This is one of the best reviews of “Reign of Error” that I have read. Because it was written as an editorial, it didn’t go into close detail, as others have, but it went right to the point:
What she claims is that many tried-and-true practices work; many new-fangled innovations now favored by politicians and powerful interest groups do not. Small class sizes demonstrably improve achievement, for instance; merit pay and charter schools motivated by profit do not. In this context, she has high praise for Vermont, calling it the “best education state in the nation” because of its commitment to small neighborhood schools governed by local communities. Other states have been more easily swayed by the promise of charters and by federal money that encourages competition among schools.
But of all the points Ravitch makes, we find most compelling her assertion that corporate money and power threaten the integrity and possibly the very existence of public education. Public schools uphold collective values, break down racial and religious barriers, and are integral to the concept of citizenship. Without them, democracy would be jeopardized. Local communities, not hedge fund managers and entrepreneurs, must remain financially and socially invested in public education. That’s a back-to-basics lesson not to be forgotten.
One of the great things about this review is that it goes straight to describing the alternatives, the very real, very important alternatives, that Dr. Ravitch describes in her book. This is not one of those books that simply lays out a negative case. It describes a better way. In debate terms, it presents the negative and affirmative, the rebuttal and constructive cases. The reviews of Dr. Ravitch’s books tend to dismiss them as being negative but as not offering any alternative solutions. Nothing could be further from the truth.
I should have said “The reformers’ reviews of Dr. Ravitch’s books. There are, of course, many, many reviews, like this one, that suggest that their authors actually read the book! 🙂
Robert,
I totally agree.
Reblogged this on David R. Taylor-Thoughts on Texas Education.
Small class sizes benefit low-income children in the early elementary grades. Other than that, class size mandates are a diversion of resources away from more effective strategies.
Charter schools in Florida just outperformed traditional public schools on NAEP. And charters in Indianapolis are far outperforming traditional public schools. Okay, enough of the facts, already. Back to Diane.
Please back up your assertions/opinions with some solid evidence. If not then what is say is just that “what you say” nothing more, nothing less.
what you say not what is say
” Public schools uphold collective values, break down racial and religious barriers, and are integral to the concept of citizenship.”
I was torn with what to excerpt from the post; so much of it resonated to me.