School Reformers vs Anti-reformers

I want to be careful to not appear to support the education reform movement. I truly do not yet have an educated opinion on either the positive or negative effects reform initiatives are having. I have a "feeling" derived partly from logic, experience and reading summaries from recent studies that most of the initiatives are the result of a panicked "we must do something quickly" mentality resulting in throwing a bunch of ideas against the wall hoping that some will stick. Most of the studies are inconclusive--comparison and correlations but little causation. From recent research, I don't think any of them is sticking and I don't think allocating more money or time will produce positive casual student achievement results. Which is basically the same criticism anti-reformers have with possibly a "more harm than good" emphasis. But that's not enough. If anti-reformers agree that we need to improve K-12, exactly what is their plan? As a group, who are the ant-reformers and who are their designated spokespersons? And were "they"  to put  forward proposals, would they not be considered "reforms"? Or do the anti-reformers believe that the pre-reform movement system was producing desired results and no changes were necessary?