The reader who calls himself or herself “democracy” has written a two-part response to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which continues to market the tired cliche–how 30 years old–that our schools are failing and our nation is at risk.

 

The critics like to cherry-pick international test data to buttress their call for “reform.” I suppose if –– like the Roundtable and the Chamber – you’re willing game the economy for profit at the expense of the nation, while calling for more top-end tax cuts and the axing of social safety net and public programs, then you’re also quite willing to lie about a set of numbers. And if you’re willing to blame teachers, and a lack of “accountability” and“ rigorous” standards, for declining American economic competitiveness – as the “talented and oh-so-privileged Amanda Ripley does –– just to sell books, all the while posturing as an “expert” and posing as an “investigative journalist,” well grandma better watch out, because she might be the next one thrown off the train.

That’s the common refrain among the current crop of “reformers.” Their prescription for“reform” is necessary to “make America more competitive” in the global economy. Bill Gates says it. Jeb Bush says it. The U.S. Chamber says, “Common core academic standards among the states are essential” to U.S. competitiveness. The Business Roundtable rekindles the scary myth from A Nation at Risk that a “rising tide of mediocrity” threaten national security, saying that “Since the release of A Nation at Risk in 1983, it has been increasingly clear that…academic expectations for American students have not been high enough.” Not surprisingly, nimrods like Condaleezza “Mushroom Cloud” Rice and Joel “News Corporation” Klein have added their shrill hysterics to the mix. But there’s no there there!

The World Economic Forum ranks nations each year on competitiveness. It uses “a highly comprehensive index” of the “many factors” that enable “national economies to achieve sustained economic growth and long-term prosperity.”

The U.S. is usually in the top five (if not 1 or 2). When it drops, the WEF doesn’t cite education, but stupid economic decisions and policies.

For example, when the U.S. dropped from 2nd to 4th in 2010-11, four factors were cited by the WEF for the decline: (1) weak corporate auditing and reporting standards, (2) suspect corporate ethics, (3) big deficits (brought on by Wall Street’s financial implosion) and (4) unsustainable levels of debt.


Last year (2011-12), major factors cited by the WEF are a “business community” and business leaders who are “critical toward public and private institutions,” a lack of trust in politicians and the political process with a lack of transparency in policy-making, and “a lack of macroeconomic stability” caused by decades of fiscal deficits especially deficits and debt accrued over the last decade that “are likely to weigh heavily on the country’s future growth.”

And this year (2012-13) the WEF dropped the U.S. to 7th place, citing problems like “increasing inequality and youth unemployment” and, environmentally, “the United States is among the countries that have ratified the fewest environmental treaties.“ The WEF noted that in the U.S.,”the business community continues to be critical toward public and private institutions” and “trust in politicians is not strong.” Political dysfunction has led to “a lack of macroeconomic stability” that “continues to be the country’s greatest area of weakness.”


[Note: data on 2009, from the 2010-1011 competitiveness report can be found here:http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GlobalCompetitivenessReport_2010-11.pdf

The problem in American public education is largely one of poverty. The data show it. Indeed, PISA scores (the scores usually cited by public education critics) are quite sensitive to income level. If one disaggregates U.S. scores the problem becomes clearer: the more poverty a school has, the lower its scores. The presumed do-gooders seem to think that more “competition” and ambitiousness will cause the schools to fix the effects of poverty. Those effects are pernicious. It takes commitment and resources to counteract them. Not testing. Not “rigor.”

Alleviating poverty and its pernicious effects, providing children with high quality environments before they get to school, and following up with health and academic and social policy programs while they are in school, result not only in high-quality education but also in a high-quality citizenry. Both are critical to genuine national security. They constitute the real-world manifestation of equity and promoting the general welfare. This is surely not what corporate “reformers” want. It will require and end to their manipulation and gaming of the “markets” and the tax system. Far easier to blame somebody else, and hold THEM “accountable.”

The public education system in a democratic republic is supposed to develop and nurture democratic character and citizenship. Surely, that’s the kind of reform we need.

And it’s exactly the kind of reform the corporate “reformers” and their allies have little (if any) interest in.