On the cover of Frederick Hess’s new book “Education Unbound: The Promise and Practice of Greenfield Schooling,” is an open green field. Hess’s theme is that we must transform the system of education and that the first step is to clear out the bramble and debris and create green space for new development.
Over the years, there’s been a lot of talk about transforming American education. The “Nation at Risk” report 27 years ago got the ball rolling by famously declaring, “If an unfriendly foreign power had attempted to impose on America the mediocre educational performance that exists today, we might well have viewed it as an act of war.”
In 1994, “Goals 2000,” was funded with $105 million and established a list of what turned out to be fantasy ideas like, “By the year 2000, students will be first in the world in mathematics and science achievement,” and, “The high school graduation rate will increase to at least 90 percent.”

The NCLB law, signed in Hamilton, Ohio, by George W. Bush, in 2002, had Ted Kennedy and John Boehner in attendance
The “No Child Left Behind” Act, a bipartisan idea that brought Ted Kennedy, George W Bush and John Boehner to Hamilton High School in Hamilton, Ohio for its signing on Jan. 8, 2002, objectified goals into a plan for “standards-based education.” NCLB resulted in a maze of tests and reports that have greatly impacted how teachers and schools operate.
But, arguably, the net result of this 30 years of alarm, goal setting, increased expenditures, testing mania and talk of reform, has simply been that the rising tide of the gray goo of mediocrity in American education has risen even further. It’s nice that, because of this effort, more schools have moved from the truly awful to the barely mediocre, but what seems missing is any vision of authentic excellence.
Missing from Hess’s new book is indication of how Hess might define excellence.
According to Ohio’s rating system, a school is “excellent” if 75% of students in a school can show minimum competence on machine scored objective tests. It is shameful, in my judgment, that professional educators and community leaders, who certainly know better, can agree to such a ridiculous standard of educational “excellence.”
Our challenge at every level of education is to create excellence. And, as I’ve reported about my experience interviewing the legendary W. Edwards Deming, the key question, I believe, we must ask and answer is, “By What Method?”
Deming would no doubt agree with the basic premise of Hess’s book — that what is needed in education is systemic reform. He would agree with Hess that we must clear the bramble and debris and create a green space upon which to make a new system. But, Hess is lacking the answer that is needed: “By what method?”
Hess advocates that entrepreneurs need green space to have opportunity to build. He writes, “Rather than our repeated efforts to reinvent the wheel in district after district … we may fare better by focusing on how we might allow and encourage problem solvers to take their services to a wealth of communities and kids.”
The Hess vision is that states and districts should create opportunities so that entrepreneurs — like those who founded Apple, Amazon, eBay, or Pixar — might have access to the huge educational market. Hess writes, “In lieu of efforts to reform each of the country’s 15,000 school districts, a single entrepreneurial venture might dramatically improve … hundreds or thousands of districts.”
Of course, entrepreneurs already have access to the American market — textbook publishers, software designers, computer manufacturers, cheapest card machine, etc — but Hess is suggesting much more. His vision, evidently, is that American business should have the opportunity to sell comprehensive programs to districts — that would supplant current structures and current union rules. He mentions charter schools, such as KIPP (Knowledge Is Power Program) or Edison, and it appears he would like to see more districts simply contracting with the entrepreneurs who control such ventures.
Hess is suggesting a radical solution for American education, and I agree that radical solutions are called for. I agree, we need to create green space. But creating opportunity for entrepreneurs, by itself, is not nearly enough. Hess’s idea that districts create green space is a first step. But then what?
The record is clear in Ohio, that creating green space for entrepreneurs to start charter schools did not result in excellence. At best, it resulted in improving the educational experience of some students from awful to mediocre. We need a system that will move education to authentic excellence, not simply to a good grade doled out by a government bureaucracy.
Hess says that educational reform should be guided by the philosophy of a gardener. He quotes Nobel Prize winner Friedrich August von Hayek that because our knowledge is inadequate, we should not seek to be craftsmen, but rather, we should, “promote growth by providing the appropriate environment, in the manner in which the gardener does this for his plants.”
Hess writes, “We would all do well to take Friedrich von Hayek’s advice and ask leaders to think more like gardeners and less like engineers. What can they do to reduce obstacles; foster smart private and public quality control; and promote talent, capital and networks?”
Yes, but here is the puzzle: Reducing obstacles, promoting talent, etc., is not easy. It is certainly not simply a matter of wishful thinking. Success requires planning. It requires engineering. It requires structure. Successful gardening is the result of a plan, the result of knowledge, the result of structure. It doesn’t just happen by itself.
Hess fails to bring to the discussion this important truth: Without structure, there can be no freedom. Hess wants entrepreneurs to have freedom in American education, but he shows no system design where that freedom will be meaningful or productive. He fails to answer Deming’s question: “By what method?”
Deming’s main idea is that quality, overwhelmingly (85%), can be attributed to organizational and systemic structure. Removing obstacles, creating green space, is not enough. We need to engineer a system that will support and advance quality, a system that will advance teacher professionalism, a system in which a gardener might have a chance for success, a system where responsible entrepreneurship can flourish. Hess, or someone, needs to take the next step and show what that system might be. I like the notion that successful systems promote, encourage, and empower natural growth, as if by the hand of a thoughtful gardener. But a successfully designed system requires thoughtful and knowledgeable engineering. My premise: To Bring Excellence To Public Education We Must First Engineer A Better System.
I’m going to give my best shot at describing such a system in my soon to be written book: “Public Education In Kettering, Ohio In The Year 2022”
See also:
- A Great Question: How Can We Tell If a School Is Excellent?;November 2, 2007
- To Transform Our System Of Education, We Must Redefine The Aim Of The System; May 27th, 2008
- Let’s Frame the Question of “Achievement Gap” to Include All Schools and All Students; June 4th, 2008
- The Change We Need In Education Is Radical Transformation Of The Present System; November 7th, 2008
- Thinking Through Purposes and Principles Needed To Guide the Re-Design of Public Education; July 17th, 2008
- In Education, Let’s Stop Trying To Improve a Horse and Buggy System; July 25th, 2008
- Throwing Money At Public Education Is Not The Answer, System Change Is Needed; January 14th, 2009
- The Kettering School Board’s Biggest Challenge Is To Gain Public Support For Transformation; September 10th, 2009





















