Kirwan reforms: Just throwing money at schools? | READER COMMENTARY

While I found many of The Sun’s comments on why lawmakers should override Gov. Larry Hogan’s veto of the “Blueprint for Maryland’s Future” interesting, I think the underlying assumptions are flawed (”Kirwan veto override: Lawmakers take a stand for schools,” Feb. 8). I don’t agree this is a once in a generation opportunity as new research and outside constraints such as the pandemic cause us to continually rethink what teaching techniques and support services constitute a great K-12 learning environment.

Further, we are also now seeing indications that charter schools are producing much better outcomes among certain lower-income African American and Hispanic communities than traditional public schools. Although currently semi-retired, I spent many years as a leading early stage investor in educational technology companies designed to produce better outcomes. Among these were Blackboard, 2U (headquartered in Maryland), Parchment and many others. I also served a number of years on the board of a large public K-12 educational publisher and provider of technological learning solutions. In addition, I have served as a trustee on a well respected K-12 school as well as a highly selective college. Of interest, I also married an elementary school teacher who taught in both a Baltimore public school and a private school.

Along the way, I have learned a number of lessons. First, throwing a lot of money at a situation rarely solves a problem without a well articulated strategy with measurable expected stage outcomes. Secondly, things rarely evolve in a straight line but instead manifest themselves as fits and starts often requiring many course corrections. Finally, it really is about the quality and flexibility of the people. I am not going to say whether the dollar amount of Kirwan is right or wrong, but on the surface it seems excessive given there is so little data on which to make an informed decision. It was as if a group of self-interested experts said, “Trust us.”

This was why I emailed both House Speaker Adrienne A. Jones and Senate President Bill Ferguson, neither of whom, I might add, I heard from, before the veto was ultimately overturned this week. Before we committed to a dollar amount and aggressive rollout, I had told them, we should have selected several regions with varying demographics to see what works and whether it could be generalized or needed to be more individualized to specific populations. From that, we could have moved forward aggressively. Going forward, I would look very hard at current teacher education and training and determine if it is keeping up with the times and where we are heading.

Roger Novak, Towson

Add your voice: Respond to this piece or other Sun content by submitting your own letter.