September/October 2000 | Contents

EXPERT WITNESS:
Covering Education: What's Our Grade?

EXPERT WITNESS features top thinkers in various disciplines discussing the journalistic coverage of their world. Educator Gene Maeroff was interviewed in May by Ari L. Goldman, an assistant professor at Columbia's Graduate School of Journalism, about trends in covering education.

* There are at least 1,000 education reporters in the U.S. What kind of a job are these education reporters doing?

It's mixed. They all try pretty hard to do a good job, but there are disadvantages under which some of them are operating. One is that they are not only new to the beat but also new to journalism. You find on education, perhaps more than other beats, that it's kind of a stepping stone for beginners. So you have people learning about how to do journalism at the same time they're learning about the intricacies of this beat. And then there's the problem of turnover. A person starts getting some seasoning and understanding, some comprehension, and lo and behold the person is moved on to do something else. At some papers, unfortunately, it almost operates like a boot camp. There are others that do have a commitment to keeping people on the beat much longer.

* Do women tend to be education reporters more than men?

The education beat is becoming more and more a female beat. And a female starting beat. No question about it. Also an important entry point for African-American reporters -- African-American women particularly.

* What do you think journalists need to know most about education?

It's really important that they have a sense of history in terms of educational issues. And that they understand the context in which things happen in education. And then of course a deepened knowledge of the issues.

* Can you give an example of that? Are there times we miss stories because we don't have that history and context?

Let's say the reporter is put on the beat and finds out that the school district is investing some great sum of money in a new reading program. Well, there's a lot to know. What reading programs were being used before? How successful or unsuccessful were they? According to what measures? If it's a new reading program, is money going to be made available for professional development of the teachers who will be using that program? Because if the teachers aren't prepared then it's not going to realize its potential. What's the history of this program been elsewhere? What were the other kinds of programs that might have been considered? Is this something that's going to be "one size fits all" or is there going to be room for adapting it to the individual needs of children?

* I remember meeting an education reporter for a big-city tabloid who told me: The trick is never to go into a school. You do everything from the board of ed.

Getting people into classrooms is the heart of what education reporting ought to be about. We're not saying they're going to be experts, but we think they could be very informed observers.

* Let's talk about the role of education issues in politics. Is education one of those issues you can campaign on but that are really hard to do anything about?

Education has come to the fore in this presidential election -- and elections at state and local levels as well. There's a lot more talk about it, but some of it doesn't have a whole lot of meaning. At the federal level, for example: the federal government provides only 7 percent of the revenues of elementary and secondary schools. Certainly there is a bully pulpit to be mounted and pronouncements to be made. But what a president can do about education is quite limited.

* The dollar impact is very small.

It's pretty small. Seven percent of $350 billion-plus. But it certainly feeds the debate and it's important in that way.

* What are some of the big issues?

Well, the voucher issue is certainly one of the hottest now -- and it is fairly well polarized between Democrats and Republicans, although there are exceptions, like Joe Lieberman. George Bush would favor the federal government putting its influence and even its largess behind vouchers, Al Gore would not.

* Is that a state vote or a federal vote?

Vouchers would require state action, although there could be possibly local action at the school district level. Conceivably there might be an entrance point for the federal government on it. It's not impossible. The federal government does provide money that could be made into vouchers. We have not yet had the definitive ruling by the United States Supreme Court on this in terms of the state, in terms of the religious -- that is, the legal issues -- that might be involved.

* Are any states doing vouchers now?

There's a state-wide program in Florida. There are local programs in Cleveland and Milwaukee. In all three, courts are getting involved. And so a lot is up in the air about it. There's been a lot more talk about vouchers than there's been vouchers actually happening. And some people are misled by reports in the media about the number of children who are receiving vouchers but who are really on private scholarships. No different from what private scholarships have always been, to enable kids to go to nonpublic schools. But the media, caught up in this whole thing today, are calling them vouchers. And that's very misleading to the public. Scholarships have existed and they will continue to exist. But vouchers involve tax money.  

* Have the numbers been massaged by the different sides in this issue?

Well, they just appear in the paper. Not very long ago, one respected national newspaper said 65,000 kids in the country are on vouchers. That's nonsense. Where the hell are they getting this figure? What they clearly were doing was taking all these scholarships that enable kids to choose Catholic schools or whatever, and they're calling them vouchers.

* So many other education issues seem to be part of a national debate as well.

This is why it's important for education reporters to be knowledgeable. Whether you're talking about subjects -- reading, math, social studies -- in all of those, there are so-called right and left positions, they become polarized. Or whether you're talking about issues -- social promotion, standards, high-stakes testing.

* Testing has gone crazy. You have fourth graders walking around New York with their noses in a book afraid to go out and play because they have to compete in the standardized test.

It's really important for an education reporter to know what these tests are all about, to know what's being tested and about how those tests work. And how they compare with other kinds of assessments that might be used. Whether the uses of the test results are in agreement with what the test maker intended them to be used for.

* Teachers unions have gotten involved in the political process by endorsing candidates. How big a story are teachers unions?

Teachers unions are a much bigger story than journalists have made them. It's an undercovered area of education. I don't mean exposés -- just good stories to be written about what influence they have and what role they play in terms of determining instruction in the classroom. You'd never know from reading newspapers in this country that by and large teachers are paid no better than journalists.

Gene Maeroff is the director of the Hechinger Institute on Education and the Media at the Columbia Teachers College, which aims to deepen the knowledge of journlaists regarding education issues. The institute, named in memory of Fred M. Hechinger, an education editor of The New York Times, publishes reports and runs seminars for education reporters, editors, and educators aimed at improving the quality and quantity of education reporting. Maeroff, a former education reporter for the Times and other newspapers, is the author of several books about education, including his most recent, Altered Destinies: Making Life Better for School Children in Need (St. Martin's Press).

(The Hechinger Instutute: www.teacherscollege.edu/hechinger)