Students for Education Reform at New York University and Columbia University plan a march to demand that the New York City United Federation of Teachers and the Bloomberg administration reach an agreement on test-based teacher evaluation. These groups are off-shoots of Democrats for Education Reform, the group founded by Wall Street hedge fund managers, the guys with annual incomes in the multiple millions, most of whom went to elite private schools.
The members of SFER pay more in tuition each year than a typical teacher’s annual income. They are students at elite universities. They obviously do not know that testing experts have found the evaluation system called “value-added assessment” to be inaccurate and unstable.
Why are they pushing teachers to accept an invalid measure? Why are these students, many of whom went to private schools that never use standardized tests, so eager to impose standardized tests on public school children and their teachers? Why do they want to see teachers rated and fired based on the results of standardized tests?
They should act like students, read the studies conducted by Jesse Rothstein of Berkeley, Linda Darling-Hammond at Stanford, and the joint statement of the National Academy of Education and the American Educational Research Association.
They should not disgrace themselves in public by promoting ideas they do not understand.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Why? Because they plan on being the ones doing the firing in a few years. That’s where the big bucks (at least in the education sector) will be.
http://www.studentsforedreform.org/act/
“The members of SFER pay more in tuition each year than a typical teacher’s annual income. They are students at elite universities.”
There are plenty of large, public universities on this list; the majority of students at those schools pay in-state tuition and few academics would refer to them as “elite universities ” (unlike say, Wellsley, Columbia, and NYU). For you, the world of SFER (and everything else) may not exist outside NYC, but for the rest of us, it does, so don’t generalize all these students as rich, elitists (which is exactly what you imply).
Be sure to read the reports named above. We know you want to stay informed and you do not want to be brainwashed by TFA, DFER,SFER, or any other privatizer.
“Reader”, who obviously IS a member of SFER appears to be skirting the question and focusing on a tangential point made by Ms. Ravitch.
Can you tell us who is funding your Vichy Group; and what have you been promised in return?
Puget Sound Parent- I’m happy to let you know that I’m have not been a student for many years and have never met a member of SFER. I wrote that post because I think Diane’s tone was derogatory and does nothing to stimulate a fruitful dialogue.
It’s time to start writing these students off as “elites.” Many of the students involved in this organization are not wealthy; many attended public K-12 schools and public universities.
Diane’s language only further drives these students to the “reform” movement.
First it is not a reform movement…it is a cash in and privatize movement and now if manipulated students decide to join or support the philanthropimp privatizers it will be
Diane’s fault. Ha! What do they take responsibility for, anything? Keep drinking the koolaid.
Linda, please review the purpose of quotation marks.
Mike Godwin was one smart fellow.
Very true. A lemming can be created at Columbia as easily as at Carlowe College Pittsburgh. But please don’t waltz in here with your misguided zeal and dollar signs in your eyes thinking you’re going to lecture people who’ve given their lives to something more precious and complex than anything your Madrassa leaders can cram into your undeveloped intellect. You need to be quiet and listen, be quiet and read and after you’ve learned come tell us something.
The only thing reader said was that SFER has chapters at a variety of institutions. Do you think that is incorrect?
And my primary reaction was yes this is true, lemmings can be created at an elite school or a third tier school for proles. Do you think that is incorrect? There was also a note of petulance in the remark which I have come to expect from people with ” a little knowledge” the ones Donne warned us about. ANd I know that’s correct so I won’t ask you to check your answer key.
Yes, they should act like students! I’ll help get them started…
Rothstein, J. (2010). Teacher quality in educational production: Tracking, decay, and student achievement. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 125(1), 175-214.
(Note to APA purists: my italics didn’t transfer.)
“educational production”??? What the —- does THAT mean?
Yeah, I know… I don’t like the term “production” either. But Rothstein’s research is on our side. Here’s a quote just from the abstract:
“In this paper, I develop falsification tests for three widely used VAM specifications, based on the idea that future teachers cannot influence students’ past achievement. In data from North Carolina, each of the VAMs’ exclusion restrictions is dramatically violated. In particular, these models indicate large “effects” of fifth grade teachers on fourth grade test score gains. I also find that conventional measures of individual teachers’ value added fade out very quickly and are at best weakly related to long-run effects.”
You hit on the problem. The test fanatics, politicians and corpoatizers think that they know how to run the schools better than the professionals do. But I’ll bet not one of them would hire a lawyer to do their heart bypass or an engineer to defend them in court.
It seems a pre-requisite of this bunch that you know absolutely NOTHING about pedagoguery, children, instruction or your content area. They almost insist on being ignorant about teaching, kids and schools and treat it as some kind of pedigree that proves they are sincere in their misguided stridency. Of course the bankers, hedgers and lawyers who’ve all arrived to straighten us out are going to show us the error of our ways by employing that age old adage of failed capitalists everywhere ” We’re going to run it like a business and treat you all like commissioned salesmen,” Well how’s that model working so far Michelle Rhee? Rahmbo Emanuel ? Dunkin Arne? Oh I know that answer, it hasn’t worked anywhere in ten years so by all means let’s double down and have some more of it.
The tone of this post is somewhat concerning to me. I know that these students are well-intentioned; they are idealistic and honestly believe that they are working to foster positive educational change and help provide a better education for all kids. I believe that they are misguided and have been taken in by the corporate model of “reform,” but as idealistic young men and women who truly believe in what they are doing I don’t think they deserve the scathing tone of the post.
Well…that’s a part of learning. This will welcome them to the real world. If they can’t hang, then they need to go home and hit the books. I’m sure they’ll bounce back. Why treat them with kid gloves. But then again, this is the “trophy for everyone generation”.
BTW- The post is not scathing.It’s honest. They need to apply their critical thinking skills and see what SFER and DFER are really about.
Such an odd student group. I recall being a part of a several groups and none had such an obscure goal. One wanted to end our university’s investment in South Africa under apartheid. Another supported a political party-University Democrats. Another prepared to do direct action if the US invaded Nicaragua. Another was environmental that tried and succeeded in stopping a giant Japanese conglomerate from building a huge copper smelter on a vital bay. I marched to end a war. Marching to have teachers accept a mathematical curiosity as policy is strange.
All the above groups were grassroots ones that wrote our bylaws on beer soaked napkins and were beholden only to ourselves. We worked hard to be right and make sure that our opinions were supported by facts.
Do your homework kids. Testing and accountability hurts students in many ways. You bought a straw horse from a well funded company. How grassroots is that?
I hear ya Kirk. 1980’s – Rutgers: Apartheid, Central America, IBM and disinvestment. The 2010’s march for teachers to accept VAM and other junk science. Truly bizarre. I wonder what they’ve partaken of ?
Money. Cash. Funding. Support. Payola. “Tips”…
The Fabulous Moolah…
THAT’S what they’ve partaken of, Mark.
It’s known as Selling Out.
Shame on them.
“wordsmith23” is correct; these are young, idealistic folk who have (temporarily, perhaps) fallen for the corporate reformists, who you must admit have done an excellent job over the past few years framing themselves as the only people truly serious about “fixing” a putatively broken public school system. For some of them, this is their first involvement in protest or social issues of any kind. I know some members of SFER who became increasingly disillusioned by the way they felt manipulated by the monied reform groups into e.g. becoming scabs during teachers’ strikes or co-sponsoring talks by right-wing speakers at their colleges–and some left the group after being exposed to critiques of the reform agenda. These are living, thinking young people who are undertaking an intellectual adventure, during which they will probably change their opinions a few times (who didn’t in college?)–it’s important that we reach out to them, offer them some alternative ideas, rather than simply castigating them.
Also note: many of these students come from public schools or less elite private schools that don’t have the same admissions costs as NYU and such; not to mention, many of the students at NYU, Columbia, etc. are receiving financial aid that they will be paying off over many years. So to cast them as rich brats meddling in matters they know not of is simple stereotypying. I have noticed that such stereotyping, as well as increasingly Manichean and rancorous rhetoric, have taken hold at this blog. I know that you are capable of more thoughtful, more civil dialogue and I hope you can return to that. Otherwise you are turning off even those who are sympathetic to your efforts.
Speak for yourself when it comes to decrying so-called rancorous rhetoric. What about the Ravitch post is less than thoughtful or civil? Let’s not be too gentle with ignorance. Your concern seems to be that simple stereotyping of “rich brats meddling in matters they know not of” is damaging because they’re not all rich. That they are meddling in matters they know not of is less concerning?
The people bankrolling the ongoing attacks against public education via DFER and its offshoot will step on your throat for the money that is at stake. Let’s not be too “concerned” that we take our eye off the ball.
And who knows more about these matters? Is the only qualification for having expertise in matters of accountability that you went through such experiences as a child? How does their personal financial standing have anything to do with the quality of their arguments? If they’re wrong, say they’re wrong. Why is it important to attack someone personally?
I think the stereotyping (which Diane’s post undoubtedly is) and lambasting is not productive because it does nothing to persuade these students to question the rhetoric of the corporate reformers. As I noted in my post, I’ve seen some of them break with those bankrolling the SFER groups–not because they were being chided for their ignorance, but because someone took the time to explain to them the critiques of educational reform, and because they themselves began to question how the student groups were being used to support a broader privatization agenda that they didn’t sign up for. I think Diane’s post is ungenerous towards these younger folks. It would be better to offer to meet with them, or to invite reform skeptics speakers to speak on campus, and invite them the members of SFER. Many of them are just eager to be “part of the solution” in some general sense and once exposed to alternatives to Rhee et al will often come to their own, more thoughtful conclusions. Diane herself should be familiar with this dynamic, as she made a dramatic late-career shift in her own views on American education.
The “solution” to what exactly?
What do they think they are fighting for or what have they been told to believe?
Why is everyone being so willfully obtuse (at least, I hope it’s willful) in implying that I am an apologist for corporate reform when I’ve argued the opposite? I put “solution” in scare quotes, for Pete’s sake! The level of discussion on this blog is scarcely better than in CNN’s comments section. I guess people just come here to blow off steam and point accusatory fingers at anyone who tries to take small exception to anything Diane writes (and she writes a lot). If this is the best the reform critics have got, God help us.
Diane Ravitch did a good piece on how happy talk is the mandatory lingua franca of the “district reformers” these days. Well this “aggrieved tone” is a similar effort to defuse and deflate opposition. Blog posters call for kid-glove treatment of the children whom hedge fund managers are now pushing forward to continue their fight to profit from schools. Would I be surprised that a hedge fund manager’s daughter or son was executive dir. of SFER at Columbia or Yale, etc? Would you?
What am I doing if not “speaking for myself”? Did I claim to be speaking for anyone else?
Too bad these students can’t do something more positive or productive with their time. They could tutor, volunteer at a school, help out at a clinic, raise some money for a shelter, fix up a senior’s home, mentor students, and / or advocate for an end to war, famine, hunger, poverty, voter suppression, etc.
But – no. They’d rather protest and match and interfere with someone’s job, career, and something they know nothing about.
Yup! That’s something I’d like to be known for. Do they at least get a thank you and flowers?
Here’s my take on this as a resident of an Ivy League community where TFA has a lot of traction: elite schools do not have education departments because, well, you know, education is REALLY not something to major in… it’s a major for so-called “universities” that used to be state teachers colleges… and they buy into the notion that since they were accepted into an elite college they are smarter than ANY education major and smarter than any administrator or teacher in any public school system… the university reinforces this by being disdainful of any major that leads directly to licensure… the result is the TFA ethos… here’s what’s sad: almost every one of these students would have a different impression if they majored in education where they would be required to spend time observing and interacting with bona fide classroom teachers…
I think for Ivy League schools educatin is something to get a graduate degree in. The same is true for business.
Let me give this another try. Ivy League schools typically do not have professional majors. You can not major in education at Harvard just like you can not major in business or law at Harvard. You can, however, get a graduate degree in both education, law, or business at Harvard.
wgersen: Thank you. I think you’ve hit the nail on the head here.
I went to an elite school—not technically the Ivy League, but we all know the equivalent group—and the ethos you describe is pinpoint accurate.
Let them spend some time as a REAL teacher, as opposed to the “Peace Corps/Resume Builder/Credential” they’re so concerned with. That might help.
Diane, although I believe the evidence to be mixed, I agree that – at this time – the science behind VAM is not yet at the point where it can be used to make high-stakes decisions about keeping or letting go of teachers. However, there is one point of disagreement I find with your post:
You’ve claimed that students from certain backgrounds who didn’t experience a particular intervention or situation are unable to understand that situation or implement that intervention. You’ve claimed that the following disqualify those students from an opinion about education policy:
– “The members of SFER pay more in tuition each year than a typical teacher’s annual income.”
– “They are students at elite universities.”
– “many of whom went to private schools”
– “never use standardized tests”
Quite simply, taking the inverse of what you’ve said, the following would be true under your logic:
– No poor student who failed to learn in a private school environment should ever be allowed to teach in a private school catering toward wealthier students
– No Black teacher should ever be allowed to teach White children.
– No teacher who never experienced special education as a child should be allowed to teach children in special education.
Not only do I find these statements inaccurate, but I find them offensive. To suggest that students attending a private university with high tuition should not advocate for a particular educational policy SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY NEVER EXPERIENCED IT THEMSELVES is erroneous and offensive, regardless of how good or bad the proposed policy actually is.
I think your readers would be much more informed by you sticking to an attack of particular arguments, rather than spending a good amount of time attacking the socioeconomic and demographic backgrounds of those presenting arguments you disagree with.
Thank you for your shocking display of rationality in the midst of such shriveling negativity.
Thanks ;).
Hold on a minute. With reflection, even you as the poster, should be able to see the strawman you’ve (inadvertently?) constructed here.
Diane Ravitch didn’t say any of those things, about “rich” or “poor” students. Go back and read what she said.
Her point was this: those students shouldn’t be protesting and commenting on things that they can’t clearly articulate. And yes, the culture of elite schools—and the leaders of SFER, ARE based at NYU and Columbia; get real. That’s the ground the Privatizers and the Hedge Fund Guys like to seed—has an aspect of it that implicitly looks down on people who are “only educators”, unless they’re doing it at an elite post-secondary institution.
Think, please, before YOU lash out. Okay?
Puget Sound Parent – I’m not sure I follow your critique of my comments. Let me address your points you have made individually:
“Diane Ravitch didn’t say any of those things, about “rich” or “poor” students. Go back and read what she said.”
Could you explain why you disagree? I provided a rationale for my comments, but your rationale seems to only include “go back and read what she said” and saying that she didn’t say them. Would you mind being more thorough in your disagreement?
“Her point was this: those students shouldn’t be protesting and commenting on things that they can’t clearly articulate.”
I agree with you, but her rationale for not being able to articulate policy is their demographic background, which comes back to my original argument. Can you provide any other insight as to Diane’s rationale why those students are not entitled to an opinion? If she had said, “these students have never been teachers, so should get experience as a teacher before expressing an opinion so actively,” I might still disagree, but that would be different than attacking the students’ demographic and financial backgrounds as the sole reason for disqualification.
Finally, I find your aggressive and offensive comments unnecessary. Hopefully you can see from my response that I’m willing to engage you if you respond to the points I’ve tried to make. However, the follow statements do nothing but put distance between two folks who (presumably) are just concerned about kids and what to do best:
“Think, please, before YOU lash out. Okay?” (Hopefully you can tell that, even if you disagree, I put thought into my original post?)
“Hold on a minute.” (Are you implying that I’m not entitled to respond, or that somehow I was out of line by expressing disagreement?)
“Go back and read what she said.” (Does it appear to you, from my comments, that I posted without reading her entire post?)
Hopefully we continue to discuss as I tend to learn quite a bit from these kinds of conversations. Looking forward to mutually respectful interactions in the future…
I just don’t get it. How did unionized public school teachers get to be the subject of a student protest? I remember being a student protester myself. I graduated from high school in 1968 and attended college during the Vietnam War. I protested the prosecution of that war, and put on walking shoes for other causes I felt were important–causes like human rights, environmental protection, and arms control.
If these students are marching for test-based teacher evaluations, they should be prepared to back up their positions with compelling data, real evidence, and a strong moral argument.
Come on, on young marchers; put up or shut up. Tell us why your position makes sense on any reasonable grounds. If, upon reflection, you find yourself short on evidence, and if you are sincerely interested in education, please read the studies Dr. Ravitch recommends, and others. You might also be well served to spend time with real public school students, like the ones I see every day in my classroom.
Talk to some real teachers too. Pick a couple of us oldsters. You can find us working late, buying classroom supplies, or picking up books at a library used book sale. Don’t worry that we won’t understand you young Ivy Leaguers. You will find that we are well-educated professionals; I myself have one of those Ivy League degrees (albeit from quite a few years back). The motto of my school is “Veritas” — always a good word to keep in your thoughts. Please study up on the situation you are protesting.
1) They are a very small minority within the student body as a whole.
2) They are getting money—in uneven amounts, no doubt, but still getting it—and they’re making “good connections” for later in life.
It’s not much more complicated beyond that. It’s really not.
What happened to the concept, aspiration, passion (!) of educators striving for students to become excited about learning? What student ever became excited about testing? Surely something has gone haywire in a major way.
Diane,
With all due respect, you know nothing about me. You don’t know what kind of school I went to (public) or how I’m paying for the university I’m very grateful to attend (merit scholarships, Pell grants, and hard work). You do know that SFER NYU meets right down the hall from your office, and despite our invitation you’ve refused to come to a meeting and share with us your knowledge. So we did our own research — we debate, we read, we engage in dialogues with all who will talk to us.
SFER NYU is a small club of progressive students, and we are free to dictate the direction of our chapter and organize around the issues we care about. We saw a problem — that the NYC DOE and UFT need to reach an agreement about teacher evaluations by January 17th, 2013 or NYC schools lose $300 million — and we decided to act. Although your defensiveness and personal attacks may make people think otherwise, we are not taking sides on the issue of VAMs or anything else. We are not arguing about what the evaluation system should look like. We are not attacking teachers in any way — we hold the profession in high regard, and many of us in fact aspire to be teachers. All we are saying is that the DOE and the UFT should sit down and come to some sort of agreement, because if they don’t, our schools — many of them already suffering due to the hurricane — will lose an enormous amount of money.
Policy issues aside, I think it is unprofessional to personally attack people you do not know anything about, not to mention hard-working, honest students at the university that employs you. If you care to get to know us, feel free to come to a meeting or reach out. We more than welcome the dialogue, and we are open to new ideas and perspectives.
And to Mark Collins: you, also, do not know me. You don’t know how many hundreds of hours I spend planning, organizing, and volunteering at a camp for homeless kids. You don’t know that I’ve done community organizing in low-income neighborhoods. You don’t know that I’ve mentored homeless middle school students and volunteered in schools. I’ve done my fair share of advocacy. So to you, and all future commenters: please be a good role model to the younger generation and “do your research” before you make accusations.
Now you know a bit more about one member of SFER NYU, but I encourage you to email us and find out more (sfernyu@gmail.com, or me personally at sara.alwan@nyu.edu). I think you might find we’re not the spoiled, elitist brats you’ve made us out to be (I’m actually hard-pressed to think of one SFER NYU member who went to a private school…). Anyways, here’s to future open, honest, and rhetoric-free dialogue. We hope to hear from you soon.
Respectfully,
Sara Alwan
Member, NYU Students for Education Reform
sara.alwan@nyu.edu
Hi Sara,
While I admire your obvious intelligence and passion, I disagree strongly with what you’ve written. It’s inaccurate. It omits some important facts. And it hurls false accusations.
Diane Ravitch made absolutely no “personal attacks” on you, or any other individual. She did note the irony of your “cause”, which is, I think we all realize, far more involved than the way you’ve presented it here.
Ms. Ravitch never used the word “spoiled”—I’m the dad of an eight year old boy and I despise the way that word is tossed around so cavalierly and mindlessly. They’re children; not dairy products!
Diane also never used the word “brats”. She never called anyone “elitist”. This is unfair.
Now, granted, back in the 1970’s, you’d hesitate before calling NYU an “elite university”; back then, its student body was far less select, yet probably more diverse. Even Columbia, still recovering from the riots on their campus a few years earlier, was not the coveted place it is today.
Congratulations to both of these fine schools for the great improvements they’ve made over the years. I’d be very proud to have my child at either of them, roughly one decade from now.
Let’s face it: Columbia and yes, now NYU are both “elite” universities. And that’s a good thing that far outweighs the downside of such status.
Regarding your comments about policy, however, we heard the same things in early September, in Chicago. People who were on the side of a mayor who was determined to crush the right of teachers to organize—which is a fundamental human right for all who work, everywhere—were saying things like “We are not taking sides on the issue.” or “We are not arguing about what the evaluation system should look like.” or “We are not attacking teachers in any way — we hold the profession in high regard.”
And then they would inevitably say something like, “All we are saying is that the CPS and the CTU should sit down and come to some sort of agreement, because if they don’t, our schools will lose an enormous amount of money and the kids will be the ones who suffer.”
Well, yes, children always suffer when we adults do bad things. Make poor judgments. Act without thinking it through. (Adults are doing far worse things to children in the Middle East as we speak, just to cite an obvious, and particularly egregious example.)
But SFER, like the similar groups funded by a handful of people with absolutely staggering wealth, is clearly taking the side of the NYC DOE. A glance at your website makes that pretty clear; at least for anyone with some background on these issues who can read above a sixth grade level.
Why aren’t you telling us the complete story here? If you’re truly “neutral” in this impending dispute, why is your stance implicitly anti-teacher? Or is it just unionized teachers that you’re opposing?
Are you hiding policy details from we readers, or are you not clear about these issues? Does the “money” you refer to come with any strings attached? What is the source of this money? Who is providing it? Would it require more absolutely awful policies that could even further impede the work of a teacher?
Also, I assume you’re aware that Mayor Bloomberg and his coadjutants took away democratic control of NYC schools, shortly after he left office? And that his old school head, Joel Klein—who ushered in some of the worst policies in the history of public education—is now working for the parent company of Fox “News”, being paid over $2 million per year, courtesy of Rupert Murdoch?
Do you think a politician should seize control of the public schools, removing them from parents like myself?
And do you realize that the second and third biggest American cities, Los Angeles and Chicago, have done the same? And that it’s a major goal for privatizers to do the same, all over the country?
Does SFER defend this practice of mayors and other politicians seizing control of the schools, its appointments, and its dollars—taking all power away from parents and taxpayers?
Why isn’t THIS one of the things that SFER—which you describe as “progressive”—worked up about?
Yes, it’s just one example. But a particularly odious one. Wouldn’t you agree? And don’t you think that there is a direct relationship between the inability of the NYC DOE—like their counterparts at CPS—to reach an agreement with the local AFT, and the fact that they are no longer selected by, or responsive to, the public?
Best to you, Sara. I hope that your views continue to develop and sharpen over the years to come. Despite our differing views, I’d be very proud if you were my daughter.
Puget Sound Parent —
Thank you for your thoughtful comments. I am encouraged by people like you who do much to challenge what I believe in a way that’s respectful and productive.
I’d like to address just a few of the things you pointed out, and this time I am speaking as an individual; these views are very much my own (SFER NYU members are diverse in their beliefs, so it’s important that this point is clear).
The way I see it, the DOE and UFT must come to an agreement at some point. In fact, it’s now state law that before they can come up with a new full contract (the last one expired years ago), they must agree on some sort of teacher evaluation system. If the two parties — who by law must do it eventually anyways — can come to an agreement before the deadline (which, admittedly, will be much more difficult because of the time lost due to Hurricane Sandy) then NYC schools won’t have to give up $300 million. This money — and this is a fact I’ve heard from people within the DOE — has already been budgeted and it would be a huge blow to schools if the money was taken away. To me, herein lies the immediate problem. And this is what I’m working to avoid.
This is coming from a place of genuine concern and a real passion for doing what’s right for the next generation. I, truly, am in no way anti-teacher; like I said, I aspire to be a teacher one day. I see a meaningful evaluation system — one based mostly on classroom observations (60% by state law), one that provides meaningful feedback and room for growth — as a bonus to keeping the money in our schools. The UFT and the DOE won’t get 100% of what they want, but I think if the process and the dialogue are open and productive, they can reach a deal they are both proud of.
I do understand the concept of mayoral control. Los Angeles, where I’m from, in fact doesn’t have mayoral control (you were right about Chicago, but not my hometown!) and the school system has suffered greatly from the lack of clear accountability. In achieving mayoral control, Bloomberg knew full well that he would be attacked and blamed for the failings of the system even more harshly than before — but I think it’s important for the public to know where this responsibility lies. In fact, as do ALL of the mayoral candidates. (Check out what the said at the mayoral forum I attended the other day: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/20/nyregion/nyc-mayoral-hopefuls-discuss-improving-schools.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&_r=0 . All candidates said they would support mayoral control if they became mayor). That being said, there is a way to go about mayoral control that is more democratic and inclusive, and this is indeed a very important point.
Again, thank you for your thoughtful response. I encourage further dialogue, but may not have a chance to respond in full over the next few days. Wishing you and your family a happy Thanksgiving!
Best,
Sara
I’m more agnostic than Christian, but I think Jesus had a lot of good things to say. One of which is that you shall know them by their fruits. You claim that we don’t know you, Sara, but we see what you do. What you do is inherently anti-teacher, which makes you, regardless of what you say, anti-teacher.
Anyway, Puget Sound Parent is apparently way nicer than I am and has a lot of good things to say. I hope you read his post thoroughly and give it some serious thought.
Hi Sara,
I looked you up and found a short bio at http://nyudems.wordpress.com/about/ .
While we are all stakeholders in education, I often wonder what business people like Arne Duncan and Margaret Spellings have in education when non of their credentials are in the field. I would not want to lead a field in which I have no qualifications.
Having said that, I noticed in your bio that you are interested in “social justice, particularly as it relates to public education policy.” I think a lot of people here share that interest.
I noticed your studies include International Relations, French, and Social & Public Policy. Would you ever consider majoring in education as a formal study? I would strongly encourage someone of your intelligence to do so.
Hey Joe!
That bio is slightly outdated — I’m now a senior! Unfortunately, I realized pretty late in the game my passion for education so I wouldn’t have been able to switch my major without spending a couple more years as an undergrad. But I am considering grad school!
Thanks for the comment, and happy Thanksgiving!
Sara
Sara, thanks for weighing in! I posted a similar disagreement above and also found Diane’s comments to be out of line and offensive, but it’s very helpful to hear from folks like you who are actually involved in the situation. Thanks for clearing up your agenda, and for weighing in.
“And to Mark Collins: you, also, do not know me. You don’t know how many hundreds of hours I spend planning, organizing, and volunteering at a camp for homeless kids. You don’t know that I’ve done community organizing in low-income neighborhoods. You don’t know that I’ve mentored homeless middle school students and volunteered in schools. I’ve done my fair share of advocacy. So to you, and all future commenters: please be a good role model to the younger generation and “do your research” before you make accusations.”
Thanks Sara for the scolding. I don’t believe I know you. I don’t believe I even personalized my attack like you have. I’m confused about the accusation you claim I’ve made. Pray tell. Lastly, I’ve offered some suggestions for college students that might be more productive than SFER. In closing, I’ll offer one more. Come see me after 25 years of teaching in an urban setting. I’ll still be around. We’ll talk then.
Thanks Sara for the scolding. I don’t believe I know you. I don’t believe I even personalized my attack like you have. I’m confused about the accusation you claim I’ve made. Pray tell. Lastly, I’ve offered some suggestions for college students that might be more productive than SFER. In closing, I’ll offer one more. Come see me after 25 years of teaching in an urban setting. I’ll still be around. We’ll talk then.
***PEOPLE: SFER is a well-organized SHAM front for ???
Example: https://twitter.com/SFERHarvard – they don’t tweet, they only re-tweet. Their WEBSITE (http://ww.sferharvard.wordpress.com/) is Stepford-Studentish. My daughter just graduated from MSU College of ED and this is NOT how real ed students talk or act…
There are no last names on the “About Us” page and the cute little bios are filled in with a perfect assortment of non-overlapping “favorite topics”. AND the listed topics are NOT what ed-students are into! The “Contact Us” page gets even weirder; I’m not even sure they are using real Harvard email addresses.
Under “Good Reads” the chapter leaders all take turns writing polite letters of dissenting diatribe to a NY Times Letter to the Editor – it’s like reading one long ROBOT CALL! Some group has gone to great lengths to set up deceptive social media platforms for large universities across the country. Check out all the strangely empty university website and twitter templates that are ready & waiting (many have been ‘liked’ only by the busy chapter leaders at Harvard):
https://twitter.com/similar_to/SFERnotredame.
Who is paying these students for their names (if they are real) and who is spending the time and money to set up fake “chapters” across the country? Michelle? ALEC? Creepy.
Daddies and mommies in the hedge fund business?