While districts under control of mayors such as New York City and Chicago can count on the considerable political heft of municipal chief executives (and in the case of the Big Apple, the wallet of Mayor Michael Bloomberg) to
beat back traditionalists in Albany and Springfield, districts with traditional school board governance structures often have few tools at their disposal against NEA and AFT locals with waning - but - still - more considerable political influence in statehouse corridors.
Ultimately, it takes the imprimatur of the federal government, along with legislation and other policymaking inside the Beltway, to give reformers at the state level the tools needed to
beat back traditionalists.
He and other reformers will have to make a strong case to families in the grassroots — especially the poor and minority households seeking better opportunities for their children — in order to
beat back traditionalist forces.
Not exact matches
In fact, one of the least - acknowledged facts about No Child is that it actually gave reform - minded governors, state school chiefs, and legislators the leverage they needed to
beat back opposition from
traditionalists.
This is because the federal government ultimately amplifies education policy decisions made at the state level, especially by those reform - minded governors and legislators (along with reformers) who also seek help from the federal level to
beat back opposition to their efforts by entrenched
traditionalist interests.
In short, No Child is helping reformers
beat back the racialist Poverty and Personal Responsibility myths held by
traditionalists (and even some of their reform allies) that is at the heart of the nation's education crisis.
For reform - minded governors and school leaders, No Child's accountability measures gave them the tools they needed to
beat back opposition to their efforts from
traditionalists in their own states.