John Dewey wrote this great sentiment over a century ago:
“What the best and wisest parent wants for his child, that must we want for all the children of the community. Anything less is unlovely, and left unchecked, destroys our democracy.”
I do not begrudge any parent their decision to send their child to a private or religious school, so long as they pay for it themselves. What I object to is when parents choose a private school for its small classes, its experienced faculty, its wonderful curriculum, its great arts programs, and its freedom from standardized testing…..but advocate for something far different for other people’s children.
Instead of fighting to get comparable programs for public schools, they insist that other people’s children should have larger classes, a school day devoted to reading and math, no arts programs, and nonstop testing.
Sandy Kress, the architect of NCLB, is now a lobbyist for Pearson, which won a contract worth nearly $500 million from the state of Texas as the legislature cut the schools’ budget by $5.4 billion.
This comment came from a reader in Texas:
Ms. Ravitch – I found the following as I was researching private schools for my son last night. The first part is a part of the homepage for a primary school affiliated with the middle school that Sandy Kress’ children have attended. The second part includes testimonials from Sandy Kress. I removed his childrens’ names.
Why Paragon for grades 2-5?
• Central Austin Location
• Small class sizes
• Experienced and caring teachers
• Academic challenge
• Daily PE, plus Art, Music, Electives
• Selective admission
• Fully accredited
• No STARR test = more time to learn!
To schedule a visit – contact Headmaster ____________________________________________________
Testimonials for Paragon Prep
Paragon creatively concocts the perfect recipe for bright adolescents: begin with a classically driven curriculum seasoned with open-minded innovation, high moral expectations with a good dose of humor and a hilarious pinch of irreverence. Then add competitive spirit on the field and in the classroom, blended with genuine care so that each student and athlete feels a valued part of the school. But their secret and unique ingredient: the total focus is on the middle schoolers’ needs with the aim to provide the best preparation possible for high school. We as ourselves how is it possible that all this takes place in such a modest building with no aggressive fundraising or fancy bells and whistles. How do they turn out kids with a disciplined work ethic and a passion for learning? Now we know. Our son, _____, comes home everyday with stories of friendship, teamwork, and a mind brimming full of new thoughts. Paragon Prep is one of the smartest decisions we have ever made.
Camille and Sandy Kress
Parents of _____ Kress (Class of _____)
and _____ Kress (Class of _______)
________________________________________
Diane Ravitch's blog 
“No STARR Test = More Time to Learn”
Wouldn’t this make a great bumper sticker? Maybe you can use it as a fundraiser for the parents who want to opt out in TX!
Brilliant idea! There are fifty states. Money to be made.
The old expression: what is good for the goose is good for the gander comes to mind. This sounds like an education all students should be exposed to. So why are students being subjected to constant fill in the bubble tests and mindless fill in the blank work? (I guess the better to subjugate them later in life. The old expression, what is good for the goose is good for the gander comes to mind. This sounds like an enriching education that all students should be exposed to. So why are students being subjected to constant fill in the bubble tests and mindless fill in the blank work?
I guess the better to subjugate them later in life. Some will be able to think and the rest will be worker bees and drones. No questions asked.
But rich parents may well choose a school because it is a Montessori school, a Waldorf school, or a Progressive school. Traditional public schools can never specialize in those types of education. Shouldn’t those parents advocate for everyone to have the same choices available for all students?
Yes, and I’d argue that public schools should wake-up and start providing those choices. I would also argue that parents should become more active and involved in their child’s education and perhaps make the case at their local school board meeting and state department of education. (I would say more, but that’s a different thread and possible rant.)
I don’t know that we need to wake up so much as we need money and flexibility (read freedom form incessant testing and tracking of students and teachers).
Perhaps it would be more possible for public schools to offer more choices (even within a school..) if there were not vast sums of money being spent of testing, test security, data collection and tracking programs, and all manner of other NCLB/RTTT mandates.
There was not a wide range of choices before NCLB/RTTT, so I don’t see that as the problem. I think the issue is that the parents who are interested in these types of educations do not happen to all live in the same elements school catchment area.
TE @ 10:16
Disagree.
In my district they were experimenting with single gender, Montessori and several other things within some elementary schools.
Then testing mania hit.
Then the massive budget cuts hit.
All gone.
We’re those schools traditional zoned schools? Did parents have any choice in enrolling students in those programs?
Yes and yes.
As I remember it, within a school, there were some classrooms with single gender or Montessori and parents could choose to place their kids in that type of room. The other classes remained traditional.
Choice is the key that unlocks the kind of education that is possible in private schools.
More money and freedom from excessive testing data tracking, etc. could make more options possible.
Even within traditionally zoned public schools.
A traditional zoned school could never be a Progressive school. Every school catchment has its own Harlan Underhill.
A traditional zoned school could have a progressive option within the school. The elementary school in the town where I lived for 7 years will be implementing a progressive option next year. The local Harlan Underhill is free to choose that option or the traditional option.
Good to hear that parents and students will be allowed some choice. Will students outside of the school’s catchment area be allowed to attend those classes as well? Will there be a set of Waldorf classes?
I think we have the” ever moving goal post” going on here.
Summary:
Public schools can and do provide some choice.
They could provide more if they had more money and freedom from incessant, expensive testing, etc.
Can individual schools provide every single option you can pull out of your hat? No.
Will the rich have more choices, yes. They will also have more gadgets, cars, vacations and all manner of goodies. They are rich.
Is this a reason to screw the public schools (out of money resources, confidence, support. etc)?
Not IMHO.
My point is that traditional zoned public schools can not offer the choices available to parents who can afford private schools no matter how much money is spent on public schools. You have to give the parents the freedom to choose a school if you want the schools to offer substantially different classroom experiences.
I thought the question was whether it’s objectionable “parents choose a private school” for certain attributes and then don’t advocate for (or advocate against) those same attributes in public schools.
These parents are also choosing a school that can make these things available at a price tag is only possible because the labor costs are substantially cheaper than at public schools. So I do have a problem with someone who chooses a private school for its lower class sizes but also chooses to advocate against attempts to reduce the expenses that make it difficult for public schools to lower their class sizes. I also have a problem with someone who, through no merit of their own, has the money to pay for the education they want for their children, while advocating for policies that would restrict students to their zoned schools. Whatever the merits of these education policy debates, there’s an element of hypocrisy to them that sticks in my craw.
I can tell you what parents don’t want – an education system that is run by bureaucrats that know nothing about education. Read, “Yes, We Are STUPID in America!” and find out why more and more parents are electing to take their children out of public schools.
I can’t really blame them.
I will not read your book. I can’t emphasize that enough.
Are you afraid of what you might find – the truth about what goes on in many public schools, particularly in rural areas?
Yes, I’m terrified.
Please stop hijacking threads on this blog to promote your book.
There, I said it.
You are absolutely right. I am guilty of trying to promote my book. Unless you are a Diane Ravitch or Michelle Rhee, you can’t get exposure without resources. I apologize. However, being a former teacher, counselor and principal in a rural area, I felt compelled to let people know what goes on inside the schools that hinders student achievement – stupid leaders and stupid policies.
Every time I read stories like this, I immediately think of “Brave New World.”
And, unfortunately, I think about this prophetic book mulitple times a day.
Ironically, I found the information Dr. Ravitch refers to above when I was looking for a way to get my child far far away from Mr. Kress’ STAAR testing. That is the only reason we are considering taking our son out of our neighborhood schools.
Dewey is despised the today’s corporate set and their made yes-men. Yet, agree with him or not, he was a great American on the level of Emerson, Thoreau, and William James. The poignancy of the contrast between Dewey’s moral integrity and humanity compared to their total lack of either one is almost too much to bear.
It is literally sickening in fact.
Agree!
Idea:
Any “reform” strategy that makes public schools LESS like Sidwell Friends should be avoided.
Does Sidwell Friends do anything other than college prep?
Yes. They teach and students learn. I’m sure there are networking opportunities beyond imagination.
What I had more in mind were courses on welding, automobile mechanics, culinary arts, etc. A short peek at the website does not show any of those classes as being offered at Sidwell Friends.
Many of the posts complaining about the Common Core criticize it as assuming all of the students will go to college. Requiring all high schools to move closer to Sidwell Friends seems to me to be vulnerable to that same criticism.
I haven’t noticed any reform strategies (at least not any that have ben foisted on my district) that have encouraged culinary arts or automotive.
Reform strategies actually make those harder to access for my students because they have to pass endless rather difficult tests to pass 9 and 10 grade courses in order to be eligible for the tech programs. ESOL kids often get burned out and frustrated with the mandated curriculum and bail before gaining admission to the program.
Your suggestion of making all schools more like Sidwell Friends would require the elimination of those classes.
To TE,
Who said anything about requiring anything?
“Requiring all high schools to move closer to Sidwell Friends seems to me to be vulnerable to that same criticism.”
Straw man much?
I just suggested we avoid requirements
(such as excessive use of standardized testing, ranking teachers based on test scores, increasing class sizes, decreasing arts, etc.)
that move us further away from the kind of education many well off families want.
To TE @ 3:05
No, it would not.
Would a reform strategy that called for schools to have tech programs result in schools being less like Sidwell Friends?
“Your suggestion of making all schools more like Sidwell Friends would require the elimination of those classes.”
Not what I wrote, not what I meant.
But you know that, don’t you?
I certainly do not want to misunderstand your idea. You stated
“Any “reform” strategy that makes public schools LESS like Sidwell Friends should be avoided.”
Are we in agreement that any reform strategy which enhances technical education will make a public school less like Sidwell Friends? If so, should reforms of those types be avoided?
OK, TE, I’ll bite.
I will assume you are not being disingenuous.
Despite the following from you:
“Requiring all high schools to move closer to Sidwell Friends seems to me to be vulnerable to that same criticism.”
Never said to require anything.
“Your suggestion of making all schools more like Sidwell Friends”
Never suggested we make all schools more like anything.
I merely suggested we avoid the strategies that are currently pushed off as reform (such as testing, limited, narrow curriculum offerings, test and punish strategies, etc, etc, ) as these things would never be tolerated for the children of the well off and well connected.
I do not see continuing or even adding to vocational offerings as school reform.
We have had vocational for a long time (at least since the 1940’s when my parents were in school).
It is not what I consider reform.
In fact, as I said, the current reform as I am experiencing it is an impediment to vocational classes for many students.
So again, auto body is not what I consider school reform
Perhaps you do.
That is fine, but it is what I was referring to.
I believe you knew that.
My larger point is that Sidwell Friends is designed around educating particular types of students with particular desires and goals. It is probably not even the most academically challenging high school in in the DC metropolitan area (I think that Thomas Jefferson High, a qualified admission public high school would be the most academically challenging). Some of what Sidwell Friends does well for their students is likely to be a terrible idea for other students. That is why matching student to school is important and a huge advantage enjoyed by those with the means to choose a private school.
I note that any reform strategy that would jettison defined-benefit pension plans or require employees to contribute toward health care premiums would not make public schools less like Sidwell Friends, but rather would make them a lot more like it.
Are you saying that northern elite private schools do not offer a good benefits package for faculty?
I would be surprised, as the big deal privates in my area offer at least as good as the public schools and in some instances much better.
However, I am in the south..non union.
We already pay toward our health premiums and have underfunded pensions.
I can’t speak for elite northeast private schools, but my faculty at my public university do not have a defined benefits retirement plan, though there are some members of the staff who do.
Yes, I’m saying that the northern elite private schools don’t offer benefits packages on par with public schools. For example, they don’t have defined-benefit pensions, and they generally contribute much more toward their healthcare expenses. They also either generally work on one-year contracts or can be fired at will. When you send your children to one of these schools, that’s the system that you are supporting. I don’t see the point of denying that.
To flerper.
Interesting, I did not know that. Thank you for the information.
I assumed the faculty at Sidwell etc did very well.
The southern big deal privates I am aware of have very good pay/benefits packages. Very close and in some cases better than the surrounding publics.
And most of the faculty has been there for years (very low turnover), but they are on yearly contracts.
Again, I am in a non union state, so the public school offerings are getting worse every year.
Why is trying to deny anything?
Thank you for the information.
I don’t know how well they do relative to other parts of the country, but it’s conventional wisdom that private school teachers have much worse retirement and medical benefits, and little in the way of due process rights, compared to their public school counterparts (and I don’t think any public school teachers in places like Chicago, Massachusetts, or New York would disagree on this point). This is something that has to be taken into consideration when we make arguments that public schools should be more like private schools. Because if private schools had the labor costs of public schools, they would be even more eye-poppingly expensive. And employee unions would never permit the public schools to adopt the labor cost structure of private schools.
Re: regionalism — the more I read this blog, with comments coming from all over the country, the more I realize how different these issues are depending on where you live. It’s hard to discuss private schools, or selective public schools, or charter schools as a general matter when I’m coming from a NYC perspective that often appears to be very different from others’ perspectives.
So true. People in the rural areas of the deep South have a completely different perspective than inner city New Yorkers.
I know, but how could I begin to learn about rural public schools? It’s not like there’s a book I could read.
Diane,
I keep running into people who believe education should be all about comparing schools, and measuring achievement, and experimenting with charter schools. Do you have any suggestions on how to make a convincing argument as to why this is not the way to go?
Andy, I try to make those arguments in my last book. Education is not about generating data and winning, but about developing good human beings who will be good citizens in our democracy.
I believe that such schools for the rest of us are called charter schools.
I’d call the Kress endorsement a smoking cannon. Other peoples children indeed. And, Mr. Underhill, you could not be more wrong about charters. Regular public schools could easily duplicate the private school model if unencumbered by junk science agendas and burdensome requirements imposed by those with less than no knowledge of what education is.
Nice to see the diffusional, diversional comments of TE again asking what appear to be well intentioned questions in the quiet, stentorian manner of a well worn sweater with leather elbow patches. Don’t be fooled. Do study his questions as they will crop up from other non TE sources in lieu of cogent arguments. It’s good practice, but don’t waste time chasing your tails for his/her amusement.
The best and wisest parents wish their children to have the best school for their children. For some that may be Sidwell Friends, for some it may be TJ, for some it may be a Waldorf school, for some it may be a Montessori school That best school will not be the same for all. How is this a diversion from the topic at hand?
Thanks for the tip. TE is one of my favorite commenters, because he does what curious economists do: ask questions that challenge your assumptions. As long as the questions are good, I couldn’t care less what the motivation is.
I am not complaining, but anybody else notice how this discussion has veered far away from the outrageous hypocrisy of the leading charterites/privatizers in fiercely advocating and providing for other people’s children something very different from what they fiercely advocate and provide for their own?
I refer y’all back to the quote by John Dewey near the beginning of this post: “What the best and wisest parent wants for his child, that must we want for all the children of the community. Anything less is unlovely, and left unchecked, destroys our democracy.”
Not a single comment has made this any less true or valid.
Yes, Krazy, you’re right: this is an interesting discussion, but back to the original point (especially for teachingeconomist): Sandy Kress was an architect of NCLB. Sandy Kress is now a lobbyist for Pear$on, the company that is making $500 million from Texas, selling the state the STARR. Sandy Kress send HIS children to a school which advertises “No STARR Test=More Time to Learn!” For goodness sake, do you NOT see what’s wrong here? Sandy Kress is selling something (STARR) while stating (by way of sending his children to a school that advertises “More Time to Learn!” by NOT giving STARR) that this “something” (STARR) takes away learning time from children! This is NOT about this parent having the right to choose his children’s school w/in their best interests–this IS about foisting something on ALL OTHER children that is obviously detrimental to THEIR learning, all the while making MONEY from that something (STARR). But–it’s okay for all the OTHER children to have their learning time taken away for STARR prep and testing! Read, again, the John Dewey quote cited by Krazy TA above. THAT’s the point. ALL of our children are deserving of an optimal learning environment. It is not school choice–it is what NCLB & RTTT have forced upon our public schools, and not the schools themselves. It is the public schools (teachers, students, parents) which have NOT been given a “choice.”
Thank you for stating it so well. The hypocrisy of Kress and other pro-standardized testing “reformers” who send their kids to schools that don’t test, is stunning.
retiredbutmissthekids: I agree with Gayaneh.
And your succinct but powerful point is a testimonial to the power of this blog and why Diane (on behalf of all of us) has to endure needless insults and smears.
To add a minor point: when you can use the public words and observable actions of the KressMeister Himself, not taken out of context or mangled, and he shows himself to be an unabashed hypocrite, you have shown once again that the leading charterites/privatizers have no shame. They truly and sincerely believe with all their hearts that their children deserve a world-class twenty-first century education and that the children of everyone else deserve an education that can best be described as Noblesse oblige obedience school.
Thank you for your posting. Keep on keepin’ on.
🙂
New York State’s Governor Andrew Cuomo also see fits to send his own children to an elite out of state school while cutting New York State public schools to shreds.