C.M. Rubin traveled the globe and interviewed educators with interesting ideas, insights, experience.
She conducted more than 250 interviews.
She invited Adam Steiner, a technology specialist in the Holliston, Massachusetts, public schools to review them and select the Top Ten.
I am happy to say that I am one of them.
Read here to find the Top Ten and their interviews.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
The teacher selected to pick the top 10 interviews apparently works in a community that is, according to Wikipedia, 96.7% white and in 2000, had a median income of $$84,878 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holliston,_Massachusetts#Demographics
Was there a single person on the list of “top ten” who had worked in an urban public school that had done very well with students from low income families? Nope.
I wonder if it’s because there was not a single example of such a person interviewed, or because such an interview didn’t interest this teacher much.
Joe… I know you’re disappointed the usual reformy-type suspects were excluded froom this list. Let’s give Steiner credit; perhaps he knows the current ed reform movement is a fraud and choses not to validate it’s players not by mentioning them.
Perhaps he believes producing “dramatic improvements for students, especially students from low income families” doesn’t mean picking your students and eliminating those toughest to educate (and using magnet lotteries to give credence to charters is a straw man arguement).
Your Huff Po comment is misleading: “As an urban public school parent, teacher, PTA president and advocate, I find this list deeply disappointing.” I find it “disappointing” you failed to mention you are a charter advocate. Furthermore, you claim you are an “urban parent” as if you face the same obstacles the typical urban family faces.
Mike I’m disappointed by the total absence of anyone who works directly with, and is successful with, urban youngsters- be they from a district or a charter public school.
There are millions of people who live in cities…with widely varying experiences. I’m one of them.
Dianne, I do follow this blog —current events of ther status of charters, common core standards, and tenure. Needed to comment on the top ten list, none of which would have been my picks for where we need to be in education today. Yes, except for Randy Weingarten (she is wherever the picture frame is hung), they are all big picture thinkers, which I admit is needed, but the educators I pay attention provide the needed insights into what we need to do in the real world of classrooms to change the current assign and assess model of schooling. Here is my list: Deborah Ball, Maggie Lampert, Laurie Sleep, Cynthia Coburn, Lee Shulman, Pamela Grossman, M. Spillane, G. D. Festermacher, Virginia Richardson. I could name more, but their names are buried in the minutia of research papers that few read, but express deep truths about the what, why, and how of instructional change. I would add, as I said above, I read this blog more as a current events of schooling — mostly what I term the Arnie Duncan wars. But at ground level, in classrooms and administrative offices where I spent my career, Deborah Ball, et.al. is where school reform needs to begin. I know, there is testing, and charters and common core standards –but in my career I ignored/modified/bridged/buffetted, these reforms, and focused my faculty on how to teach math better or social studies. I would admit that arguing big picture policies gets you on Fox or CNN, but does nothing to how teachers teach and student learn mathematics.
good list, Alan.
Where were the Top 10 when NCLB was being put into place. Why was it not prevented by the experts who should have been able to foresee this corporate feeding frenzy? Why could they not recognize that Bush’s covert goal was to profit the wealthy?
To the owner of this blog: I noticed under the “Conversations” [i.e., comments] thread that you were paid the highest possible compliment for garnering spot #1—
“I find this list deeply disappointing.” [Joe Nathan]
Could it be that he is opposed in principle to the whole idea of picking a top ten, or because he finds himself opposed to labeling & sorting & ranking using some ill-founded numerological criteria, or that he has broken with the High Holy Church of Testolatry, or that he has now abandoned promoting and mandating the mad dog pursuit of $tudent $ucce$$ by the leading charterites/privatizers?
No, it’s really—not Rheeally!—much more simple than that. You simply aren’t a “thought leader” of the charterite/privatization movement and hence don’t qualify as a cage busting achievement gap crushing 21st century innovative disruptor.
You’re just for a “better education for all.” Congratulations!
😃
But a heartfelt reminder to the commenter: one of the most powerful and brilliant intellects of the “education reform” movement has pontificated on this subject—
“Men lie and women lie but numbers don’t.” [“Dr.” Steve Perry, “America’s Most Trusted Educator”—it says so in big letters on his website]
But said commenter wasn’t supposed to reveal a super secret Marxist dictum:
“Those are my principles, and if you don’t like them.. well, I have others.” [Groucho]
Hint: you’re not supposed to let the Marxist cat out of the rheephorm bag. Looks bad in public. Hurts that business plan that masquerades as an education model.
Just some friendly advice from you local neighborhood KrazyTA.
Rheeally! In a Johnsonally sort of way…
😎
KTA,
You’ve written some quotes about humor, or lack of it. Some to the effect of “A day without humor. . . ” or “Humor is. . . ” etc. . . .
Can you please post of few for me?
Thanks,
Duane
Señor Swacker: me da gusto presentarselo/it is my pleasure to present it to you—
A), “A day without laughter is a day wasted.” [Charlie Chaplin, “Ph.D” in Laughology with a minor in Smile-esthenics);
B), “Against the assault of laughter nothing can stand.” [Mark Twain, following up on his “Humor is mankind’s greatest blessing”); and
C), “Humor is reason gone mad.” [from that greatest of all Marxists, Groucho]
Now, just to, er, leave you laughing, a few quotes from Dorothy Parker about the self-styled leaders of the “education reform” movement.” *Ok, I’m doing a decontextualized rip-off of selected excerpts—but hey!—what do you expect from someone who has faithfully done all the required CCSS ‘closet’ reading without a sufficient supply of fresh flashlight batteries?*
First, about all those in mad dog pursuit of $tudent $ucce$$: “If you want to know what God thinks of money, just look at the people he gave it to.”
Second, about all those unconfirmed rumors about the upcoming COLLECTED WIT AND WISDOM OF ARNE DUNCAN: “This is not a novel to be tossed aside lightly. It should be thrown with great force.” *News on the grapevine is that it was first to be a graphic novel, then a dummies how-to manual, and now a 1-page coloring book. Wow! Talk about low expectations!*
Third, that the creators of CCSS seem to not understand which of the following is the worse alternative: “I’d rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy.” *Pearson will pretest to find the ‘best’ answer to a five-part item about this on their next set of high-stakes standardized tests.*
Fourth, on the acting ability of Michelle Rhee when she tries to explain ed reform in public: “She runs the gamut of emotions from A to B.” *Not to be confused with her fleeing from a public discussion with Diane Ravitch. Her fright in flight was genuine.*
Fifth and last, on John Deasy’s initial reaction to his deals with Apple and Pearson: “The two most beautiful words in the English language are ‘cheque enclosed.”
Okay, time to hang up my hat and rest my weary head. Oh, how I wish I could tell Arne Duncan’s boss, Bill Gates, what I really think of his plans for public education:
“You have a ready wit. Tell me when it’s ready.” [Henny Youngman]
😎
I find the list very interesting and, of course, greatly appreciate the efforts of Diane in helping meet the challenges now facing public education in the US. However, I am interested in this statement and need a little clarity.
“What would be your position on improving the teaching profession, including recruitment, teacher training, compensation, and assignment to low-income schools?
I would like to see higher standards for entry into schools of education. I would wish that every teacher has a four-year degree in a content area, so they are knowledgeable in the subjects they will teach, and a fifth year of study of education, including cognitive science, adolescent psychology, assessment, cultural diversity, the sociology of the family and the community, and the history, politics, and economics of education. No one should be allowed to teach who does not have a year of study that includes practice teaching and research. I would also disallow education degrees earned online. Teachers should be paid more for taking on additional responsibilities; they should not have their pay or evaluation tied to test scores of students.”
On the one hand, I agree regarding teacher quality that needs to be improved and higher standards for entry into teacher education programs. However, does this statement have to do with high school teachers, or do elementary school teachers need a four year degree in the content areas they teach also? (This seems hard to achieve.) As an important aside, I do know that most – if not all – NCATE certified teacher education programs require a high school teacher to have the required number of credits in a content area that enables them to get a “major” in that area.
I was also wondering where/when in the program suggested the required field/internships take place? In other words, where does that year in practice teaching and research happen?
Is the teacher education program suggested part of the Holmes Group idea regarding teacher education? If so, does this mean that traditional teacher education programs need to be eliminated or revamped?
Thanks,
Tom
Congratulations, Diane. I like the list, but some names I consider important are definitely missing. They would be on my top 10 list for they have been tireless advocates for public education, and have pointed out the “real” research not junk science used by the deformers.