In the Washington Post, Katrina vanden Heuvel describes an emerging populist agenda for the nation–and the 2016 election. She is the editor and publisher of The Nation.
It is encouraging to see that the centerpiece of this agenda is a focus on reducing inequality by increasing jobs. Anything that reduces poverty will help children, families, and communities.
It is discouraging, however, to see that the putative progressive agenda offers so little hope to beleaguered public schools, students, and teachers.
This is the purported progressive agenda for education:
“The Basics in Education: Most challenge the limits of our punitive education debate, focusing instead on basic investments in education: universal pre-K, investments in public education and various roads to debt-free public college.”
Not a word about the privatization steam-roller, nor about the attacks on the teaching profession and unions. Nothing about the NCLB-RTTT debacle. Nothing about reversing the federal demands to close schools, to fire teachers, to facilitate data-mining, to promote charters, to accept schools and colleges that operate for profit.
Vanden Heuvel knows better. Her magazine has published some of the most hard-hitting exposes of the corporate assault on public education, such as those by Lee Fang.
We will have to write our own agenda to support public education from the rapacious hands of the profiteers and privateers.
And we will. Starting now. Send me your agenda, one or several, and I will combine them as our platform.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Hang Down Your Head, John Dewey, This Trogressive Will Never Fly ❢❢❢
I knew pre-k would be offered as a replacement for support of K-12 public schools.
You coulda seen that one coming 🙂
We’ll want to examine the net gain carefully there. It’s easy to move money around and say you’re “supporting public education”.
Pre-k may the brand & talking point for Dems because universal pre-k is popular. However, the path to finance it is through “social impact bonds” another Wall St scheme to privatize Pre-K. http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2013/08/07/37preschool_ep.h32.html?tkn=PZNF%2Fyi60RsoRgtRpL%2B2b5ASuLpkqFuFzg6n&print=1
Did you really think Obama & the neoliberals would expand Head Start for all families? Of course not. Obama & the R’ s have been starving Head Start since 2008. Nixon would be so pleased.
I do think it will be really interesting to watch Bush and Walker and Clinton roll thru Ohio.
Clinton probably can’t say exactly what they say, and if she follows Obama’s agenda she will be saying exactly what they say. There’s only so long she’ll be able to dodge with the community college gambit. At some point someone is bound to ask her about K-12 schools 🙂
I’m voting Sanders in the primary to send a message. By the time the candidates get to Ohio, the field is set.
Bush or whatever Republican sorts out will have to reconcile Kasich’s “Ohio Miracle” claims with “Blame Obama” for the economy. Same problem they danced around with Romney.
I do not have much faith in Ohio voters, anymore. Too many are like that diabetic, smoker in North Carolina who refused to purchase Obamacare on principle, then got seriously ill, and now blames Democrats because he doesn’t have Obamacare.
What is Sanders’ position on charters and vouchers?
I’m voting for Sanders, too. He’s a Democratic Socialist & not afraid to explain if to the Sunday talking heads.
http://crooksandliars.com/cltv/2015/05/bernie-sanders-demonstrates
The economy is broken, rigged, and deteriorating. Even economists have no idea and can’t agree on what causes inequality and the recent decline in productivity. Technology is replacing many jobs. Unless we want to enter another dark ages, we need to collectively redesign the way the economy works. Social contracts and enpowering those that work is a step in the right direction. Worker owned companies, reversing decades of income redistribution upwards, fair progressive taxation are another. Sanders is not the end game, he is that first step.
Does Sanders have a campaign position on charters and vouchers?
Does Sherrod Brown support public schools?
Warren supports vouchers?
The progressive agenda of 1900 had Teddy Roosevelt and what’s considered the golden age of journalism on its side.
But the golden age of journalism died when President Reagan got rid of the Fairness Doctrine, and replaced it with hate media and the choke hold on 90% of the traditional media by six huge corporations that control what most of the people read, and hear according to the dictates of a few powerful oligarchs who are idealistic, foolish narcissistic psychopaths, who have created a form of state media that rivals China’s Xinhua state media, but I think is far more dangerous because of people like Gates, the Walton family, the Koch brothers, Eli Broad and others who keep buying up newspapers and national magazines.
In addition, I don’t see any candidates for president who stand a chance to win the White House that will be a progressive Teddy Roosevelt as far as education and labor unions are concerned—TR wasn’t perfect but at least he was right about a few things. Instead, every front runner looks like they will just be more of the same: another combination of Clinton > G. W. Bush > Obama, who will certainly lie to fool and deceive people to vote for them and then pull an about face like Obama/Cuomo did after their wins.
Can we trust anyone who lands the nomination for President or governor and then wins?
Which is why we’ve got to make sure the Internet stays free.
Agreed and from the flood of internet petitions I keep getting it doesn’t look like the struggle to keep the internet free is ever going to end. AT&T and Comcast are refusing to give up.
The point is: register as a Democrat, &vote in the Democrat primary for Sanders. If we get a significant block voting Sanders (progressive), Hillary will have to shuffle her policies to the left of the neoliberal [right of center] position in order to ensure that those of us to the left of center even bother to vote in the presidential election. (Because after all there’s little difference between neoliberal & mainstream Republican policies, which is why Democrats haven’t been turning out, which is why we have a preponderance of Republicans in Congress.)
I’m registered as an independent, and the last time I looked, the Democrats allowed independents to vote in the Democratic primaries, because I’ve been doing it for decades—at least in California.
The often intolerant, crackpot GOP with its bevy of crazy factions struggling to control the Republican platform doesn’t do this because those factions are intolerant of any thinking that isn’t aligned with them 100%. To most if not all far-right conservatives even a registered conservative Republican who is even one step to the left is an evil liberal responsible for everything that’s gone wrong in the United States.
And what will guarantee that once Hillery is elected and she moves in to the White House as President that she won’t do what Obama did when he dumped a respected educator who worked in his election campaign the first time around for another Arne Duncan or even pull a total Cuomo?
Hillery is a total political animal, and I think we dare not risk trusting her for that very reason.
Reblogged this on David R. Taylor-Thoughts on Texas Education.
Diane, Could not agree more. We need to set the improvement agenda. Attached are several of the pieces I have written with that framing and solution proposing in mind. Hope this makes a contribution. Thanks, Arthur
There is a town hall meeting in my town of Asheville, NC tomorrow; it is hosted by Public Schools First and NCAE. The purpose is to talk about what the strengths of the public schools are beyond our new letter grade system (modeled after Florida).
I attended a state level parent meeting last summer to discuss how to display the letter grade on the website in a manner that best represented the schools (albeit I did learn there are minority parents who want that letter grade prominently displayed, apparently seeing it as a check on teachers). I believe the website design selected is appropriate (and our legislature did extend the time frame for having a 15 point letter grade rather than a 10). Also, I attended a parent meeting with our state superintendent to discuss letter grades and what else should be elevated.
So I would say that a better definition of what makes a successful school needs to be articulated and added to the rhetoric. (I’ve been asking for that for a long time).
I think it would be great to have something else indicating the strength of the school alongside whatever our seemingly anti-public education leadership requires.
and that is not a typo on “elevated.” I did not mean evaluated.
That is precisely the problem these days. We elevate evaluation above all else.
What about the experience the children and youth are having?
I would love to know what every caucus is that influences decisions about our schools.
Reblogged this on ohyesjulesdid.
Unfortunately although there are many good people who write for the Nation Magazine (Jeremy Scahill for example) Katrina vanden Heuvel as editor and publisher, has taken the reputation of the magazine into a black hole. She is guilty of some of the most despicable shilling for the corporate Democrats I have ever witnessed. Most notably, she believes that any Democrat should be voted for over a Green Party or independent candidate no matter how horrific that Democrat’s policies have been. She believes in lesser-of-two evil voting even when she knows it is really an evil-of-two-lessors system she is promoting. Her strategy only serves to keep power in the hands of the corporate elite. She should be ashamed of herself. She should not be given any credit for furthering any truly progressive or independent cause in any arena. She is bought and sold and she should be challenged at every turn.
How strong a stand does she take regarding the use and misuse of standardized testing. Does she consider the attack on elected school boards as a problem.
When you are considering the disenfranchisement of largely minority populations regarding control of something that touches their lives so directly as education, no one who ignores that should claim to be a progressive.
It would be interesting to see who funds this magazine. I mean who REALLY funds this magazine.
Wiki says Victor Navasky bought the magazine in 1995. Wiki doesn’t say he sold it yet. Navasky was born in 1932 so he may have stepped down as publisher in 2005 due to retirement.
Victor Saul Navasky is an American journalist, editor, publisher, author and professor at the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism. He was editor of The Nation from 1978 until 1995, and its publisher and editorial director 1995 to 2005.
http://www.thenation.com/authors/victor-navasky
* Educational services should be driven by peer reviewed research on child and adolescent development, brain-based learning, and knowledge acquisition, statistics and measurement, and organizational development. We have access to sound research on effective practices that foster learning and knowledge acquisition. School Reformists typically lack significant experience and knowledge about teaching and learning.
* Smaller class sizes
* Support for the arts, foreign language, social studies, political science, and technology for all students. All of these activities improve student performance in science and math.
* Opportunity to utilize and share specific assessment information with students, parents, teachers in order to improve instruction and understanding of teaching practices. Are there items on the tests that are generally missed by students in a specific class, or by a specific group, or in a school. If so why, was the item not taught, was the language confusing and different that the language in the curriculum, was the test item invalid etc.
* Create working and learning conditions that encourage learning rather than block learning by creating fear.
* Create conditions that foster school improvement rather than instability and unpredictability.
* Eliminate government subsidized for-profit schools. Our tax dollars should not be used to support institutions whose primary goal is profit rather than quality.
* Hold State Superintendents, Chancellors, Charter School Executives to the same standard as principals and teachers.
I just don’t like the term “school improvement.” It takes us into the territory of rating entire schools, usually based on test scores. I much prefer each child having an individualized learning plan which is supported by all the adults in the building, hence “student growth” which in no way do I mean to measure by their test scores. Teachers know what student growth means- the whole child.
Students in a school can have totally different experiences there and we need to stop lumping it all under one umbrella of school improvement. Student growth is what we seek and students themselves have a big hand in that. Educators are not totally responsible for what students do in schools.
There was a story on a N.O. television channel last night about a young man who wasted many of his school years getting in trouble, getting expelled, etc. Then HE made the choice to change his behavior and outlook on education. He is graduating from HS at age 20 and hopes to get into a bible school. Once he decided to change his behavior, he had adults who gave him opportunities that he lived up to.
With individual student learning plans and adults who are there to help support the learning, the sky is the limit for students who do their part to be successful. A school will have all types, let’s stop rating entire schools by seeing if their test scores improve.
” I much prefer each child having an individualized learning plan which is supported by all the adults in the building, hence “student growth” which in no way do I mean to measure by their test scores. Teachers know what student growth means- the whole child.”
I so agree. We were most fortunate to have our boys in a wealthy NJ district w/all bells & whistles. Two of the three were singled out for IEP’s early on: one because his school performance was far less than IQ would suggest, the other less-well-articulated (I’m going to say, because this was a kid who didn’t even talk intelligibly until age 4; his vocabulary & hence reading ability lagged behind his peers.)… So we had 504 law/ IEP/ SpEd in our corner for those two.
Wow, what a wonder ensued, especially as I began to understand how to advocate for those kids. Both benefited from resource room, then self-contained classes in h.s.– these music-techies were able then to graduate w/decent grades & succeed in 4-yr music-tech colleges.
My middle guy– a smart yet less-&-less motivated student as primary progressed to m.s.– would have fallen in the crack had it not been for our ‘alternative’ school-w/n-a-school program in h.s. One of those alternative schools dreamed up in the ’70’s & ongoing. He too was a music-techie & excelled in a 4yr college w/that major. Until he joined that program, his ed suffered because he was ‘in the mainstream’– got by well enough, had no discernible LD; it took parents to notice that his grades in his favorite subjects were gradually dipping below average.
My husband & I resisted special programs at first. It seemed obvious to us that our kids had good intelligence, why should they be foundering in adapting to the mainstream? But more than one educator-friend pointed out that the SpEd & alt-hs programs afforded us the opportunity to place our kids in small group with excellent teachers– we were paying exorbitant school taxes, why not get our moneys’ worth?
I come from a rural background: my primary ed benefited (in the ’50’s) from tiny schools with good teachers. Decades later: these individually-adapted classes for my kids (via SpEd & alt h.s.)approximated the small-school ed I’d received long ago. Though in the next century we landed in a wealthy town where my kids were surrounded by hi-IQ peers, the typical mainstream classes were a bit too large for teachers to be able to carefully work with those who learned differently from the average kid.
I am with you: an “individualized learning plan which is supported by all the adults in the building” is the ideal–but that is not what we are delivering today. I have often felt that the 21st c. school is large, mainstreamed, & assembly-line in nature. I was lucky that my kids were thrown off the assembly-lihe into “Q/A”, & so were able to get a fine public education. Which could not have happened had I lived in your average middle-class school under today’s budget restraints.
“We will have to write our own agenda to support public education from the rapacious hands of the profiteers and privateers.
And we will. Starting now. Send me your agenda, one or several, and I will combine them as our platform.”
Better to say you will combine some of the key ideas in the submissions and draft a platform. That protects you and announces that your work will be open to some review by others, the drafts will be something forged from good thinking from multiple sources.
Think about the differences –agendas, platforms, manifestos, and a principled position statement.
Who are the audiences? Who is speaking to whom, and for whom?
Trick is to avoid the trap of conceiving of education as a managerial problem.
That was the basis for the grand experiment launched into existence around 1999 with Achieve at the center of realizing a “vision” and an agenda crafted by CEOs, marginal participation by educators…and hammered into existence by private entities with a veneer of public representation offered by the Council of Chief State School Officers and National Governor’s Association (both functioning as lobbies)… Inserting the agenda into federal policies was a piece of cake. It was a corporate agenda.
This was the 1999 AGENDA articulated by the newly formed Achieve. It included seven action steps:
1. establish alternative paths to teaching, recruit the most “talented,” raise standards for certification, and target professional development to higher standards
2. align curriculum to rigorous state standards and tests
3. provide extra learning time and help for low achieving students,
4. train school leaders to improve instruction, manage organizational change, reward the best teachers with pay for performance, hold schools accountable for results
5. intervene in chronically failing schools and expand public school choice and charter schools
6. benchmark and compare standards, tests scores and other data state by state and with other nations
7. align college admission standards with high school standards and expand the number of companies that will use student academic records in hires. Achieve’s history
published by Achieve (http://www.achieve.org)
On the other hand… an ‘agenda’ does not have to mean top-down micromanagement of public ed as you illustrate from Achieve. The agenda could simply focus on returning power to create the agenda to municipalities– perhaps aided by state criteria which are set as guidelines, to be modified by municipalities as as befits the local population.
The Center for American Progress is funded by Gates, Walton, Hewlett, etc..
Fordham posted a 2013 tax document, at their site, that showed $45,000 to CAP.
Public education deserves a government for and by the people, but, that’s not what it’s got.
I unsubscribed from receiving Moveon.org emails and when prompted why, I wrote because the movement does not seem concerned about what’s going on in education.
I had the same reaction. I tried a letter explaining why. I got a thank you, give us money reply. I tried a letter laced with profanity and got a thank you give us more money reply.
We need a number of teachers from various states, to say what they think about moveon.org, and then start posting them in various newspaper forums. We need a collection of moveon.org abuse of teachers—–and if it causes a flood of republican donations….well…..that would probably be appropriate.
I agree with Arthur Camins. He describes a climate where teachers are free to collaborate and share success. A successful school should be supportive of its staff and the families of the children. I was fortunate enough to have taught in a diverse school such as this for many years. Teachers served on a variety of committees including hiring, curriculum development, and school improvement plans and professional development teams. Through IST teams we addressed minor problems, rather than allowing difficulties to become overwhelming. The school social worker was effective in working with troubled children and families The school was inclusive welcoming all students including those that didn’t fit the mold. The best learning is social, and technology was a useful tool, not a way of life. Standardized test scores were used to inform, not drive instruction. Frequent formative tests were used to guide instruction. The school was safe, clean and well sourced.
One of reasons are school had such sustainable success is because it was a school that contained more than two thirds middle class and about one third poverty. Children learned a great deal from each other, especially when working in collaborative groups. I found the following article that confirms one main reason we met with success. http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/january_february_2013/on_political_books/class_no_longer_dismissed042129.php?page=all
Public schools in the United States have served both nobly and ignobly. Nobly they have provided education to, for, and by the people–not a bad accomplishment! Ignobly they have stultified (Ivan Illich) and ideologized (Althusser–sorry for the ugly neologism). But the privatization movement which began in the 1970s as prescribed by the Powell Memo (http://reclaimdemocracy.org/powell_memo_lewis/) is downright medieval.
I am so happy to see the reference to Ivan Illich. I was a renegade Catholic, who attended his think-tank in Cuernavaca in 1968 (but just to become fluent in Spanish– not a student in his seminars.) Can you give me a link to his thoughts on public schooling?
*eliminate annual standardized testing and use NAEP results to measure national educational outcomes
*outlaw any “race” for funds to provide a sound, basic education
*require educational leaders, from the Department of Education down through the building level, to have at least 3-5 years of certified teaching experience
*require all charter schools accepting any tax dollars to submit to accounting procedures equivalent to their public school counterparts
*outlaw any stack ranking evaluation of teachers
*require school, principal, and teacher evaluations to be criterion-referenced, not normative
*outlaw setting cut scores after giving full-scale exams. This step should be completed after field testing and made public before standardized tests are given
*require all standardized tests to release non-personally identifiable data, in tidy form, for independent analysis by data researchers for reliability and validity analyses
LIKE!!!!
DOUBLE LIKE!!!!!!!!!!
One simple concept that should be repeated over and over…public control of public money. The key is to frame the argument as charter schools usurping the public control of its money.
Totally agree. This is the message that must get out to the public.
I agree.
AR 406 L 5/20/2011 Eric Kangas, Independent Researcher &retired Instructor; ekangas@juno.com; © E. Kangas, 2012; Textbook Level Certification, TLC TM ; H/Fax 619-588/-9500 Page 1/1
The basic idea is to combine the proficiency promotion requirement defined by NAEP and NCLB, the Common Core standards model, diagnostic-prescriptive testing, and the ten documented effective innovations defined bebelow.
TITLE: Ten Tools taught at ECC that seem to increase pre/post math learning at a DOCUMENTED rate of 7-9 times of the K-12 Stanford norm reference rate of 9.1%/year,,.The program involved 21 years; 4 levels of math, general math, pre-algebra, algebra 1, and algebra 2; 400 math sections, 10,000 students and over 20 instructors. The student populations was 90 % black-Latino ethnic minority, and 75% women;
1) Norm & criterion reference diagnostic-prescriptive (D/P) tests were given at entrance, mid term, and exit to each course. The D/P tests & other innovations allowed the student and instructor to “see, measures, & correct” area deficiencies in real time. The norm, criteria reference, and R & D components of the tests allowed reference and comparisons to other test results, such as SAT/ACT, NAEP and state test results.
2) The six D/P test student/class profile sheet model/semester allow for a comprehensive R & D monitoring of student/class progress for real time corrections and analysis within and outside of class each semester.
3) The pre/post and midterm tests evaluated learning and achievement in ten areas and textbook levels, systematically, that help defines valid predictive, empirically based student placement cut scores.
4) The final exam for each course was equivalent to the entrance test for the next level, which limited social promotion, empirically, allowed for accurate empirically based placement, and provided much quantitative measures of how the learning process occurred. The research suggests that the learning process seems to have at least ten characteristics defined to date.i.e (Linear, slow, additive, incremental. interactive, etc)
.
5) The optical reader computer technology(1978) provided three D/P printouts for each of the six tests( one for the student & two for the instructor) that defined deficiencies for the student/instructor’s next class period.
6) A computer aided / managed instructional model, similar to the Khan Academy, was available to help correct student deficiencies in real time outside of class. The D/P’S printouts identified student deficiencies.
7) Three of the Learning Textbooks(LT) courses and subsequent tests are referenced to national math standards. The LT and D/P tests taught concepts effectively via application and repetition. If students successfully complete the LT homework, self correction of deficient areas identified by D/P testing results. The LT and D/P test decreases lesson planning and increase articulation among levels and instructors!
8) The Torrey Pines Block scheduling model(TPBS) doubled the amount of class time for effective discussions of homework and course content and an effective evaluation. Secondly, TPBS reduced the amount of homework/day by ½ for the student to complete & for the instructor’s correction & recording.
9) The E. Park HS(Illinois) three semester proficiencies promotional model or an equivalent seems to be necessary to effectively meet the needs of the deficient, normal, and an advanced student defined by the NCLB proficiency promotional mandate. The model’s understanding, implementation, and evaluation support the promotional proficiency requirement of the NCLB law. The model promotes students each semester (not yearly) by grade level proficiency, separately from attendance & age. The promotional proficiency model allows the more advanced students to progress more quickly through the course material & provides the deficient student more time to learn the material.to the required standard. The model has no remedially nor advanced courses only one course sequence in each subject area, just as in most college programs. Advanced placement courses would be taught by college instructors, but taught at the K-12 site. Also, since all students are promoted by proficiency to the next level, the background differences (standard deviation) among students will be low, which allows students to help each other more effectively & reduces, the time teacher’s need to review past material. The tri-semester models -fall, spring, summer -provides interested teachers an option of an increase of salary of 9-15% without an increase in K-12 funding. The decrease in costs of the expensive “special” education & advanced classes, an increase in attendance, & lower drop rates will more than compensate for the summer school additional costs to the program. In the ECC tri- semester model program example, the costs were about $2500/ADA (1978-2000) versus the K-12 costs of more than $10,000/ADA. The ECC-K-12 cost difference predicts low or no extra costs for K-12.
10). A standardized syllabus, student learning packets, and grading standards were defined, implemented and evaluated by the instructors allowing the high student and class performance to be relatively constant. Secondly, by standardizing these components using the LT and D/P tests, the national standards are successfully and continuously addressed. Finally, the amount of outside preparation required by the teachers is reduced including costs, as course modifications are added yearly, prior to the start of the school year.
An additional 40 “tools & innovations” were defined & available, which helps explain the “how & why” the model’s effectiveness occurs both in terms of educational theory and practices among levels & instructors.
do you have a layman-friendly version of this post? What are you saying?
I am underwhelmed by the tools and innovations and premises of this program. it is part of the problem. May work for military and technical training for adults.
I am supporting Bernie Sanders. He understands and strongly opposes the privatization agenda of neo-liberals and Republicans. Any Democrat who talks about “private-public” partnerships is sending a message to hedge funders that they should proceed with their plans to monetize public services. Don’t vote for them if you want a local post office, Social Security, single payer health care… or well funded public schools. In September I sent Bernie Sanders a draft of a public education platform and published it in three posts as one that could be adopted by any candidate. After reading this post and the Washington Post article I decided to re-post it as I originally wrote it.
Six months after writing this, it is evident that Bernie is the ONLY candidate who will give full-throated opposition to the privatization of public education. He needs lots of small donations and lots of shoe leather if he has a chance. I hope that those reading Diane’s blog, especially those in “early primary” states like mine (I’m in NH) will look over the current field of Presidential candidates and come to the same conclusion: Bernie Sanders is clearly the ONLY candidate to support if you want to derail the privatization train.
1. Teacher control of schools! Enough of school and district administrators treating teachers like assembly line workers who simply carry out their edicts.
2. Peer evaluations.
3. Restoring tenure in places where it has been eroded.
4. Decent pay.
5. Real mentoring & support for beginning teachers.
One of the things we must do is to have a much greater role for experienced teachers at the pre certification level. The college professors are often limited and their students who want to be teachers need our help.
Classroom size is often ignored. I’d like to propose a radical change in class size– a maximum class size in our toughest schools of 12:1. We keep hearing how inner city schools are ‘terrible schools.’ But what we do is compare those schools unfairly to high performing schools. One teacher may be enough for 25 average or high performing students. But one teacher isn’t enough for 25 students with learning disabilities and/behavior problems. In my first year as a public school teacher in a Title I school I had a class of 31 students, nine of those had IEP’s. I had no help in the classroom and was expected to teach the county’s standard 4th grade curriculum to students who were all reading well below grade level. Some students, when tested, read only four words a minute. Teachers are pretty amazing people, but they aren’t magic. I can already see the politicians cringe at this suggestion. But if we want success, if we want positive change, we need to propose some outside the box ideas.
Perhaps schools or school systems should be graded on important educational aspects that were lost to the new era of standardized testing and Common Core?
Grade schools on their lack of arts, their lack of physical education/recess, their lack of social studies, their lack of industrial arts (shop), etc. Grade them on how much time is devoted to teaching to the standardized/bastardized tests, administering the tests, etc.
Alternatively, let parents decide what their schools’ grades are. Create independent websites where parents can issue their grade for a school. I believe these grades would be a lot more telling — after all, the parents are the ones who can best see progress in their own children.
Of course, I think all the grading that’s currently done (based on standardized/bastardized tests) doesn’t lead to much significant understanding of what happens in any particular school, and therefore it’s pernicious.
As for a progressive agenda, it seems we could do a lot simply by reversing a lot of the _regressive_ things happening, such as too much time being spent teaching to standardized/bastardized tests instead of real teaching. Also, having smaller classroom sizes, especially for students with special needs/issues. would be useful. I probably have a lot of other ideas but, as usual, I’m too distracted to think of them right now.
In this Ed Week exchange, Deborah Meier and I share priorities for a progressive education agenda:
http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/Bridging-Differences/2015/05/whats_are_priorities_for_a_pro.html
Among mine are higher federal taxes on the wealthy, programs at every school to help youngsters see they can make a difference, high quality early childhood for all students from low income families; uses of a much broader array of assessments to determine what’s happening with schools & students, schools and other organizations sharing facilities, efforts to dramatically reduce theft & corruption, and increase transparency among all public schools, startup funds to help educators create new public school options in districts or as chartered public schools; make it possible for virtually all high school students to earn free college credits; increase funding for students serving predominantly students from low income families; and develop partnerships with organizations working to increase # of good jobs, medical care and affordable housing.
Deborah also shares her priorities.
Joe Nathan, a progressive agenda would not permit charter operators to have for-profit management; it would not allow charter operators to draw a salary higher than that of district principals; it would require charters to accept the students with the highest needs, not to skim those with the highest test scores. The Waltons and ALEC would not accept those conditions. Would Scott Walker, Rick Scott, John Kasich, or any of the other rightwing promoters of charters?
Thanks for your note ,Diane. We agree that public schools should be open to all – though I think you’ve noted several times you are ok with selective admissions district public schools.
A progressive agenda would not allow all public schools, district or charter, to reject students on the basis of test scores or other forms of admission tests; it would not allow suburban districts to reject inner city students, much less permit them to hire detectives to insure that inner city kids don’t somehow enroll.
A progressive agenda would crack down on corruption, conflicts of interest and promote greater financial and academic transparency in all public schools.