It’s been pointed out time and time again that schools are struggling to get their students reading at grade level. This is of particular concern since it has been discovered that if a student isn’t reading at grade level by third grade they are 4x’s more likely not to graduate from high school.

But what can be done to solve this problem? There are several ideas that have been posited, one being that government support for for-profit schools could be the answer to accelerating the process that effective reforms are revealed.

In a recent article, the following positions were made in support of this opinion:

As Silicon Valley blogger Sarah Lacy noted, "I've spoken to many venture capitalists who say they'd love to use technology to change education, but few think they can make money at it."

Washington deems it acceptable to make a profit by reducing greenhouse emissions but not by reducing dropouts.

Ultimately, our public policy should urgently seek to better educate our children by any means necessary. We need to embrace a quality revolution that focuses solely on holding organizations accountable and responsible for improving student outcomes. Those that do should be rewarded and scaled so that we can ensure that students receive the education that they deserve using the entrepreneurial spirit and genius that have made America so great.

Another popular opinion is that the government needs not to support for-profit schools, but to support the educators they themselves hire.

Jon Steward, an unlikely voice for reform, recently said: “I’ve always found with education that individuals are the ones that make the enormous difference. And the more that you are able to empower a great teacher, a great principal, a great superintendent, that can make enormous differences. How do we empower the individuals to have the authority and responsibility to make those changes and not tie them to arbitrary objective realities or goals?”

Here’s a clip from his recent interview with Melody Barnes, one of the chief government officials in regards to education policy:

With few exceptions, every individual that goes into education wants to make a difference, whether in their work in public education or private education. In both of these markets the individuals working on the forefronts have their hands tied with regulations – whether it be standards to abide by or barriers to entry.

Why not capitalize on educators’ passion for helping students by granting them more freedom to do the job they elected to do? Do you think this would raise or lower the number of low-level readers in this country?

Remember Title I?  It’s been more than 45 years since Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act was established as U.S. law.

In its day it was viewed as forward-thinking education and a big-spend on improving educational opportunities for our children.

For your benefit (and mine) here is the Cliff Notes version of this directive.

The purpose of this title is to ensure that all children have a fair, equal, and significant opportunity to obtain a high-quality education through:

• high-quality academic assessments, accountability systems, teacher preparation/training, curriculum, and instructional materials;

• meeting the educational needs of low-achieving children including limited English proficient children, migratory children, children with disabilities; First Nation children, neglected or delinquent children, and young children in need of reading assistance;

• closing the achievement gap between high- and low-performing children;

• holding schools, local educational agencies, and States accountable for improving the academic achievement of all students;

• distributing and targeting resources sufficiently to make a difference;

• providing greater decision-making authority and flexibility;
  

• providing children and enriched and accelerated educational program;

• promoting school-wide reform;

• significantly elevating the quality of instruction;

• coordinating all services under the title; and

• affording parents substantial and meaningful opportunities to participate in their child’s education.

So exactly where are we on the pathway to furthering this initiative? Does No Child Left Behind or President Barak Obama’s education initiatives dilute or improve the original intent? What I'm asking is: is Title I still viable, practical, and achievable?