States of Success: Exploring and Explaining Differing Causes and Contexts of Similar High Performance in New England States Amid a Pervasive Educational Reform Movement

• In Event: The Austerity of Change: Leadership Challenges in Diverse International Democracies

Abstract

A global educational reform movement (GERM) (Sahlberg, 2012) is sweeping the globe and most nations, including the United States (US), have been unable to resist submission to its press for standardization and accountability. Some would argue that Massachusetts (MA) is one such state that has attained and maintained success through compliance with GERM. MA surpasses all states, outperforming all states on the US’s National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) and consistently ranks in the top 10 and top 5 on PISA and TIMSS respectively. However the achievement gap between various student subgroups remains vast and student achievement has slowed and in some cases stalled (Barber & Day, 2014).
In contrast, Vermont (VT) and New Hampshire (NH) are equally successful states that have achieved excellence through resistance to pervasive reform movements. While most states chose compliance with federal stipulations to attain NCLB waivers, VT and MA declined, believing it would stifle their vision to provide more comprehensive assessments for its students, consequently forfeiting millions of dollars in federal funding. VT and NH are mainly rural systems with contrasting politics that believe in providing a holistic education for students and have flourished through local control, collaboration and innovation within and across schools, districts, and states. Both are members of a four-state consortium to develop innovation in the design and implementation of secondary education standards and assessments. Their strategies have been more compatible with what Hargreaves and Shirley (2009, 2012) describe as democratic and inclusive Fourth Way strategies.
The objectives of this session are to:
1. Identify, analyze, and critique the differing policies and initiatives that have been associated with these states’ status as educational high performers
2. Examine the impact of contemporary reforms on states’ efforts to effectively serve diverse learners
3. Analyze the impact of imposed austerity and funding shortfalls on states that reject Race to The Top and No Child Left Behind funding because of the GERM-like conditions that are part of the federal funding requirements.

Author

• Shanee A Wangia, Boston College