles and with multimedia—anima- LC: The politics of adopting new tech-
tion, simulation, online teachers—and very nologies remain a top-down (school board
www.educationnext.org W I N T E R 2 0 0 9 / E D U C AT I O N N E X T 51
and superintendent), elite-driven (civic diversified and less conducive to sameness
and business leaders, vendors) operation and solidarity. There will be many new
largely determined by the district’s history schools and a dramatic increase in choice
Unions will resist of innovation, available resources, and and competition. All these developments,
technology. responsiveness to key stakeholders. Unions operating together in mutually reinforcing
have played a largely peripheral role in ways, will work to sap the organizational
Their mission is to either endorsing (some union chapters strength of the teachers unions, undermine
protect the jobs of have gotten district approval for schools in their political power, and weaken their abil-
which new technologies are central) or ity to block in the policy process. As they are
teachers in the opposing classroom technological inno- less and less able to block them, reforms of
regular public vations (cybercharter schools, for example). all kinds—not just those that are high tech—
School boards and parents, however, will will begin to flow through.
schools. fight efforts to substitute machines for School boards are a bit more nuanced.
—JC and TM teachers, even when champions of reduc- They clearly do not want to lose students
ing labor costs dress up the purchase of new and revenue to cyberschools or other
technologies as overall savings and a tech- sources of competition. Many board mem-
nological Utopia. They will resist such bers are also beholden to the unions, which
moves because they see the purposes of are influential in local elections, and school
public schools as more than efficiency and boards have regularly joined forces with
working to bolster a growing economy the unions—in the courts and state legis-
through supplying skilled graduates. latures—to oppose competitive threats. Yet
school boards in districts with especially
JC and TM: Unions will resist technology. active parents, weak unions, limited bud-
Their mission is to protect the jobs of teach- gets, and kids whose needs are going unmet
School boards and ers in the regular public schools, and real may have incentives to embrace techno-
technological change—which outsources logical change and become early adopters.
parents will fight work to distant locations, allows students In rare cases, school boards may see that, by
efforts to substitute and money to leave, substitutes capital for acting entrepreneurially, they can set up
labor, and in other ways disrupts the exist- their own cybercharters and win over stu-
machines for ing job structure—is a threat to the security dents and revenue from other districts,
teachers, even when and stability that the unions seek. For thus using competition to make themselves
decades, the unions and their allies have better off; indeed, a small number of dis-
champions of been the major obstacles to education tricts around the country (in Pennsylvania
reducing labor costs reform, regularly using their formidable and Wisconsin, for example) are already
political power to block or weaken the blazing this trail.
dress up the purchase reforms they do not like, from accountabil- Technology is a double-barreled agent of
of new technologies ity to school choice to pay for performance. change. It generates the innovations that
No surprise, then, that they are already make change attractive, and at the same
as overall savings working to kill or limit virtual charters, and time it undermines the political resistance
and a technological to ensure that technology fits neatly into that would normally prevent change from
the status quo. happening. There will be struggles and set-
Utopia. But this time they won’t succeed. Tech- backs, and the process will take decades.
—LC nology has a far-reaching capacity to trans- But the forces of resistance will ultimately
form politics. As distance learning prolifer- be overcome, and American education
ates, for example, teachers will be less transformed. This will mean real improve-
geographically concentrated in districts, ment for the nation, its children, and its
considerably more dispersed, and much schools. It will also bring the dawning of a
more difficult for unions to organize. The new era in which education politics is more
substitution of technology for labor will open, productive changes are more readily
lower the demand for teachers. The teach- embraced, and learning is liberated from
ing profession will become much more the dead hand of the past. I
52 E D U C AT I O N N E X T / W I N T E R 2 0 0 9 www.educationnext.org
RESEARCH & ANALYSIS FROM THE CATO INSTITUTE
REGULATION THE CATO JOURNAL
THE CATO REVIEW OF AN INTERDISCIPLINARY
BUSINESS AND JOURNAL OF PUBLIC POLICY
GOVERNMENT ANALYSIS
Four times a A unique and timely public
year since 1977, policy journal for policymak-
Regulation has ers, scholars, and interested
offered immediately laypeople, the Cato Journal
usable insights about provides insightful
regulatory policies and engaging analy-
from leading econo- ses of key issues by
mists, policy analysts, leading scholars and
and legal experts. policy analysts three
Regulation guarantees times each year.
the objective in-depth America’s leading
analysis needed to free-market public
stay on top of regula- policy journal since
tory and economic 1981, its topics run
policymaking in Washington, D.C. the gamut of policy
Written in clear, unambiguous terms, it issues from foreign
has examined every market, from envi- policy and banking to
ronmental and labor law to health and domestic issues like
transportation, and nearly every govern- health care and educa-
ment intervention, from interstate com- tion, not to mention economic freedom
merce regulation to price controls. and international development concerns.
SUBSCRIBE TODAY! CATO.ORG/SUBSCRIBE SUBSCRIBE TODAY! CATO.ORG/SUBSCRIBE
1 YEAR 2 YEARS 3 YEARS 1 YEAR 2 YEARS 3 YEARS
Individuals $20 $35 $50 Individuals $22 $38 $55
Institutions $40 $70 $100 Institutions $50 $85 $125
RECENT RESEARCH FROM THE CATO INSTITUTE
● “Markets vs. Monopolies in Education: A Global Review of the
Evidence,” BY ANDREW J. COULSON. SEPTEMBER 10, 2008
● “The Fiscal Impact of a Large-Scale Education Tax Credit Program,”
BY ANDREW J. COULSON. JULY 1, 2008
● “Dismal Science: The Shortcomings of U.S. School Choice Research
and How to Address Them,” BY JOHN MERRIFIELD. APRIL 16, 2008
R EPORTS ARE FREE AT C ATO. ORG . C ALL FOR PRINT COPIES : $6
BUYYOUR COPY AT BOOKSTORES NATIONWIDE,
BY CALLING 1-800-767-1241, OR VISITING CATO.ORG