By MICHAEL J. BAKALIS

Richard P. Niemiec and Herbert J. Walberg, eds. Evaluating Chicago School Reform. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1993. Pp. 110 with index. $17.95 (paper).

Maribeth Vander Weele. Reclaiming Our Schools. Chicago: Loyola University Press, 1994. Pp. 355 with appendix, resources, notes, bibliography and index. $21.95 (cloth); $12.95 (paper).

The Chicago Public School Reform Act of 1988 has been widely acclaimed as the most revolutionary reform effort in American urban public education in the past half century. That some "revolutionary" approach was needed had been clear to everyone close to the city's school system; after all, then Secretary of Education William Bennett had focused the eyes of the country on Chicago's schools when he unhesitatingly labeled them "the worst in the nation." Now, some six years later, scholars and laymen alike are asking the inevitable and necessary question: Is Chicago school reform working?

An article in the September 1994 issue of the national educational journal. Phi Delta Kappan, by investigators from the consortium on Chicago School Research gives the effort a qualified vote of approval. There is still much to do, they say, but in about one-third of the city schools positive change is evident; furthermore, the basic premises upon which the reform act was written are sound. Their generally positive view is not universally shared, however.

Richard P. Niemiec and Herbert Walberg's Evaluating School Reform offers a decidedly mixed review of Chicago's school reform efforts, and Maribeth Vander Weele's Reclaiming Our Schools presents an even more disturbing summary of the post-1988 Chicago school saga. Judging the reform effort appears to depend on what questions one asks as well as one's timetable and values: To some the school reform glass is half full; to others it is more than half empty.

Photo by Ginny R. Lee

In Evaluating Chicago School Reform, editors Niemiec and Walberg present nine essays by 20 authors on various aspects of school reform. Chapters deal with the issues that triggered the reform effort, surveys of Chicago school personnel on their attitudes toward and evaluations of reform, anthropological and political scientist perspectives on the movement, the effects of specific school programs on the reform effort and case studies of what has happened in special education as well as in particular Chicago schools. The book concludes with commentary on the reform plan by a former school board member, a teachers' union leader and a Chicago business executive. Niemiec and Walberg then summarize by looking at success indicators such as drop-out rates, student achievement, attendance records and citizen satisfaction. The book presents a useful overview of these important topics in a scholarly manner. Its audience will most likely be professional educators and graduate students.

Chicago Sun-Times education writer Maribeth Vander Weele's book is of a different kind. Written in a lively journalistic style, it is more likely to find a receptive audience in that still small but significant segment of the lay public, the opinion shapers and the policy-makers who, if they have the will, clearly have the power to further school reform.

Will the Chicago Teachers Union ever threaten to strike because textbooks are outdated? Will politicians who are captives of education PAC money lead the way?

Vander Weele's purpose is clearly stated. "Another book could be written solely on the early successes of school reform," she writes. Thus, while she applauds the fact that "some schools are being revolutionized," she concludes that "those responsible will tell you their accomplishments were made not because of the system, but in spite of it." What follows is a litany of devastatingly negative school statistics, depressing case studies and vignettes of the actual implementation of "reform," and specific examples of teacher, board and administrator actions which range from the outrageous to the incredibly stupid.

Some of the chapter titles convey the flavor of the book: "Chaos on Pershing

36/January 1995/Illinois Issues

Road," "Everyone Passes," "Schoolhouses in Disrepair," "Revolving Leadership," "Union Might" and "No Accountability, No Controls." It is important to underscore that Vander Weele's book is a view of Chicago schools six years after the advent of school reform. Her last chapter, entitled "Chaos and Hope," does try to offer a somewhat more optimistic conclusion, but it is not persuasive. With almost excessive detail and repetition, she has effectively presented a picture of a system either beyond salvation or requiring even more drastic reform. If one turns to her book for realistic remedies and solutions, one will have to look very hard to find them. If Vander Weele's book can outrage parents, students, policy-makers and a cynical and weary taxpaying public enough to propel them to action, however, it can be a catalyst for creating the necessary next agenda for school reform.

In 1986 a small group of dedicated people from various racial and ethnic groups and from every neighborhood of Chicago gathered in my office to plan an educational revolution. The coalition we created, Chicagoans United To Reform Education (C.U.R.E.), believed our children deserved much better than to be trapped in schools that were "the worst in the nation." We spent countless hours conceptualizing the reform plan, writing the legislation, activating the community and persuading the legislature that it could not sit idly by while another generation was lost to our society because of inferior schools. To its credit, the legislature took the bold step of mandating school reform. All of us knew well that governance reform was but the first step; we also needed to transfer decision-making power to the people most involved — parents, teachers, local administrators and taxpayers — so that then they could initiate the more important educational reforms.

Thus far Illinois citizens can be only lukewarm in their praise of past efforts and cautious in their hope for the future of Chicago's schools. Niemiec and Walberg's overall conclusion concerning the impact of reform on school achievement is not encouraging. Vander Weele's account of a central administration and school board sabotaging school reform by intent or by ineptitude is even more disheartening.

Vander Weele believes we need an aroused citizen movement to change things. But who will lead it? Can we expect the leaders to come from the over 75 percent of adult Illinois citizens who have no children in our public schools? Or will such leadership come from the teachers? Will we ever see the day when the Chicago Teachers Union threatens to strike because the textbooks are outdated, the school toilets don't work or incompetent teachers remain in their ranks? Will the politicians who are captives of education PAC money lead the way? Or will the virtually silent and invisible state board of education suddenly realize it has a responsibility to do something about the Chicago schools as well as those in the rest of the state?

The answer to the problems surveyed in these two books is clearly not just more money

While none will deny that better funding would help, the answer to the problems surveyed in these two books is clearly not just more money. The underlying message of both of the books is a crying need for leadership. We need leaders who recognize that schools are the foundation for a vibrant economy and a healthy society and who have the courage and vision to educate and energize voters to demand good schools.

Chicago school reform has had mixed results thus far. Many citizens who worked hard to make it happen still want to believe it can lead ultimately to a quality education for all of the city's public school children. They are prepared to work with those leaders who can move the effort on to the next stage, but there have been far too few whom they can follow.

Dr. Michael J. Bakalis is professor of public management and policy at Northwestern University. He served as state comptroller from 1977 to 1979 and as superintendent of public instruction from 1971 to 1975. While at Northwestern from 1981 to 1985, he headed the Illinois Project for School Reform, whose recommendations were published in a report titled "Education for a New Illinois."

January 1995/lllinois Issues/37