Does anyone know what the reformers’ end game is?
What do they think will happen to students and schools and the quality of education if they achieve their goals?
How will education get better if teachers live in fear of termination without cause?
How will education get better if standardized tests are the sole measure of success?
Will the “best and brightest” flock to teach if they will be rated by the test scores of their students?
Will the “best and brightest” stay in education more than a year or two if teachers are treated with disrespect?
Will education improve if teaching is no longer a profession but an at-will job?
Can anyone name any nation in the world that rates teachers by the test scores of their students? I can’t.
The reformers puzzle me.
They seem to know so little about children or motivation or schools or education, yet they are so certain they are right.
Does anyone know what their end game is?
Diane
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Their end game is the dismantling of public education, so that their friends can start charter schools, that are accountable to no one, and make money hand over fist. Their end game is the evisceration of teachers’ unions (and all unions). Their end game is for all states to be right-to-work states. Their end game is less taxes and regulations on business. Their end game is is educate the few and turn the masses into spear carriers. All these groups are one and the same.
The reformers’ end game is to prove that public education doesn’t work. Then they will privatize it. And open up one of the last giant revenue streams for corporate America.
Yes:
To so thoroughly discredit public education that more are driven to the private schools, for-profit charters, and cyber charters that enrich many of these “reformers”.
In this case, more and more involved and motivated parents and students flee traditional public schools, leaving greater and greater challenges remaining for teachers. At this point, the teachers will be either the most compliant and meek, the lowest of their college classes, or the least willing to stand for themselves, cycling out every three years. These factors will also precipitate a decline in public schools, causing the reformers to point and say that they told us so, justifying greater evisceration of public schools and more money and power for the private/charter/cyber-charter cabal…
It becomes a self-perpetuating cycle wherein ‘reformers’ support policies destructive to public education, driving out motivated parents and students, creating a downward spiral of schools and a greater exodus of strong teachers and families…etc.
I’m not sure I understand the question. The charter school operators such as Moskowitz and Canada earn about $450,000 educating a very small number of students. DOE emails revealed Murdoch would be happy to see 10% of his corporation’s income be derived from charter schools. I am VERY jaded and do not believe the “reformers” believe their own stated goals of helping students. As far as I can understand it’s all about money. There is strong opposition to charter schools in more well-off communities as evidenced by demonstrations against Eva’s schools. In poorer communities where parents may be less informed charters are an easier “sell”, although resistance seems to be growing against the charter movement. And of course, you pointed out that removing the bottom 10% of students in poverty places US schools at the top on international comparisons. This privatization movement reminds me of the push to privatize Social Security when Bush II was president. Financial institutions envisioned enormous new profits from management fees handling all the money invested in Social Security. The financial meltdown ended that terrible idea because people realized the very real and immediate impact privatization could have on their retirement income/security. That type of immediate impact doesn’t apply to education hence the initial success of the growth of charters. In the long run I believe it will be seen for what it really is: selling off our public schools for private gain.
The end game is profit. Pure and simple.
The real endgame precipitated by the so-called reformers is chaos. It’s too awful to think about, but we have no choice. I watched the privatization of the Univ of California’s flagship campus; it was/is terrifying confusion. Think about it: should we expect the corporate juggernaut to take care of us? What we have left now to fight the corporate takeover of our democracy is civil disobedience; we must use it.
While I agree that money is the primary motivation of these folks, don’t underestimate the social engineering premises from which corporate ed deform springs, a toxic stew of social darwinism, eugenics, behaviorism and sorting out the worthy and unworthy poor, all combined with a reflexive anti-labor animus.
Philadelphia is a perfect example of the end game.
David: Please tell us about Philadelphia. Thank you.
Pennsylvania has cut budgets year after year. Schools in urban settings or poor districts are hit hardest because they have no other resources to draw on to help support schools.
In Philadelphia, it has gotten to the point where the district is bankrupt and has decided to auction over 40 schools to private charter companies. As the article states, the schools are being dismantled and sold for scrap.
http://www.citypaper.net/news/2012-05-03-whos-killing-philly-public-schools.html
Jesus.
Dismantling the schools that serve the least of us first and then scale up until toal privatization of our public schools is achieved.
http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/living-in-dialogue/2012/05/tim_slekar_pennsylvania_school.html
This is actually pretty easy…
> Does anyone know what the reformers’ end game is?
Yes
> What do they think will happen to students and schools and the quality of education if they achieve their goals?
The quality of education overall will go up, and our primary and secondary educational system will once again be competitive in the global arena. Just as importantly, the difference in the quality of education provided to students of affluent families and students of low-income poverties will become negligible. Every child, regardless of race or income level, will have the opportunity to attain an excellent education.
> How will education get better if teachers live in fear of termination without cause?
Teachers will live with the same fear of termination without cause that lawyers, engineers, doctors, computer scientists, managers and all other professionals currently live with. In other words, as is the case with all other professionals, termination without cause will not actually be a concern for good teachers, and the ability to terminate teachers will have a net positive impact on the quality of education.
> How will education get better if standardized tests are the sole measure of success?
Standardized tests are not the sole measure of success for education reformers. Standardized tests are only one of many measures that can be used by educators to help inform and refine their instructional planning. Education will get better when teachers teach beyond the test.
> Will the “best and brightest” flock to teach if they will be rated by the test scores of their students?
Yes, but rating teachers by their students’ test scores is not the goal of education reform. The “best and brightest” did not flock to teach when there was no rating system, no measure of success, no recognition of excellence and absolute job security for all teachers regardless of talent or effort. In fact, the opposite happened – teachers came from uncompetitive colleges, had uncompetitive GPAs, and half left within the first five years. To attract the best and brightest, and keep them in education, it’s important to recognize and reward those teachers that are successful, and provide additional support for (or eventually counsel out) those teachers that are not successful. Treating everyone the same regardless of effort or performance discourages those who excel from entering or staying in education.
> Will the “best and brightest” stay in education more than a year or two if teachers are treated with disrespect?
Honoring and respecting teachers is the cornerstone of education reform. Teachers have long been disrespected before education reform began, and the criticism is largely driven by the fact that all teachers are treated the same regardless of effort or performance. It’s important to note that college-educated professionals don’t typically have lifetime employment or lockstep compensation – both of these things are typically reserved for high-school educated blue-collar employees.
> Will education improve if teaching is no longer a profession but an at-will job?
Virtually all professions are at-will jobs, with teaching being one of very, very few exceptions. It would certainly be a stretch to say that lawyers, computer scientists, engineers, pharmacists, managers and executives are not engaging in a “profession but an at-will job,” yet all of these professionals are hired on at at-will basis.
> Can anyone name any nation in the world that rates teachers by the test scores of their students? I can’t.
> The reformers puzzle me.
I hope this clears things up then. I strongly encourage you to go visit some charter schools and talk to some education reformers to better understand where their passion is coming from. If you’re truly puzzled by education reform and want to learn more, the best way to start isn’t by demonizing the reformers, but rather by meeting them, asking questions, and listening to the answers.
> They seem to know so little about children or motivation or schools or education, yet they are so certain they are right.
Once again, I strongly encourage you to go visit some high-performing charter schools and engage in actual conversation with education reformers, rather than just demonizing them. You’ll see that education reform is driven by a deep concern about the quality of education and the achievement gap in this great nation. What happens to low-income and minority children in this country is nothing short of a crime, and reformers are working their tails off to try to fix it so that as many children as possible have access to an excellent education.
If you care about children, or schools or education, it would be wonderful if you could present your ideas for how to close the achievement gaps – both the gap between low-income/minority students and affluent/white students, and the gap between the United States and the 25 some nations that outrank it in educational outcomes.
Education reform is largely a trial-and-error process – reformers have hypothesis on what will work in improving educational outcomes for kids, put those hypothesis into action (typically in the form of legislation or charter schools), and replicate the reforms that are successful while cutting back on the reforms that aren’t (see Gates Foundation funding for small-schools over time).
The problem with hypothesis-testing is that sometimes things don’t work out. It’s easy to throw stones when something isn’t working on the first trial, but if everyone gave up the first time a good idea didn’t work, we’d never have things like aviation and computer technology. It’s also easy to question the motivations of those who are trying their hardest to alleviate the achievement gap without taking the time to get to know them, but if you put in the effort, you’ll soon realize that, for the most part, reformers’ care deeply about children and schools and are driven by a strong passion to do the right thing.
> Does anyone know what their end game is?
Yes.
Also, Dr. Ravich, my understanding is that you were once an education reformer yourself. At some point in time you supported No Child Left Behind as well as charter schools. While it’s unfortunate that you are no longer a part of the reform movement, it is incredibly puzzling to me that you yourself are puzzled by the reformers – given that you used to be one of them.
Duke,
I recognized that these reforms failed after years of trial and observation. I hoped that others–like you–would learn from my experience. Have you read my book? Are you aware that every part of the “reform” agenda has already failed? There is not a shred of evidence that these so-called reforms has ever worked anywhere? Can you name another country that has followed this path?
Diane
” There is not a shred of evidence that these so-called reforms has ever worked anywhere?”
There are dozens of studies showing success from charter schools or vouchers. That doesn’t mean they’re universally successful for all kids, nor that they are a solution to the achievement gap, but to say there’s no evidence at all is not true.
Thank you for responding. I actually own your book and it is quite good. I’m also incredibly excited to have the opportunity to engage with you in dialog.
I left my response to that question blank because I can’t name another country that does this, and I have no plans of justifying that kind of data use. At the same time, however, I can’t think of a single state that uses “standardized tests are the sole measure of success.” Certainly there are some states that are using data as a part of the measurement formula, but to use only the standardized test seems to be a comical mis-understanding of what education reform is about. Also, I disagree with your assertion that every part of the “reform” agenda has already failed, largely because of how you and I define reform.
I like to believe that, like all people, reformers don’t necessarily work from a unified agenda. To use an analogy, the Democratic party represents the collective voice of roughly half of our nation, but the Democratic platforms don’t reflect the views of every person who identifies as a Democrat. Similarly, Teachers Unions represents the collective voice of teachers, but their collective voice certainly didn’t represent my views when I was a teacher for 4 years, and I can think of many other teachers who didn’t feel represented as well.
Perhaps the best evidence of this for “education reformers” is when Bill Gates and Wendy Kopp both came out publicly in opposition of the release of value-add based “teacher rankings” in New York City. Certainly the “reform platform” sees a greater use of data as a cornerstone of transforming education, but clearly this particular move did not represent the views of many reformers. Indeed, to say that reformers want to see data used that way is an oversimplification of data use. Reformers certainly support the increased use of data in informing classroom instruction – but using it to publicly humiliate teachers is a huge over-reach and a tragic misuse of data.
When you state that “standardized tests are the sole measure of success” and “teachers are treated with disrespect” are aspects of the reform movement, I can’t help but flinch. I can’t think of a single reformer whose goal it is to disrespect teachers, nor can I think of any reformers who want to see standardized tests as the sole (keyword sole) measure of success. You may see these elements as a part of the “reform platform” (although I don’t personally think that it is) but that doesn’t mean they broadly represent the views of reformers. Having no data be used in the measure of success (the status quo in many states), and having ONLY data be used in the measure of success are both extremes – reform as I see it is to find a happy compromise where some data is used, but many other non-data measures are used as well.
I think the reason that this particular post really rubbed me the wrong way is because it is something of a departure from what I’m used to seeing from you. Rather than question the reform itself as you have faithfully been doing for much of your career (using research, I might add), here you are questioning the motivations of the reformers themselves, which is something of an ad-hominem attack.
As someone who used to believe in many of the things reformers are doing, I would like to think that you see that most reformers aren’t part of some corporate conspiracy – rather, they are citizens who are deeply concerned with the achievement gap and tired of waiting for somebody else to do something about it. Every reformer has their own internal vision of what reform looks like – reform at KIPP is different from reform at YesPrep, which is different from reform at FirstLine which is different from reform at Codman Academies.
There are thousands upon thousands of reform-minded teachers in classrooms today, and each teacher uses their own unique combination of “reforms” to make their classroom special. So many different ideas are being tried out, it’s difficult to put out a blanket statement like “every part of the “reform” agenda has already failed.” We don’t even know what the ultimate reform agenda will be, because the current reform agenda is just to experiment and find some things that work. At least that’s how I see it, I’m sure you see it differently from your perspective. Still, I do encourage everyone who reads this to go on a tour of charter schools – it’s a good reminder that, ultimately, reform isn’t about adults – it’s about children who currently don’t have access to the excellent education they deserve.
Duke, No offense but I’m sure it will be taken. But why so much rhetoric to defend reformers as advocating for children and not adults? It would seem a very simple exercise if the “data” pointed in that direction.
Nice to meet you, Professor Slekar. No offense is taken, of course =)
Nobody, including those that advocate for education reform and those who criticize education reforms, likes to be demonized.
My own reasons for advocating for education reform are very personal – I come from a low-income background and would not have gone to college were it not for the impact that a few teachers made in my life. I have seen first-hand the way that low-income, minority students are systematically deprived of the opportunity to attain an excellent education so that they can escape the cycle of poverty, and it chills me to the bone. The only reason I’m involved in education reform is because I believe that, as a nation, we can do a much better job of educating our low-income children, and I support the efforts of my peers who are also outraged at the achievement gap and are trying their hardest to find a way to give our kids an excellent education.
Many of my friends and colleagues also advocate for education reform – and all of them, to the best of my knowledge, are doing it because they want to create better outcomes for kids. Many of them, like me, come from the same low-income communities as the kids that we teach – and many of them share the same racial backgrounds as well. Many of them also turned down much more prestigious, high-paying, easier jobs so that they could work in education and make an impact on low-income kids. They didn’t make the choice to work in education so they could cash out – if they wanted to cash out they never would have gone into education. They do it because they the see the achievement gap for what it is – a great social injustice that can be reversed in our lifetimes – and they feel a calling to reverse it themselves.
It’s incredibly frustrating to hear the critics of education reform throw around terms like “corporate reformers” and accuse education reformers of being part of some right-wing conspiracy to dismantle public education and privatize schools. If these critics took the time to visit high-performing charter schools – talk to the teachers, the parents, the kids, and the administration – and get to know the reformers on a personal level, they’d realize that there is no conspiracy behind the reform. These people are pouring their blood, sweat and tears into providing kids with an excellent education, and they don’t deserve the kind of recession-fueled rhetoric that is being levied at them.
Duke,
I don’t doubt your convictions or the convictions of your friends. But a few convictions does not make a generalizable data set. And you’re right, there is no right wing conspiracy to dismantle public schools. It is in the open and it’s coming from the left and right. If you want to solve all of the real and significant issues you cite above then why not argue for a free and equitable system of public education for all children and not some glorified charter for a few needy children. This is the salient point. I am not ready to give up on the idea of a free and equitable education for ALL students. It may not work perfectly but the idea is flawless–equality. So when people (like me) that offer critique to the reform movement we are critiquing the fact that the reform movement, if taken to the end game, means a tiered system of education in this country–one that serves the children not taken by charters and on that serves students that are “chosen.” So even if “high achieving charters” save and or help some kids it is still an injustice in a nation with the capability and resources to serve all children. Helping only a few disadvantaged kids is not justice.
Professor Slekar,
Thank you for the dialog. I do want to solve the real and significant issue of educational inequity, but you and I see a completely different “endgame” for education reform.
Consider this clip from Waiting for Superman: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1VX1apvagA
In under two minutes, it does a fair job of summarizing what is systematically wrong with our education system. As a nation, we don’t invest nearly enough in it – we don’t invest enough money, but we also don’t invest enough passion. The point of Waiting for Superman is that there is no “Superman” – there is no hero that is going to come in and “safe” disadvantaged kids and under resourced schools. Glorifying charter schools as some kind of “Superman” misses the point of charter schools. The tragedy isn’t that there aren’t enough charter schools – the tragedy is that our nation doesn’t provide a free and equitable public education for ALL students. The endgame isn’t a world with more charter schools, its a world where there is no more lottery, because all public schools are excellent and kids have many excellent schools to choose from.
Charter schools are supposed to be something like the Research and Development arm of education. Their purpose is to experiment with different variables – the length of the school day, labor regulations, teacher/student ratios, the use of technology, teacher preparation and professional development, and countless other variables – and see if they can identify what variables work to drive student achievement for low-income students that are currently not being served by the public education system.
Charter schools are public schools. The purpose of charter schools isn’t to create a tiered system where some students get to go to elite charter schools and others have to go to underperforming non-charter public schools. In fact, we already have that system, it’s called “magnet schools” and we don’t see nearly enough outrage about it.
The purpose of charter schools is to identify best practices that can be copied across all public schools so that we can create a a free and equitable education for ALL students. Things like the Five Pillars, the Extended School Day, Hybrid Learning are being tested in charter schools – if proven to work, these things should absolutely be spread to all schools, not kept locked away just in the charters. If you look at Houston (HISD) you’ll see that many of these best practices are starting to take hold on a district-wide level.
I believe strongly that all children deserve the opportunity to attain an excellent education. You may recognize that line – it’s TFA’s vision statement. In fact, your belief that ALL students should have a free and equitable education is virtually identical to TFA’s vision statement. I actually think you may have a lot in common with education reformers than you may realize. Unfortunately, this isn’t something that can be achieved overnight, but TFA alumni and (some) charter school operators are working hard to ensure that it’s something that happens within our lifetimes. It would be great to have your input to support these efforts.