Today, the New York Times gave a lot of column inches to an article by a Harvard professor who claims to know how to fix the teaching profession.
He begins with the assertion that despite the many reforms of the past 30 years, the performance of our K-12 education system “remains stubbornly mediocre.”
His “evidence” is the test scores on the 2009 PISA in which the US scored about average.
Wouldn’t you expect a Harvard professor to check out the socioeconomic breakdown of the PISA scores which showed that US students in low poverty schools had scores higher than those of Japan, Finland, and other high scoring nations and that our average scores fell as the poverty level of the school increased? (Table 6, p. 15.)
Wouldn’t you expect a Harvard professor to cite the far better US scores on the 2011 TIMSS tests, where black eighth grade students in Massachusetts tied with their peers in Finland in math? If the Daily Howler noticed, why didn’t a Harvard professor?
He then goes on to say this, as though both Rhee and I are extremists and equally wrong:
“The debate over school reform has become a false polarization between figures like Michelle Rhee, the former Washington, D.C., schools chancellor, who emphasizes testing and teacher evaluation, and the education historian Diane Ravitch, who decries the long-run effort to privatize public education and emphasizes structural impediments to student achievement, like poverty.”
Wouldn’t you think that a Harvard professor would see some relationship between the scandalously high rate of child poverty in the United States–about 23%–and low scores on international tests?
The rest of the article is an effort to shift the blame to teachers for what he claims is mediocrity. If only we could get “the best and the brightest!”
If only the professor would explain how the teaching profession will improve when state after state is demoralizing teachers with unproven evaluations based on test scores, stripping away protection for academic freedom, cutting benefits, and lowering standards for new teachers.
Grrrr.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Do you think he can see poor people from his ivy covered tower?
Chuck him!
Elitist bastard that he is.
Wow! I am shocked. Another dumb opinion piece that wasn’t written by Tom Friedman. I cancelled my subscription over a year ago. As someone pointed out they are Fox News with a higher level vocabulary. Isn’t Bloomturd about to become their master?
Here’s the comment I wrote to the article, which I believe glossed over the most important reality about public education: our public schools are NOT failing!
Mr. Mehta overlooks the glaringly obvious point he made when comparing the US to the high performing countries: “These countries also have much stronger welfare states; by providing more support for students’ social, psychological and physical needs, they make it easier for teachers to focus on their academic needs.”… A close look at the data on school performance indicates that US schools are NOT failing: the schools serving those raised in poverty are pulling down the mean performance.
When Terrell Bell released A Nation At Risk, instead of looking at the root causes of our “national” failure we spent years arguing over standards, devising accountability testing for students, changing entry standards for teachers, and devising ways to privatize substandard schools. And during that time period we’ve shredded the safety nets that make our competitors successful and done nothing about the huge inequality in school funding that exists in most states. Sorry, Mr. Mehta, professionalizing the teaching profession is more tinkering at the edges: if we want all schools to perform at the level of the schools in our affluent districts and highest performing states we need to provide the funding and support systems that make those schools successful. Anything else is a diversion.
Agreed, of course. However, a diversion is precisely what they’re trying to achieve. Makes it easier to pick the pockets, you know.
Diane, given who Harvard Graduate School of Education partners with in some of its endeavors right now, which includes the likes of Teach for America, New Leaders, New Schools Venture Fund, and Khan Academy (even though partners also include school districts and the National Board folks), why are you surprised at a statement like this? I read the piece this morning and started to write a response to post online citing the kind of data you did, then decided it was a waste of time because the tone of the piece was dismissive of anyone who might disagree.
Meh, I saw that and moved on. He’s selling a book (see the end of the op-ed) and he’s clearly trying to paint himself as a Serious Centrist with his “pox on both houses” approach. You see it all the time in the mainstream media.
“he’s clearly trying to paint himself as a Serious Centrist with his “pox on both houses” approach”
Good call. Love the phrase “serious centrist”.
What a clown.
However, I am not sure I agree we should let his nonsense go unchallenged.
You know the trick. They will repeat numerous times that Diane is the equal to Rhee, both extreme and both wrong. It will become conventional wisdom, then a fact. And we will continue to experience the rape and pillage of our public schools.
Just MHO.
If Diane is equal to the rheeject then I’m equal to the devil.
And, ang you are about 1000% correct in your analysis of what is going on in trying to equate Diane with the rheeject. Although soon they will be rejecting her themselves.
Devils can reject their own spawn? Cool!
The comparison of you and Michelle Rhee is fatally flawed, but I can’t argue with many, if not most, of the things he argues need to change about our educational system.
You make good points but you blame “poverty”. Why don’t you dig deeper and look at how many children end up in poverty. Poverty is not the root cause but it demands more attention as to how children end up there. Many of us grew up in poverty but did well because we had 2 parents instilling good values in us. We were brought up in families that put GOD above all else. So we were able to over-come some of those obstacles.
You compare that to the child in poverty with a single mother, drug addicted neighborhood, crime, etc. and you realize that much of the problems these children face come directly from a culture that has seen a real break down in the traditional family.
Some kids can still over-come those obstacles, but many will fall victim to a culture that breeds and supports the culture that keeps them in poverty.
One does not NEED wealth to over-come poverty. You can look at the statistics to realize that. WHat they need is a supportive, functional, in-tact mother and father who instill moral values and ethics.
When you decide to focus on that, your honesty may help turn the tide.
Right now, Progressives, Liberals and even many on the “right” of the political spectrum want to dismiss social issues. But if you are going to dismiss them or ignore them, can you really expect anything different?
I have taught children of poverty with intact families with good values – who lived in neighborhoods where violence was endemic – who often did not eat enough on the weekend because their primary source of nutrition was free lunch at school – who had rotting teeth because the family could not afford a dentist – who had trouble seeing the board because the family lacked medical insurance and could not see an eye doctor and even if they could had no money for glasses – and I have just started to scratch the surface.
I have taught children who present as ADD and lack of emotional control who if you tested them have exceedingly high levels of lead in their bloodstream from peeling paint
I have taught students who are homeless, who have one set of underwear and rarely a place to wash it, who therefore miss school one or two days every week
I’m sorry, but good values and two caring parents does not make up for the conditions in which they live to expect them to be able to compete – because stupidly we make school a competition.
Oh, and there is this – when my father grew up in Utica NY as one of six children of a poor immigrant tailor, there was a public library to which he could go to read and to learn. In our impoverished neighborhoods we do not have public libraries, and in many schools we do not even have books in a school library.
Middle class kids have computers and the internet. It makes a difference.
The economic inequity in this country absolutely has an impact on education.
So by the way do unions, positively.
The states with the highest test scores tend to have unionized teaching forces. That’s because they have more of their workforce unionized.
Why does that matter? Because it translates to higher family incomes.
And test scores have their strongest correlation with family income.
The only exception is ” poor families” when one or both parents is a graduate student and have no “income” beyond what the graduate school provides for them.
But they have the social equity of parental education.
Too many of the students in our poor neighborhoods have little to provide that kind of offset.
Granting everything you describe. What specific policy recommendations do you propose to enable each state to provide the support to whose lack you attribute the gaps in student performance. Your curse the darkness quite convincingly. What candles would you like to see lit?
how about raising the minimum wage to the buying power it had several decades ago? That would take it to around 22/hour and provide livable wages for people. That’s for starters. Unless you are willing to support something like that you will have no interest in anything else I have to offer.
Oh, and I am not going to repeat myself just for your sake Harlan. I have written hundreds of thousands of words online about education, poverty, government, policy and related, including offering many specific proposals. If you are interested you can start reading through 9+ years of blog posts at Daily Kos – now approaching 3,000.
Raising the minimum wage to $22 an hour would diminish hiring. You know this.
actually if it had kept up it wouldn’t and might increase hiring because there would be more disposal income being spent thus creating more demand.
Looks like you know about as much economics as you do education, which is not all that much is it Harlan?
So let’s take a libertarian approach – and give you the attention you deserve – only in the form of ridicule.
At a minimum wage of $22 an hour I suspect businesses would look to moving more production and services outside the country and increased substitution of capital for labor. Some activities, like bagging groceries, would be done by the purchaser rather than an employee of the firm.
“actually if it had kept up…”
Key words here. Teacherken is not suggesting that we unilaterally jump to $22 as a minimum wage.
I was not assuming a jump, just the steady pressure of increasing labor costs driving businesses to change practices in order to minimize labor.
were we to effectively triple the minimum wage in one full swoop it would have some negative effects. But had we be doing it all along it would not have. We have evidence of that in what happened with states when they raised their minimum wages – which are often significantly higher than the Federal minimum.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren has pointed out that raising the wages of McDonald’s employees to the new Federal minimum for the current would add about $.04 to the cost of a #11 meal.
The things we do would just be different. Instead of having staff take your order at an inexpensive restraunt, you would order on an Ipad. There would be fewer retail outlets in my downtown area. It would all seem as normal as pumping your own gas and washing your own car windows. There would be fewer and fewer low skill jobs and fewer start up businesses.
A lot of things would be different. Imagine what wages for skilled workers would be if minimum wage was $22. H-m-m-m. It is beginning to sound like a lot of people have been shafted in the past thirty years. Where did all that money go?
It went a couple of different places. Some of it went to higher salaries. Some of it went to lower prices. Much of it went to higher health care costs.
Considering that wages for a large segment of the population have been virtually stagnant, I’m guessing that those”wage” increases apply to those at the top of the food chain. Their real worth has sky rocketed. It would be interesting to see, though, how much of the cost of health insurance businesses have absorbed versus the amount now paid out of the individual’s pocket. I doubt that health care costs account for the stagnation of wages.
Wages remain dragnet but compensation has not because of the increased value of healthcare.if you are interested in total compensation, head over to the BLS website and take a look. Here is a place to start:http://www.bls.gov/news.release/eci.t05.htm
Thanks, TE. It will take a lot of study for me to absorb information from this site. Are these figures adjusted for inflation anywhere? I need the Idiot’s Guide.
Thanks TK!!
“At a minimum wage of $22 an hour I suspect businesses would look to moving more production and services outside the country and increased substitution of capital for labor.”
How about introducing the increase gradually over the course of 5-10 years but calling it a business investment? For every dip into corporate profits these raises take, the business gets a small tax-break based on a reasonable rate that will not cripple the economy providing they begin to gradually move production back to this country as well. In exchange, the employee begins making more per hour, and over time, a humanly livable wage. Tighten up contracts so both parties are treated fairly. Gradually over time, the minimum wage workforce can begin investing back into the economy with consumer spending. Why couldn’t this be a win-win?
How economists cannot make this work baffles me, but then again, unlike those uncredentialed, uneducated pseudo-educators out there, I’m certain there are many issues about which I have little knowledge. We need to hear from those experts. So, teachingeconomist, could you outline the pros and cons of this thinking? Take it to its every last detail, and solve this problem without starving the poor from a livable wage or destroying the middle class.
The rich always find ways of taking care of themselves. If investment and profit cash-cows start to weaken, they could just “work harder” like they suggest everyone else who is not privileged do. You know, maybe they could only have one house like rest of us schmoes have.
Economists don’t make anything happen. What we call the economy is the outcome of trillions of individual decisions made by billions of people around the world.
Even introduced gradually, a minimum wage of $22 would change the cost of labor relative to the cost of doing the same things by other means. Retail sales would have been pushed to the internet faster than it has been. Machines would do more, people would do less. Small shops would close until the remaining businesses could take advantage of scale economies and market power to increase margins.
Some services will shift from the firm to the consumer. I am old enough to remember a time when gas station employees pumped gas, checked oil, and cleaned windows. Because consumers wanted lower priced gasoline, consumers now do those tasks themselves. Self serve would be the norm across many industries.
There would be a sizable black market in labor as there would be people needing work and employers needing workers at wages below $22 an hour.
I’m not really sure what you’d like to do about all the social differences between your ideal vision and the current state of things. Poverty is at least a numbers problem that can be addressed by policy. If the federal minimum wage had kept up with productivity, it would be $22/hour now but it’s really $7. Where’s the the extra $15 of value going?
But how would you legislate two-parent households? Criminalize sex outside of marriage? Eliminate divorce from the law? Ironically, I think gay marriage is the ideal case in this scenario since it will not produce children and will more likely result in adoption. I also don’t think you can legislate faith in God, because we’re not the country to require citizens to all believe in a certain religion. Whatever else the authors of the constitution did, they didn’t do that.
I’m also not sure how you determined that poverty is not the root cause. I want to recommend that you read The Two Income Trap by Elizabeth Warren (and her daughter), for a different view of what’s happened to families in this country. Actually, everyone ought to read that book. And if you have time, please read The Electronic Sweatshop by Barbara Garson.
Please take GOD out of it. There are ethical and moral agnostics and atheists. I am one.
KinderTeacher: So am I, but I’m trying to engage the argument that was made in a constructive way. I don’t think this debate around ed reform is really one about religion, and the sooner we understand that the course of religion in this country can’t be changed by legislative action, the sooner we can get back to it.
Your good outcome story does not make it true for most living in poverty.
MOMwithAbrain, FYI, I grew up solid working class back in the 60’s and 70’s when a working class family could live pretty well. We never owned a new car, never went on a vacation, never ate at a fancy restaurant—and never wanted for anything of substance and importance.
But we knew many people—among our family, friends and neighbors who WERE poor; very poor in many instances.
And the one thing they ALL had in common was a deep and abiding faith in “God” and religion. God and church were the most important things in their life. In every case.
In fact, the poorer they were, the more fervent and unshakable their belief in the whole package: Jesus, redemption, the afterlife, etc.
My cousin—poor in childhood and Dirt Poor throughout her entire adult life—would say, “Well, you know, I get down about having absolutely nothing but then I realize that this is all happening for a reason. God has a plan for me.”
“A pretty terrible plan from what I can see”, her non-believing father would always say. “Why did ‘God’ choose YOU for such a crappy life anyway? Can your faith explain THAT?”
And—the most successful, well-educated and financially secure people we knew were almost all atheists or agnostics or just never went to a church of any type and never stopped to think about it, busy as they were, with making money and garnering the deep admiration we Americans have for the driven and affluent.
But Diane! He’s from Harvard! You should get down on your knees and thank the gods that he even deigned to mention your name. After all, you didn’t attend Harvard.
but she does have a doctorate from Columbia and she did her undergraduate at Wellesley, so she has an elite education.
My wife went to Harvard. I went to Haverford. I regularly remind her that in the first two intercollegiate soccer games in the US, Haverford beat Harvard by the same 1-0 score and they refused to play us again for more than half a century.
My husband went to Carnegie Mellon. They used to talk about the time in the ancient past when Carnegie beat Notre Dame in football. I went to Mount Holyoke where I began to learn how to think. I’m still learning. I think Harvard maybe needs another kick in the pants. Where is Haverford when you need them?
Yeah, and I went to the University of Missouri-Columbia and finished up at the University of Missouri-St. Louis and got a masters degree from them in Ed Adm. I guess I’m just a peon and can’t compete intellectually with the elite bastards, eh. EF you all who believe that where one goes to school allows one to be above all us others. Go ER yourselves.
The divisiveness has now seeped into education in this country. Or is it envy? What happened to the days when seeing others succeed motivated another to do the same? What happened to the time when one’s credentials earned respect? Here we are throwing stones at each other regarding status. This country is in a cultural clash between those who have and acquire to those who expect handouts and others to do it for them. Bigger govt. diminishes it people. Dept. of Ed. has become so bureaucratic that it’s too unwieldy to navigate anymore. Let charters do their thing, but quit closing neighborhood schools. The community needs them desparately.
relax Duane, I am just deflating anyone who things Harvard is automatically the cat’s meow
Good, then you caught the sarcasm in my original post.
Sorry the last ER was supposed to be EF.
Diane, you continue to rock! Thank you for all you do! I have enjoyed catching up on your blog over Spring Break.
A friend sent me the article, so I read it and then found the author’s CV online. He’s a young guy with a doctorate in sociology–no education degrees, never taught in the schools, and barely teaches at Harvard. I’m sure he’s bright, and writes well, but please spare me from “experts” on education with no teaching degrees or teaching experience.
I will start buying in to his ideas when Harvard’s medical school asks me for tips on how to improve medical education. And why do schools of education hire professors who have no background in education? You’d think they would know better…
This from a man who attended private school all of his life. Typical 1% er.
I seem to recall that the expression “best and brightest” was originally coined with a sarcastic tone. If I recall correctly, it was meant to describe, critically, those that mired America in the Vietnam War.
The expression’s usefulness continues. Now, the “best and brightest” have mired us in the Race to the Top.
Add an E to race, change the c to s and we have the Rhee method:
Erase to the top.
Picture Rhee with a tiny head and a huge eraser and now presto…we have the new Gates USDOE logo.
You’re on a roll tonight, Linda…and, no, I’m not trying to “butter” you up. 😛
(Bloomturd…lmao!)
a better idea
take famous Time magazine cover with Rhee
photo shop it replacing the broom with a pencil with a big eraser
label it Erase to the Top
btw have a twitter meme going #MichelleRhee = #EraseToTheTop
Love it techerken…great idea. I don’t do twitter yet, but I should. I don’t have much free time and I am afraid it will suck me in. Keep it going….can you post the link?
Real teachers have to stick together. I also picture her melting into the floor and only the witch hat is left.
I lack the photoshop skills. But someone I know just posted this on my Facebook Timeline
TK, LG….I am doctoring the Time cover now….thanks for the great idea…will get back go you.
If you put the image up at someplace like Flickr, or email it to me at kber at earthlink dot net and give me permission to post it with credit to you, I will have it up at dailykos very quickly then point at it through twitter and facebook and google plus and email
Will do….my assistant, this kid in college, said it would be done tonight. As soon as I have it I will send to you. She said she could put it in a PDF and then I can either post here or send to you. I uploaded the time cover, pencils and eraser pictures and sent the ETTT headline. Hopefully, I will have it tonight. Stay tuned.
Thanks LG…love your posts…Kendall Jackson has always helped me!
TK…try to link again…it says page not found.
okay, the image can also be seen here:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/04/13/1201588/-A-new-internet-meme-for-Michelle-Rhee
scroll down and you will see the picture of Rhee
Posted in the wrong place…for TK…
Love it….should have new Time cover within an hour or so. Will send as PDF and I can send as photo to your email. Is it on the Daily Kos site?
I tend to agree with the Harvard professor in that Ravitch and Rhee are extremist. Social issues play a major part in the lack of student achievement, but not having effective, competent teachers in every classroom is the main culprit. Many of the teacher education programs are willing to give anyone a teaching certificate that finishes the coursework and passes the teaching exam. Having been a middle school principal for 7 years, the picture is clear. Giving out teaching certificates so freely, offering alternate routes to teaching, and teacher tenure is perpetuating the problem of a failing education system in America.
Vicky, a word to the wise. Don’t follow extremist blogs.
From my view, giving our principalships so easily has been a HUGE problem.
I have dealt with many more ineffective administrators than teachers by far.
vicky’s right about one thing…we do have to end these alternate routes to teaching…that’s in a sense what you were talking about before about lowering standards for teachers, Diane. its not like there’s an alternate route to becoming a doctor or a lawyer . Teaching is a profession and an art that is rigorous, needs to be properly respected, and requires a lot of knowledge about both educational theory and methods in addition to subject matter. It is not fair to students, and I’m but one of them who suffers under this policy, to give us teachers who only know about subject matter but really have no idea how to teach…You see it in higher education all over unfortunately… as long as you have your advanced degree in whatever field you specialize in, then they assume you can be a professor and affectively teach college kids…its absurd…reducing a teacher to the status of lecturer has become in the norm in higher education…..please don’t mischaracterize me as one of those “blame teachers for everything” people….cause, as an aspiring educator, I am certainly not one of those people….I’m just saying we need to require everyone who wants to become a teacher at any level to go through a rigorous teacher education program…and I certainly disagree with vicky that teacher tenure is a bad thing…and you are certainly not an extremist on par with Rhee
actually there is an alternate route to becoming a lawyer. At least a few states still allow one to read for the law
as for medicine, you do not have to be an MD to do most of what MDs do – I have a sister-in-law who is a physician’s assistant, and my personal care person is a nurse practitioner
not disagreeing with the thrust of your argument, just picking a bit around the edges
I see what your saying, but unlike with medicine there is no “lower on the rung” profession that only does some of the things teachers do, nor should there be.
again I am going to have to disagree. There is something “lower on the rung” with lesser qualifications. Actually there are two such things: (1) teachers’ assistants; (2) substitutes. One can be an uncertified substitute and have full responsibility for teaching.
ok..you have bested me there…substitutes only teach whenever they’re called in right, so its not like they affect the overall health and rigor of the teaching profession in as substantial way right?
imagine a school that has a significant portion of its teaching staff is uncertified subs, or “provisionally certified” fill-ins. It sure as heck will affect the attitudes of students towards teachers. Further, in a secondary setting, if they cannot manage a classroom they can set kids off for the rest of the day.
Look, I was not disagreeing with the thrust of your remarks, just cautioning on the kind of sweeping statements. The danger of a universal statement is that it takes only one counterexample to undercut the thrust of the argument.
I’m just asking questions out of curiosity. I didn’t know there were schools like that. certainly I agree with you that a school like that the attitudes of students towards teachers will not be positive. I understood you weren’t disagreeing with the thrust of my remarks. i guess i just made a misinformed statement.
dianerav: so glad to see you put your “boxing gloves” on and call it like it is on so many fronts!
dianerav & teacherken: with no disrespect to anyone else over these past two days on this blog, I thank you for your comments, forbearance and endurance.
I was particularly struck by this sage piece of advice offered by dianerav: “Vicky, a word to the wise. Don’t follow extremist blogs.”
Sometimes we in the ‘discourse bidness’ fail to communicate. So as a small token of my gratitude to the owner of this blog and many of its posters—especially on account of having been in highly varied bi- or multilingual situations many times in my life—I offer gratis my English-to-English translation of the same so we are all on the same page: “Vicky, a word to the wise. Don’t follow extremist blogs.”
🙂
Diane, The only blog I follow is yours.
And who Vicky gives due process rights to teachers?
The outstanding, hard working principals and administrators like you?
By the way, how many years did you teach, what subjects, grades, settings before becoming a principal?
You claim to be from GA and all your teaching/administration experience in in GA….so…
You know darn good and well that GA teachers have NO SUCH THING AS TENURE!
Ga is a right to work state.
This clearly shows you are very willing to be disingenuous.
Is she the same person pushing her book…You are so stupid or something like that? Hmmm? Maybe the title is closer to home than she thinks.
You are wrong Ang. Teachers in Georgia have tenure. Trust me.
I ought to know. I had teachers who I could not relieve without documentation after documentation and offering professional development over a long period of time. By the way, I taught for 7 years, school counselor for 6 years, testing director and prek director for 2 years before becoming a principal.
Vicky, tenure will be a thing of the past. Following Michelle Rhee’s leadership, state after state is abolishing it. Principals will be able to fire teachers whenever they want. That will make kids smarter. Right?
Teaches have NEVER had any such thing as “tenure.” That is strictly something unique to college and university personnel and is an outgrowth of the concept of academic freedom, something that does not exist in K-12.
What teachers have or did have is something called civil service protections, which are IDENTICAL to what other public employees have.
Thanks to liars deliberately confusing people with what “tenure” is, teachers are losing their property rights to jobs all over the country in the name of “saving money.” Principals, you must realize, have total control over teachers with little accountability for their actions.
Actually, Vicki, YOU are the one who is wrong. “Tenure” does not exist in K-12 and never has. It doesn’t matter what politicians call civil service protections, teachers do NOT have lifetime employment or a right to it.
No, Vicky, you are wrong and I ought to know.
I am a public school teacher in GA.
A very successful and well thought of one, at that. (forgive the brag, but I want to establish that I do not lack tenure due to sucking..or whatever 😉
Have been for over 20 years.
I do NOT HAVE TENURE!
I have some due process rights.
This is NOT THE SAME AS TENURE.
If you were unsuccessful at firing actually poor teachers, you must have been a poor principal.
If you had to document to do it, so what?
Again, either you are stupid or you are being disingenuous.
Or (from my experiences) both and lazy, self-serving, over-confident, pompous and mean-spirited (and they couldn’t wait to get out of the classroom).
That sums up many administrators who somehow give due process rights to the “bad” teachers.
Ang: in the battle between your lived experience in the classrooms of GA and firsthand knowledge of what job protections you have or don’t have, and the argument from authority of an administrator and proof by assertion, the winner is….hold your breath…
Reality! Congratulations, Ang. The victory lap is yours!
🙂
Let me add that I admire you putting so much time and effort into this discussion but perhaps you should save some gunpowder for another battle: “No sinner is ever saved after the first twenty minutes of a sermon.” [Mark Twain]
I think the twenty minutes are already up.
Just my dos centavitos worth.
🙂
to KrazyTA @ 11:48
Thank you my friend!
And regarding:
“perhaps you should save some gunpowder for another battle: “No sinner is ever saved after the first twenty minutes of a sermon.” [Mark Twain]”
Correct!
Thanks for the tip!
However, on a bit of a serious note…I am concerned about letting things that are glaring untruths go unchallenged.
You know..repeat a lie often enough it becomes the truth kinda thing.
I am particularly worried about equating Diane with Rhee and as an extremist.
We better shut that junk down quick, before it is used as a reason (perhaps unconscious on some people’s parts) to dismiss Dr. R, as she is our most powerful voice right now. And (am I being overly dramatic?) public schools’ main hope.
Again, you are right about wasting the valuable gun powder!
As always, you make my day!
Thanks.
Diane is an extremist? Oh really? How about someone more knowledgeable about the history of education than anyone else currently on the scene? How about someone who has served on the National Assessment Government Board under both Republican (George H. W. Bush) and Democratic (BIll CLinton) presidents?
You can make your point about the poor quality of some teacher prep programs without having to put egg on your face in calling Diane an extremist.
THe reality is that too many colleges and universities treat their teacher prep programs and their ability to provide courses for recertification as cash cows, and will fight tooth and nail against anyone trying to show them a better way.
That said, even the graduates of these programs are usually far better prepared to manage a classroom than the 5-week wonders like Michelle Rhee was – who by her own admission was a horrible teacher for more than a year.
Here is her book that she posts nonstop and it says former principal:
Yes, We Are Stupid in America!
A Former Principal’s Reality Check on Why Our Public Schools Are Failing. By Dr. Vicky Wells
http://bookstore.iuniverse.com/Products/SKU-000604112/yes-we-are-stupid-in-america.aspx
Don’t forget her “duct tape” episode. That should have ended her career right then and there.
She also embellished her resume.
Anybody who makes a foolish statement like that obviously hasn’t taught.
Teachers have little or no impact on the situation. Their job is to deliver content; they cannot force kids to learn if they won’t or can’t learn. Furthermore, teachers have almost no control over the content they teach; administrators and politicians call the shots.
I am going to disagree more than a little. While there may be a curriculum, smart administrators give teachers flexibility what they do with it, including additional material they may bring in. No one ever limited whom I could bring in as a guest speaker, for example.
While teachers can’t MAKE students learn, they can be positive or negative influences on a student’s willingness to try. Our task as teachers is to identify where our students are and at first meet them there. If we are too much away from them there will be no connection and no ability to learn meaningfully for many of the students.
Ultimately it is up to the individual student; teachers have no control over that.
are you going to tell me you’ve never seen a teacher totally shut a kid down? I remember seeing it when I was a student and I can even remember getting into an argument with more than one teacher on that basis.
Although my most infamous activity was with a chemistry teacher who insisted that if one student got a 90 or above all grades would remain as they were, otherwise he would add points until at least one student had a 90. I persuaded the entire class to hand in blank papers on one quiz and then demanded he give us all 90s. He refused. I went to the principal. The quiz was thrown out and his grading policy was changed forthwith.
But then, I have always been argumentative, come from a long line of lawyer (my mother was an assistant AG of NY at the time), and have a strong sense of fairness and equity.
I agree with you that teachers these days have little control over content, what with the dominance of standardized tests. But to say that the only job of an affective teacher is to deliver content through transmission-lecture style pedagogy, as in the only purpose of learning is rote memorization…that I must disagree with.
all kids can learn and to say that some can’t is purely wrong and exactly the kind of attitude that people who want to go into the teaching profession can not have if they want to be successful professionals
Respectfully, if I may suggest a book to you Susan, Teachers As Intellectuals by Henry Giroux, one of the architects of critical pedagogy for why teachers have to see themselves as much more than “content deliverers” in order to engage their students. by the way henry is a teacher, so its not someone from outside the profession, like some harvard snob, telling teachers how to do their job.
Teacherken,
The grading practice you describe in your most infamous moment is one that was used in my son’s chemistry class. He was the one that always set the curve on the exam, and of course paid the social price.
OMG…can we please go at least 24 hours without having to hear about TE’s son.
We all have children. Puhlease….give it a rest.
Actually it was a post about the chemistry teacher’s policy, and the impact it has on the students in the class.
And your son AGAIN….see here..your words: my son’s chemistry class. He was the one that always set the curve on the exam, and of course paid the social price.
I need to make a credible claim, so I included an explanation of how I knew of the grading policy. How would I have said it? I heard about this at a coffee house?
You can’t have it both ways, Vicky. The reformers speak out of both sides of their mouths. They want “the best and brightest,” but also want to have the five-week TFA’ers. And let’s not even start with the principals who have little or no teaching experience.
” Many of the teacher education programs are willing to give anyone a teaching certificate that finishes the coursework and passes the teaching exam.”
Oh, I suppose that having a supervised practicum (or three) or having a mentor for alternate route teachers is rare then?
Where in the world do you work to say that many of the teacher education programs are willing to give anyone a teaching cert with only coursework and examinations? Is it a private school? A parochial school? A charter? Do tell us where such nonsense goes on.
Oh, Georgia…I should have known. Another teachers-without-tenure right-to-work-for-less state. Well, at least we know YOUR politics.
Yes to TeacherKen. I have dismissed anything about education out of Harvard after watching Harvardites come hang out in our school system central office via a Gates- funded strategic data project (SDP). They wowed people who don’t understand research by supposedly using our own local data to determine (among other things) that experience and advanced degrees don’t matter in teaching (a helpful conclusion so that our charter system can move towards not paying for them). After watching them on video present to our board (fulton county in georgia), I happened to see video of the same group presenting to the board in Charlotte-Mecklenberg system (NC). It was just amazing how similar the data they shared and the conclusions they drew were!!! And it was uncanny how well their conclusions meshed with the agenda of both Broad trained systems. As the church lady used to say on Saturday Night Live, “HOW CONVENIENT!”
You might consider reading The Global Achievement Gap by Tony Wagner, from Harvard. It’s written for a non-teacher audience so if you teach, you might find yourself skipping sections but there is a core of a few nice ideas in there about what learning is and ought to be.
let me add to this that Tony Wagner has carefully and thoughtfully studied Finland
That’s a good point – reading that book is what got me investigating Finland. So, let me add Finnish Lessons by Pasi Sahlberg to the list of book recommendations I’m making in this comment thread. I think that’s four books you all have to read now.
I don’t know–the piece has flaws but makes intelligent and important points. Take this, for instance:
“Teachers in leading nations’ schools also teach much less than ours do. High school teachers provide 1,080 hours per year of instruction in America, compared with fewer than 600 in South Korea and Japan, where the balance of teachers’ time is spent collaboratively on developing and refining lesson plans. These countries also have much stronger welfare states; by providing more support for students’ social, psychological and physical needs, they make it easier for teachers to focus on their academic needs. These elements create a virtuous cycle: strong academic performance leads to schools with greater autonomy and more public financing, which in turn makes education an attractive profession for talented people.”
Or this:
“We also need to develop a career arc for teaching and a differentiated salary structure to match it. Like medical residents in teaching hospitals, rookie teachers should be carefully overseen by experts as they move from apprenticeship to proficiency, and then mastery. Early- to mid-career teachers need time to collaborate and explore new directions — having mastered the basics, this is the stage when they can refine their skills. The system should reward master teachers with salaries commensurate with leading professionals in other fields.”
Not a perfect article, and not an article that makes me applaud from start to finish (some parts make me cringe a little), but not the dumbest either, in my view.
One should not make an argument–even a sound one–by defaming public school teachers en masse and falsely claiming that public education is mediocre.
I have been outspoken in advocacy for higher standards for entry into teaching–I even support Randi’s call for a “bar exam” for new teachers.
Sorry, but the underlying claim that America’s public schools are awash in mediocrity sounds either arrogant or ignorant–or both.
I share your Grrr!
Linda, You may be right. I can’t understand why most of you are so defensive, however.
There’s a pretty concerted attack on public education underway. You may not be part of it (I haven’t read your book) but there’s no denying its existence. Hence the guard.
When I saw that contrast between you and Rhee, and then claims about the fruitlessness of artificial binaries, the article lost me.
No, Diane. It won’t make kids smarter, but it will give them a better opportunity to learn. However, we also must have competent principals making these decisions about someone’s livelihood. It’s not just the teacher preparation programs that need to be revamped, but also the principal preparation programs. I think the emphasis should be on culling teacher and principal candidates before they get into the classroom or the office. Then, we won’t have to worry about tenure. I’ll be the first to tell you that it was too easy getting into the leadership program and passing the exam. I’m not exactly a genius, and I certainly could not have gotten into Harvard. I’m just a regular South Georgia redneck who worked hard to get an education.
This is what I emailed the author in response
“After reading your insightful article in the NYT op-Ed section, I look forward to you coming to classroom to show me the error of my ways after teaching in NYC public schools for 14 years. When can I expect you? Obviously, a man of such opinions has solutions to create a better classroom that will far exceed anything I have ever tried, been trained to do, been told to do by countless administrators who were given their instructions from countless administrators. I think you need to go into public schools and show us how it is done to emphasize that your research has validity. If you are uncomfortable teaching a instrumental music lesson because you are not skilled in that multiple intelligence, then I invite you to teach a reading lesson about music to my classes. So shall we set up a time and date? I eagerly awaiting your reply as I am sure the readers of your opinion piece are.
Bronx Music Teacher
I absolutely love it and to Vicky..you don’t need to worry.
Many will be leaving the profession within the next five years and once the economy improves, if it does, very few will enter teaching.
The corporate vultures have taken care of that…they want test preparing robots to cultivate the next generation of complaint worker bees. Critical thinkers need not apply.
Stepford drones will be “personalizing” learning via Amplify devices while students practice canned virtual worksheets with emoticons popping up for virtual reinforcement. Reducing the labor force and funneling the money to edupreneurs is the plan.
Where have you been?
Susannunes,
Harben and Hartley, the law firm that represents GA educators, need to be informed, because they have mislead all educators in Georgia in reference to tenure.
That law firm does not represent educators, they represent school districts.
Big difference.
Do you really not know/understand these things?
http://www.hhhlawyers.com
One of your best!!!!!!!
But you ARE an extremist.
care to back that up sir?
The attitude expressed by the writer of this editorial, shared by many Americans, is probably the Number One reason why our educational system is less than stellar.
False polarization, ya, time to head for the equator and get some sun.
Some of what he says in the article is very true. Some is spun. What he says about Diane Ravich and Rhee is absolutely absurd. Rhee is a “Destroyer of Worlds” and Ravich “Finally got Religion” after being on the inside of the other side and is now championing for a real education system. What is similar with that? Why should we trust any Harvard School of Business graduate? Aren’t they the ones who put us into the financial mess which leads to the state, county, city and school district problems? Obama has continued this violation of the public trust.
None of us are perfect and correct all of the time. I have pounded Ravich recently for lack of knowledge in some specific areas but that has nothing to do with where she is coming from, why she is doing it and her goal for a better not just U.S but world through proper education with critical thinking to create great citizens and a better future through knowledge. We are with her 1,000,000,000% on this.
LOL! “Finally got Religion!” HAHAHAHA! (stands up and shouts “PRAAAYZ JEEE-ZUS!!!)
Linda, Why do you care if it happens to work? Aren’t we all about providing a better education for our children? What if it actually works? If you are an employer of a small business and your business is failing or not performing to the point where you make a profit, what will you do? Nothing?? Or will you try something different? The old adage, “if you keep doing the same thing over and over, you are going to get the same results”, has some merit to it.
What we have done over and over since 1983 (A Nation at Risk) is more “rigorous” standards and test-based accountability. So thank you, you have properly identifed the basis of the so-called reform movement as insane.
dingdingdingdingding! We have a winner!
Maybe you should define the “it”….testing, personalized learning, cyber charters, released FERPA data without parental permission to salivating edustalkers, huh?
I know what works…remember…I AM a teacher.
I see and hear kids everyday. I know them, their dreams, interests, hobbies, strengths, passions, etc.
Students are people to me…not data, not props, not assets, not a number on a spread sheet. That’s so hard for the faux reformies to understand…it’s a pity they don’t know what they don’t know.
Experiment on your children and grandchildren Vicky.
Leave my students to the expert and that would be ME, not you.
Actually, Vicky…your true colors are showing. You should know, as a former principal, we never do the same thing every year. We adjust to new students, new situations, new interests, new abilities and disabilities. We adapt to new situations all the time.
I now wonder how effective you were…is there a rate my principal website?
Linda, As a matter of fact you can check the GADOE website and look at the gains made at my grades 4-8 middle school (1,000 students) from 2005-2011. I had a wonderful team of teachers with the exception of a handful of tenured teachers who were there to stay until retirement. We worked our tails off analyzing tests results to see which students needed that extra help, collaborating with each other, mentoring individual kids, working with parents, and praying. My whole life was dedicated to students.
I can tell by your attitude and sarcasm that you would not have been
a good teaching candidate at my school. We all respected each others views, although we may not have agreed with them.
Phew! Thank goodness for that. You don’t even know what you don’t know. Glad you have moved on.
“We worked our tails off analyzing tests results…”
Which tests?
“…to see which students needed that extra help..”
Yes, that’s what educators do–it’s called pupil assistance and/or intervention, and most schools analyze more than just test scores to determine this.
“…collaborating with each other…”
Again, most schools do this. Often it’s even done during a teacher’s lunch time although, contractually, that should be the teacher’s personal duty-free time. Teachers are constantly thinking of ways to help their students. There is no down time in this job during the school day, and for most, even after hours.
“…mentoring individual kids…”
Individuals always get attention by teachers…that is, in most schools. Your ideas are not novel.
“…working with parents,…”
Who doesn’t?
“…and praying.”
Honestly? If you mean emotional support, that’s one thing, but prayer?
“My whole life was dedicated to students.”
I’d rather have an educator with a personal life purpose teaching my children than one who has no experiences in life other than teaching. A professional educator with a private/work life balance is well-rested and has a better chance of doing his or her best work for my children. Any other approach creates burn-out which is never good for students and teachers alike. The best administrators know this.
“I can tell by your attitude and sarcasm that you would not have been
a good teaching candidate at my school. We all respected each others views, although we may not have agreed with them.”
If your “environment of respect” includes disdain for the right of an employee to make a living and have a life outside of work, then I would happily disagree with your characterization of your school.
I admire your patience LG…I couldn’t muster the strength….very good points. Some get overwhelmed with themselves and don’t realize we are all working together for our students in all of our schools. She didn’t corner the market on teaching, learning, advocating, creating, encouraging, motivating, etc…well, you get it. Happy spring.
Really, Vicky?
Again with the teacher tenure in GA canard?
“handful of tenured teachers”
Give it a rest.
At this point, you know you are “misinformed” and attempting to misinform others.
(For those of you from other parts of the country, the previous sentence was southern polite for stop lying.)
This Harvard professor doesn’t intimidate me nor should he anyone else. He can hide behind his ivory tower all he wants and get away with bloviating about the minions in teaching, but his ignorance is obvious. Teaching takes brains but it also takes heart and an overabundance of work ethic to be any effective. I hope you, Mr. Metha, take on the challenge to try your skills at teaching in any other school but the likes of Ivy Elitism. If you do, you will change your tune within the first hour. It is the most grueling, difficult and satisfying work you’ll ever experience. I feel as if you are condescending to us lowly public school teachers and we’re getting really tired of it. We get that a lot. Your title alone exempts you from that kind of judgment. Automatically, you get a pass because of where you teach. Get off your high horse and come down here where the work is credible, the daily benefits are many and the pay is lousy. You won’t last long. But, if you do, I bet my year’s salary that you will fall in love with it given enough time to figure out how to really teach with your hair on fire and really make a difference for students. I wouldn’t trade places with you for all the prestige, power and position that it affords. Give me a gritty group of kids to work with any day! They are the ones who need our efforts, anyway.
Furious doesn’t fully express how I feel after reading this diatribe!
Sandy Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2013 21:45:23 +0000 To: sjhume@msn.com
I think that reading some of these comments proves that there is a difference between I.Q. and education. Yes, you can educate a person and improve their personal potential, but you can’t “teach” someone to be really smart or bright, can you? You either have it or you don’t. This is one of the main limitations to all of this reform. Conservatives already know this, and they are just saying this because they know that the public schools will never succeed (no one could). Some kids are gifted, some are smart, and many are not so bright. That is why there is a bell curve to human intelligence. Yes, anyone can improve within their own genetic potential. Yes, I can play basketball, but all the training in the world by the best coaches won’t make me a Michael Jordan. You can only expose the students to the various disciplines, and hopefully, the truly bright will latch on to something. You cannot educate someone into being a Shakespeare, Einstein, or Mozart. Yes, ideally we should have our best students want to be teachers (and principals), but obviously, this is not the case. How can we attract the best and brightest when we do nothing but blame them for society’s ills and yes, human limitations?
“our best students want to be teachers (and principals), but obviously, this is not the case”…..and how do you know? Just curious…where exactly are you on the bell curve?
I love how only conservatives “know” this…whatever this is……what a hoot.
Oh Harlan…yoohoo…where are you? Red rover, red rover….
Oh come now…a libertarian is a “special” kind of conservative, not your average run-of-the-mill conservative. Why lump our friend in? 😛
Because I miss him?
And right on cue…THERE HE IS!
He likes us….he really, really likes us. Aw…shucks!
I am here, Linda, continuing to read and reflect, enjoying your corrosive but unconstructive comments, glad that you are applying your lemon juice to Vicky and john rather than to me. I am coming to understand WHY you are so angry, however, and I am coming to respect it. Yet john does have a point which deserves addressing.
It is not politically correct to observe that all human traits fall on a bell curve, and that NCLB was fundamentally flawed from the beginning from a statistical point of view. Yet we all, or at least many of us deceived ourselves that it was possible because we had that utopian hope for a few years that someone in government knew how to save everyone for a constructive and happy and productive life.
We are (the nation) now being subjected to additional statistical abuses from the Rhee side of things, yet the Ravitch side of the debate still seems to cling to a sort of shadow of the NCLB ideal, namely that the government should provide a first class education to all on the assumption that intellectual variation is totally explained by environment.
Yes, the government should provide a comprehensive, first class, or at least second class education to all citizens, as was once attempted in the past and attempted fairly successfully by ignoring the citizens of color in segregated schools. But even back then, in say Harlem, public schools turned out people like Thomas Sowell in a totally black community. So we keep thinking that maybe, just maybe, the difficult is not impossible.
What is unfortunate is that all of those interested in good education have been polarized by the debate over how to achieve it rather than working together to at least achieve what is possible. From what does that division arise? It seems to me it is a reflection of the larger debate in the nation over the size of government in general. Some of us want to see the amount of money spent by the government reduced because we think that the taxing slows economic activity and the borrowing is unsustainable Others see the egregious neglect in the urban schools and say nothing matters except doing a better job there. Neither side will acknowledge that the other has a point.
Ultimately it comes down to choosing what one considers the lesser of two evils. Some saw voting for Obama as the lesser of the two evils, and others saw voting for Romney is the lesser of two evils. There is morality on both sides, but I do not think those who voted for Obama acknowledge the error of continued unbalanced budgets because they embrace an essentially socialist approach to social problems. Those who voted for Romney thought he could get the economy going again and thus the revenue crunch might be lessened, but they are criticized by the socialist side as immoral, money-grubbing capitalists when capitalists do not think they have anything to apologize for, since every penny spent by the public sector comes from business profits and wages.
We see it in the postings here most of the time, the death of good old American pragmatism in favor of ideological haranguing by the government employees of the capitalist drudges who create the wealth. At some point the team of capitalist horses pulling the cart will stop pulling because there are too many people piled in the cart. That’s where the conservatives are now. They’re tired of pulling the cart. They are saying to the public education riders, “Neigh” and all the riders in the cart can do is scream and rant and lash the team of horses more viciously. That you Linda, and Diane Ravitch. But some of the horses have bitten through their harnesses and have left the cart to fend for itself, and have gone off the main road to pull smaller carts, i.e. the charters, and eventually the voucher buggies. Those are the Rheemanites and Jindalistas, and eventually they want to steal the rest of the horses away from the cart of public education and leave it stuck in the mud with all its passengers left in the lurch.
Until the socialists stop being uber greedy and the capitalists stop leaving the poor in the ditch, I don’t see much chance of reunification of the population around education.
OK, Linda, that should give you enough to want to fling more of your acid in my face. You are morally right, but economically wrong, as is TeacherKen. John and Vicky are economically right, and pragmatically right, but won’t save every soul and won’t give us spiritual comfort for living in reality.
It’s more than dumb. His assumptions are faulty and shows an elitist attitude. Bet he can’t even fathom poverty. Sad.
The point that the U.S. scores aren’t broken down by the poverty level of the schools is an interesting and valid one. However, if one were to break down those scores, wouldn’t it also be necessary to break down the scores from the rest of the world in a similar fashion?
The high-performing nations of the world have less poverty and less inequality than the U.S.
Rothstein and Carnoy did the study comparing nations by their socioeconomic composition, and the U.S. position improved considerably.
Read it here: https://ed.stanford.edu/news/poor-ranking-international-tests-misleading-about-us-performance-new-report-finds
That doesn’t answer the question of whether, for example, the most affluent U.S. students score better or worse than the most affluent French, German, or other students, though. There is a lot of poverty in France, for example. It would seem to me that stripping out the scores of poor U.S. students and not doing the same for other countries makes the comparison meaningless.
Dr. Ravitch posted a link to a study that concluded, among other things, that Finland and South Korea out scored the US at every point on the income distribution.
actually, if you do a comparison between US schools with 25% of kids in poverty, we outperform France and perform about as well as Finland. France has a childhood poverty rate of <10%. You can look at 2008 OECD childhood poverty rate and note how few countries have a higher rate than the US. Oh, and btw, since 2008 the US rate as increased.
But the bottom line is that NO country is serving kids living in poverty adequately. We can conclude that teaching kids living in poverty is hopeless until poverty is fixed, or we can attempt to examine our practices and identify ways to reach struggling learners more effectively.
Children perform better at school when they have a place to live, food in their bellies, their parents have jobs and they basic needs are met.
Can that be solved by our elected officials or should all of society’s ills be dumped on one profession and one institution?
Gates and Bloomberg money could go a long way if they stopped bribing people to do their bidding.
you cannot teach a child who does not show up because s/he hasn’t eaten or doesn’t have any place to bathe or wash the one set of underwear s/he has.
You seem to imply that teachers are not working very hard with children in poverty. They are. We are – I had my share. But school cannot overcome by itself what society imposes on these children.
For what it is worth, while teachers are the most important in-school factor affecting test scores, since it is those scores that the so-called reformers think are the only measure, all told teachers account for about 16% in the variation of test scores.
No question Linda that kids perform better, on average, when their home/community needs are taken care of. But that doesn’t mean the teaching profession is in no need of improvement. This also isn’t an elected official, but a professor, but I believe that we need a collaborative effort – from teachers, politicians, professors, etc. – no one person or group holds all of the answers. This man is not wrong for having an opinion as a professor, just as teachers are not wrong for having opinions about policy without being politicians.
Teachers work collaboratively every single day. Who are you to say the do not?
All you do here is repeat the false narrative perpetuated by grifters, frauds and shysters.
There is more work to be done in our society and it is not JUST the teachers. We are sick society if we continue to bash an entire profession for the failures of our leaders who are using a trumped up crisis to further themselves and raid the coffers.
Linda, I’ve said multiple times that I don’t believe teachers are the only ones responsible. I’ve never made that claim, so you are arguing a point continuously that we both agree with.
In terms of teachers collaborating, I’m not sure that’s relevant to what I was saying. My point was that complex educational issues should have input from a variety of types of folks – administrators, teachers, parents, politicians, etc. – no one group has all the answers. I’m not sure how you though I said teachers don’t work collaboratively? Do you disagree with my point?
All you do is put teachers down and put all the blame for a failing society on one group.
Putting blame on one group is actually what I am arguing specifically against. Could you find one comment I’ve made on this blog that indicates I blame teachers for poor performing students?
Advocating for high standards for teachers, and a model of continuous improvement, is not putting teachers down. How do you make that connection Linda?
ededucation, the problem with your stance is that you assume teachers are the solution. They aren’t, resources are. Before special education, would you have argued for better teaching, or smaller classes and interventions? The teaching profession has plenty of built-in standards and accountability feedback mechanisms. Ever wonder why we don’t hear about “bad” teachers at middle-class schools? Because their job is actually possible; they aren’t expected to work miracles. Sure, they exist, but they are dealt with in the same way that most professions deal with employees, that is, unless they do something really terrible, they aren’t allowed to do much damage.
The difference is that in education, we ask so much of teachers at poor schools that we end up relying on miracle-workers instead of solid employees. If you ran a business this way, by making the job so impossible very few could even come close to doing it, you would quickly fail.
“NO country is serving kids living in poverty adequately. We can conclude that teaching kids living in poverty is hopeless until poverty is fixed, or we can attempt to examine our practices and identify ways to reach struggling learners more effectively.”
While “reformers” have given false claims that there is no need to wait for poverty to be fixed, even though poverty is worse after 40+ years of school “reforms,” they have effectively given permission to politicians to no longer even attempt to fix poverty.
We must stop letting politicians and corporations off the hook for ignoring poverty.
We should demand that our government stop putting all eggs in the education basket, as if it is the only path from poverty to prosperity.
Since we know that the achievement gap exists between lower and higher income students in ALL countries, we need to stop blaming American teachers for the achievement gap here.
We should stop expecting teachers to eradicate poverty all by themselves.
We must demand that our neediest students in our neediest schools no longer be the ones who receive the least resources.
Instead of shutting down schools, we should demand that resources be poured into schools in low income areas where children are not finding success.
We should demand that comprehensive, wrap around services which address out of school factors be provided to schools and communities in low income areas
We should demand jobs programs.
We must demand that highly profitable corporations be required to pay employees livable wages.
Our failure to address all of these matters effectively scape-goats teachers and serves to perpetuate poverty.
You say: “We must demand that our neediest students in our neediest schools no longer be the ones who receive the least resources.” May I paraphrase that for you: ‘From each according to his ability; to each according to his need.’ N’est ce pas?
Harlan, perhaps you ought to try an earlier version:
” For neither was there among them any who lacked, for as many as were owners of lands or houses sold them, and brought the proceeds of the things that were sold, and laid them at the apostles’ feet, and distribution was made to each, according as anyone had need.” Gee, the leaders of the early Church were – gasp – communists, at least according to Acts 4:34-4:35.
Your point, teacherken, being that we all ought to recover our Christian faith and membership in the primitive church? I’ll accept that. No more abortions. No more statism. Everyone leading a restrained and ethical life. It wouldn’t be such a bad thing, but I doubt you are proselytizing, only trying to score a shallow point off me by equating the voluntary communal wealth sharing of the early church with the forced tyrannical communism of Marx. Unless you are one of those Liberation Theology Christians who have fused the tyranny of Marxism with the tyranny of religion. Usually Marxists think religion is the opiate of the people, which prevents them from accepting revolution now. Are you that strange beast a believing Christian Communist? God help us. Didn’t your elite education at Haverford teach you basic semantics? Just because a specific word “communism” is used in both cases doesn’t mean that its referent is the same. Or are you still stuck in Platonic linguistics in which each word refers to a unique idea in heaven? Seriously, Ken, you know better. That’s Freshman English stuff. Don’t make it TOO easy for me to refute you.
you didn’t come close to refuting me. You tried rather poorly to tar those who disagree with you as being Marxists, I merely pointed out that the idea has very different roots.
And I will believe you are prepared to return to primitive Christianity when you sell all your possession and give them over to others to distribute according to need.
Or even better, rather than the Apostles – how about the word of Jesus when challenged on whether it was legitimate to pay taxes, you know, what the government demands of you in return for the services rendered.
Oh, and for what is worth – Jewish records make it very clear that the death penalty was not applied without first exhausting every means of rationalizing not executing someone, and there is no prohibition on abortion in Jewish law – the only relevant mention in the Hebrew bible is what happens when a pregnant woman is killed – and the presumption is the death of the foetus was not intentional. The result is increased monetary damages: the idea of an eye for an eye was not a literal partial blinding, but rather limiting compensation to no more than the value of an eye.
The primitive Church was Jewish – one of the issues that was resolved at the Council of Jerusalem was to decide one did not first have to become Jewish in order to be part of the Church.
even today, up to the 40th day even Observant Jews will accept abortion.
And the life of the mother takes precedence over that of the foetus until some part of the foetus begins to appear from the womb.
I don’t have time to explain all the other ways you are wrong about the early church.
But then, you probably didn’t know that I have a masters in religion, a certificate from the Vatican to teach religion in any Catholic school in North America (even though I have never been Catholic), that my major area of study in the Catholic seminary was scripture, and that years later I participated in an Advanced Talmud study class in an Orthodox shul in Washington DC.
Like many of the Tea Party orientation, you do not even accurately read what you try to claim as foundational texts.
Tr
In spite of your laying out your wonderfully extensive qualifications—should I call you Rabbi, or Father, or what—you do not reply to the real question which is whether the voluntary communism of the primitive church is the same thing as the enforced communism of Marxism.
What constitutes poverty is a changing standard. Perhaps that is the correct view, but it does mean that comparing poverty levels over time is difficult. I often begin my class on macroeconomics with pictures from the Great Depression and ask my students if they notice something common to almost all the children in the photographs. Only once has a student noticed what I noticed: the children had no shoes. That is not what poverty means now, but it is what it meant to be poor once.
The subject of shoes during the Great Depression came up when I was a youngster studying this matter in school and, since my parents grew up in the Depression, I asked them about it –and photographs from the times confirmed their experiences.
People in colder climates and urban areas were much more likely to somehow find the means to put shoes on their feet, due to exposure to the elements and safety hazards, such as glass in streets. Photographs of shoeless people tend to be of those In warmer climates and rural areas.
Here’s an example of men in Chicago waiting in a soup kitchen line in 1931, all wearing shoes:
My teacher at the time said the same thing you said, but she experienced the Depression in a rural southern area, while my parents grew up in the cold north. Since my mom traveled throughout the south a lot with her family, she noticed the discrepancy.
You are certainly correct that climate was an important consideration for determining what folks could do without. Perhaps it is still common for people living in poverty in the southern part of the country to not buy shoes for their children,
Eli Rector, we’ve got to move beyond a “this or that” mentality. I’m not relying on teachers to solve all educational problems, but I do believe they can be PART of the solution.
With you SPED analogy, yes – I would have both argued for additional/separate resources AND small classes, better interventions, etc.
Since we work with our students every day we already consider ourselves part of the solution. This is not new news to the teacher. Maybe you should make an appointment with Arne, Michelle, Eli, Bill and Barack…they don’t get it or they don’t want to get it. No money to be made if teachers are allowed to do their jobs. They got to muck up the works to siphon away the funds.
Cosmic Tinkerer, in response to your comment at 12:28am, I’m in total agreement with you. I do believe that politicians are placing too much burden on teachers instead of addressing the real meat of the issue with poverty. Note that this does NOT mean schools can’t improve, but I do agree with you that we hear an awful lot about teachers/schools and nothing about poverty, which is a disgrace.
Linda, it sounds like you are in disagreement then with Eli Rector, and that you and I are on the same page. Eli Rector says that I’m wrong to assume teachers are the solution, while you are saying they already are.
How can teachers who are professionals not be a part of any solution when they have dedicated their lives to their schools, their communities and their children? That doesn’t even make sense. We are solving problems all the time. We shouldn’t adopt their false trumped up rhetoric.
Linda, it seems that the rhetoric you are hearing is that teachers perform at a level 0 on a scale of 1-10, which I don’t believe is true. However, most folks would probably agree that the US teach force, while varied, also doesn’t perform at a 10 out of 10 – it’s doubtful any profession could score that high. So, if we’re at a 7, my point is let’s push for 8.
So, yes – educators are solving problems all the time. However, what if we could solve more, or solve them more effectively? My experience has been that we can, but that doesn’t mean I believe 1) teachers caused those problems or 2) that only teachers should be involved in solving these problems.
Would you agree?
why don’t these academics get it – never been in a public school? They completely ignore the root causes and obstacles. Here’s my letter to the editor they won’t touch…
Where are politicians, unions, corporations, early childhood, excessive testing, poverty and taxes in “Teachers: Will We Ever Learn?” Unions, essential to protect teachers and protest English classes of 35 and schools without nurses or libraries, still retain 100 page contracts of factory-model language. Politicians promise faulty quick-fix reforms for the next election cycle. The “Goals 2000” federal initiative that followed “A Nation At Risk” wisely recommended all children start school ready to learn and competency measured in grades 4, 8, and 12. Since then? The fraudulent Texas Miracle spawned NCLB and annual testing; the DOE cut support for programs like Parents As Teachers and ignores early childhood; states label teachers and principals with invalid measures; and taxpayer revolt deteriorates local school funding as state education departments ignore financial relief at their fingertips, funnel funds to exclusive charter schools, and fill corporate coffers. Teachers do learn. Perhaps those far removed from children should, too, and look for answers in the correct places.
1) This was a not a politician
2) How do you know how much time this author has spent in a public school? I have spent a great amount of time in public schools, and find his comments relevant, even if I don’t agree with them all.
3) His article has absolutely nothing to do with any of the initiatives you mentioned. Are his points invalid because he doesn’t address every single educational issue out there?
No, I am teacher, and I didn’t mean any disrespect to teachers. I was talking about principals..ha ha. I honestly don’t think that intellectuals always make the best teachers for all students. It depends on what they teach. Many of the smartest teachers I know have a hard time relating to kids who aren’t AP. My point is that no matter how good you are as a teacher, the students you have make a big difference with test scores, etc. As a teacher, you see right away that some kids “get it” immediately, while others never do. Yes, all kids can improve within their potential, but even the best teachers cannot make all the kids score at the highest level. That was my main point. Teaching has its limitations, and one of those limitations is the student and his or her potential. We aren’t magicians or sorcerers.
That’s more succinct …..Funny how the lowly unionized teacher is the greatest contributing factor to a child’s success in life (according to the reformy talking points), however, we are simultaneously an economic drain on society while also ruining the country. So much power for such dunces, according to know-it-all Harvard professors.
In other words, we can’t defy the “Bell Curve”… aka… the “Normal Curve.”
The bell curve is a statistical device nothing more nor less. Someone please show me somewhere in nature that the “normal” curve describes reality.
OK… real life examples. I’ve taught kids with high IQs, average IQs, and low IQs. I’ve YET to see an example of a child with an IQ of 76 master algebra…. but when I taught middle-schoolers with special needs, there was some kind of miracle I was supposed to perform to make those kids “get it.” We’re talking 8th grade kids who were baffled by 4th grade level math. I have a student now who I KNOW has a high IQ… NOT because he’s been given an actual IQ test; however, he’s 6, and is quickly mastering multiplication and division (by reading his older sister’s homework). Most kids are “middle of the road” when it comes to intelligence, and their ability to grasp material seems to be at an “average rate.” Now, as a teacher, I’m NOT going to waste my time testing the kids to death to establish who is or who is NOT below, average, or above when it comes to IQ. THAT is a waste of my time. I take kids as they are, day to day using my own observations. I push them on days they’re ready to be pushed… I back off on days when their ability to focus/concentrate isn’t there. If a child is showing aptitude and desire to work on harder material, I willingly give them the tools to do that. If a child is struggling with the basics, I take ’em where they are and do my best to go at their pace (because pushing too hard doesn’t help). It is unrealistic to push kids into material they’re not ready for… it just hurts them and frustrates the teacher. Point being, people’s rate of learning falls on a “normal curve.” Most folks learn at an “average rate” (which in itself has a large range). There are a few “outliers” who learn very quickly or very slowly. This is why teachers are supposed to differentiate. This is also why ALL the kids cannot pass the “tests” at proficient rates. Can you give me an example of any society ANYWHERE or ANYTIME has been able to defy rates of growth so that everyone is achieving at the highest levels?
And, oh, the panic that ensues when one of my students has difficulty with a concept: telling time to the minute, addition and/or subtraction facts, difficulty retelling a story read independently, inability to write to a prompt. They’re seven. They’ll get there, it just may take some a little more time. We are experienced teachers who know how to take kids from point A to point Z, although we also know that point Z might not be reached by June of that school year. We cannot cram any more knowledge into their little heads than they are ready to absorb. We need to be trusted to do what’s right for our students.
Education is in the business of human research and development. All students do not learn in the same way on the same day. I posted this phrase in my classroom and would point to it often when a student felt dejected or aggravated about a certain concept. It helped promote that each student was unique and learns at her own pace. It would be undignified to expect anything else. Do we want all students to be successful? You bet. When? WHEN THEY ARE READY! Until then, they are being a successful student by just keep going until they do get it. When did that human quality become something evil and unacceptable? I dare say we adults would not prefer that kind of judgment and mandate placed on our lives…since we’re all lifelong learners, don’t we appreciate having the dignity to learn, grow and succeed at our own pace? Motivation plays a big role in the success of our lives. Same with children. They are innately curious, but that often gets quashed in the effort to cram learning down their throats. A highly motivated student will learn in spite of what a teacher does. It’s the human spirit that carries learning to its greatest heights. Finding that spark and encouraging its energy is kind of the heart of teaching. Can’t do that very well when all around us is carnage from the corp takeover and irrational demands of the humans in the classrooms. Learning is a relationship experience…either with other humans or with the knowledge that is to be learned. A person is not a widget that can be easily manipulated and assembled. Each one has different parts, emotionally, physically, spiritually and cognitively. Unless one has had the upclose and personal experience of teaching a classroom of individuals, this truth will not be revealed as fully as it must be for understanding the nature of an educator’s work.
Exactly! It’s like expecting all children to physically grow at the same rate… expecting all children to start losing teeth at the same rate (which, the only way to accomplish this is to forcefully REMOVE their teeth all at the same time… analogy perhaps?)… expecting all children to start crawling or walking at the same rate… why is it sooooo hard for reformers to understand that learning is the same? Children learn at their own pace and in their own time… trying to force them to learn faster than they’re ready is damaging.
Love it….should have new Time cover within an hour or so. Will send as PDF and I can send as photo to your email. Is it on the Daily Kos site?
my email is separate. I will put up to flickr. Just tell me to whom or how I should give credit – by name or by description.
I will post it as a separate posting aka diary
and I will put the link up here.
One more version here and with help:
Linda and TeacherKen, Did you see the picture in the Examiner? http://www.examiner.com/article/michelle-rhee-erase-to-the-top
I didn’t see it until now. Thanks for sending along CT. Cool!
the Flickr picture has gone viral. I originally added it in a comment on a piece I already had up at Daily Kos. Then I put it up by itself – that separate post got retweeted and liked on Facebook. Then Susan Ohanian featured it. That lead to another diary featuring it at Daily Kos, which also got a lot of traffic.
Not sure from which of those Examiner pulled it down from Flickr.
And see Edushysters Facebook page:
https://www.facebook.com/EduShyster
Also, when you google image: rhee erase to the top time cover, it is the first image posted. Try it!
Thanks Ken.
Why do NONE of these pundits ever visit our schools? Nick Kristof can go around the world dozens of times to get direct information about women in other countries, but he can’t spend a day shadowing a public school teacher to witness a day-in-the-life? These guys are armchair philosophers. They need to get out in the real world!
How do you know if he isn’t in public schools? Where are you getting your information about his experience level?
Thank you for the posting on this. I read that opinion piece with dismay this morning. As a high school teacher in an uban high school, I just kept wondering what the Harvard professor THINKS he knows about teaching on, what I like to call, “the front lines.” This past week I faced verbal abuse from two separate students every day and then I was the one called into the assistant principal’s office. Why is it always the teachers who are mediocre? Why not administrators? For the first time in 9 years, I am seriously wondering why I’m in this profession.
and perhaps no one considers that it’s the parents are mediocre (or less)… which is why the kids aren’t ready to come to school to learn
I’m not so sure that this piece is all bad. It seems that Jal is suggesting that we do what Finland and South Korea did – make teaching a true profession. They have based their systems on the research done in the U.S., while we’ve ignored it. Teaching is a profession and is becoming a more and more complex one all the time. It should be treated as such, with the training and rewards being commensurate with the level of expertise and responsibility involved in the job.
Yes, we should make teaching a respected profession, but not by demeaning our schools and our teachers. It can never be a respected profession until we put an end to the teacher-bashing.
HERE HERE!!!
Diane, Do you know what test scores people like this guy are referring to when they claim that teachers in Singapore, Japan, South Korea, Finland, and Canada “are drawn from the top third of college graduates?” Are they referring to a standardized final exam for college graduates in those countries or something else?
When they say that US teachers are “from the bottom 60 percent” of college graduates, I think that’s extremely misleading, since we don’t have end of college exams, so I’ve read that they’re talking about high school juniors’ SAT/ACT scores. I think that extrapolating that to rankings of “college graduates” implies that what teachers learned in college is of no consequence.
Are they referring to college entrance exams taken in the third year of high school for teachers in other countries, too?
Where do you see teacher-bashing in this article?
turns out someone has already done something like that a few years ago:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/08/22/1009422/-Michelle-Rhee-still-refuses-to-answer-questions-about-cheating-scandal
Okay. I still want to show you what I have now. But I have it as a jpg and a PDF, but I don’t know how to upload pictures here. Can I send to your email?
I went to Flickr and got the embed code. I have added it to the previous post on Rhee but also offered it as its own post adding to the fun on Michelle Rhee http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/04/14/1201642/-adding-to-the-fun-on-Michelle-Rhee
Thanks! I figured out Flickr late last night. My daughter did the photoshopping for us.
Happy Sunday and happy spring.
I think Linda’s phrase, “Erase to the Top,” is much more clever and I prefer her picture, too, so I added it to the comments section on John Merrow’s page.
actually, I offered Erase to the Top and Linda picked it up. I claim no original credit – it has been around for several years – but i did help make it somewhat more visible through tweeting and blogging it yesterday (Saturday) and having others pick it up and pass it on. Somehow I do not think I will be on Rhee’s list of favorites. Oh, and she was following me on twitter, so by now she should have seen it
That was my thought on Friday. Get a room full of veteran teachers, and these “reformers” would be much closer to the “answers” they seek. Instead they waste millions of dollars on smaller schools and other untried, untested, junk science, which will ultimately fail. They could save a lot of money just by talking to actual veteran teachers- you know the people who teach day in and day out in all kinds of conditions for many years. Sickening, isn’t it? It shows a high level of disrespect. Could you imagine a billionaire, college drop out trying to change education in France, Germany, or Finland? They would be laughed right out of the country. Only in America… It is very sad. What other country puts a person as head of education who has never been a teacher? Think about that one for awhile.
We spend over 610 billion dollars a year on public K-12 education. Millions are simply what is lost in the couch cushions.
What is a “couch cushion”?
The poster was talking about millions wasted in a budget of over 610 thousand millions. Millions is a rounding error.
Man, I wish I was reupholstering the couch that has those millions! Now I’ve found a few coins every now and then, lots of dirt, dog hair, combs, plastic toy bits, etc. . . over the years but never millions of dollars.
You have found the equivalent change. A million dollars in a 610 billion dollar budget is the same relative amount as a dime in a $61,000 budget.
How do you know this didn’t happen? How do you know he didn’t teach before entering academia? How do you know he’s out of touch?
Does it get tiring defending the self-appointed, non-educator, policy wonks?
It must be exhausting. Do you have a blog?
1) This man is a part of the education system as a professor of education.
2) I’m not defending him – I’m questioning the assumptions and attacks made on him because I think those assumptions derail real conversation.
3) I have made a few blog posts, but haven’t done much with it. It’s linked to my wordpress account – you should be able to find my posts by looking at my wordpress id.
He doesn’t teach education; he teaches education POLICY. His bio says nothing about having been trained in education or having taught K12.
You go girl
I know. So much waste. It is such a waste of money to educate those kids! We must take another look at our values! We should be buying more predator drones or tanks. Weapons- now that is what we need more of. At least we paid back all those bankers. They all got back their money that they lost during the financial crisis. If those bankers and Wall Street millionaires had lost any money (even one dollar), I don’t know if I could still sleep at night. We should all be thankful to the “teaching economist.” So much money is being wasted on education, so terrible…It’s criminal really..
Please point to where I suggested the 610 billion dollars was wasted.
Thank you diane. Your voice of reason in this insane debacle that is education “reform” is so important. I am a teacher and the corporate vultures who have ruined almost every other part of our country must be stopped now. Fear has been injected into the system at every level from the students afraid of failing, to teachers afraid of being fired, to parents afraid to say no and opt-out their kids from the lunacy of incessant testing.
The article is by a professor, not a corporate reformer.
just because one holds an academic position does not exclude them from being part of the corporate “reform” movement
You’re right, but I see no evidence that would connect the author to the corporate reform movement.
his ideas and his rhetoric for starters. Oh, and HGSE is a hotbed of working with key elements of the corporate “reform” movement, which includes NLNS, TNTP, TFA, Gates Foundation, etc.
teacherken, what specifically? I’m open to being wrong as I don’t know the author or his background, and am certainly not an expert in the “corporate reform movement.” Which of his statements in the article do you suggest align him with the “corporate reform movement?”
I give up – you have had things explained to you in multiple ways, starting with the original blog post. If you don’t want to see it nothing will convince you.
teacherken, I’ve found that comments such as the one you just made are typically what I hear when someone is unwilling to, unable to, or uninterested in continuing a discussion. I’m sorry if I’ve given you the impression that I’m unwilling to hear or consider any viewpoint. In fact, I just mentioned my willingness to admit being wrong and considering other viewpoints.
If you’d be interested in continuing, I’m open.
“Which of his statements in the article do you suggest align him with the “corporate reform movement?””
His very first statement. An unbiased education academic would not start off by basing an argument for the need of education “reform” on the shock doctrine of, “A Nation at Risk.” There was no research to support that document or even any citations provided within it. That was the right wing propaganda which first got the ball rolling on market-based school “reform.”
Yes, an astute doctoral level scholar would look at, “A Nation at Risk” and ask, “Where are the references, so we can check into the research upon which these claims are based?” There are no in-text citations and no References at the end listing the sources of the information provided. It’s a faith-based report. Academic scholars in education do not take information at face value and advocate setting national policies based on faith.
The report talked about studies, but they provided no way for a researcher to look into them and confirm that those studies were methodologically sound. For example, when they talked about research, they said things like, “A California study..” and they gave no specific information about the study or where it was published, so it could not be verified. They also made misleading claims by omitting important information. For example, they stated that average SAT scores had declined, but they made no mention of the fact that the number of students from low income and minority groups taking the test had increased significantly, impacting the mean of test scores. Poverty was never mentioned in the report.
Citing sources of information is critical for determining the veracity of such “the sky is falling” claims and policy directives based on them, as promoted in this report, and the sources should be studies published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals. They didn’t even attempt that. This diatribe is not scientifically-based and has since been refuted by scholars, based on conflicting, verifiable research.
Are full citations typically done in New York Times Op-Ed pieces? I don’t recall seeing them before, but I am a recent regular subscriber.
umm, the lack of citations is a reference to A Nation At Risk, not to the op ed itself. That is rather clear even from the portion of the comment to which you are responding included in the email about your response
No, this is about “A Nation at Risk”, which the Op Ed author referred to in his first sentence, never contested and accepted at face value even though it had no references.
Sorry to misunderstand. Perhaps there are full citations in the papers listed in appendix C: commissioned papers.
There are no corresponding in-text citations or footnotes to tie claims asserted in the body of the report to anything listed under Commissioned Papers. “Commissioned Papers” also sounds suspiciously like the Working Papers of think tanks and private research companies that we see today, whose services are often contracted by organizations or corporate sponsors –very different from research published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, IMHO.
It is not surprising that “A Nation at Risk” is very different from a scholarly article as it is not a scholarly article, but a report by a government commission. Appendix C lists over forty papers with authors and affiliations.
A Nation at Risk is shock doctrine propaganda. No Harvard scholar should be accepting and passing off propaganda as if it is undisputed truth.
Cosmic Tinkere & Spaces, I think we’re discussing 2 different things – the first is the quality of the piece, and the second is its connection with the “reform movement.”
In terms of its quality, I agree – more citations (or at least a link to a page with citations) would have been helpful. I do think that sometimes editorials for public consumption don’t necessarily have to be held to the same standards as a journal article, but especially when presenting controversial information, yes – backing up statements would be important. I’d also add that I disagree with his premise that US is underperforming. However, that still doesn’t mean we don’t have a problem with performance. It just means we have the same problem as other countries.
Nevertheless, the quality of the article isn’t what I was defending. Rather, my statement was that the evidence presented that the author represented “corporate reform” – attacking the quality of the piece, though valid, doesn’t bear truth on the connection between the author and “corporate reform.”
As stated several times previously by myself and others, this is not about citations in a Times Op Ed article. TeacherKen is right, “If you don’t want to see it nothing will convince you.”
Cosmic Tinker, my experience has been that folks who use that phrase (“I don’t want to see the truth so nothing will ever convince me”) tends to be something folks say when, for example, they come to a point in the discussion where they realize they are wrong and move to personal attacks as they have no more content-oriented material to address.
If I’m wrong I’d be happy to continue the discussion. Specifically, I’d be interested in hearing any information you have in connecting this article with the “corporate reform movement.”
“However, that still doesn’t mean we don’t have a problem with performance. It just means we have the same problem as other countries.”
Yes. We all have the same problem. To wit: Not every person is destined to go to college. There. That was kinda easy…
LG, true – not every child is destined for college, and not every failure is the result of teachers. However, that’s not evidence that our educational system isn’t in need of improvement. Here’s the bottom line – comparing US academic achievement rates with those of other countries doesn’t yield any info about whether our schools are functioning well. It doesn’t mean they are, it doesn’t mean they aren’t. Rather, we need to look at the practices that occur in existing schools.
But that’s not what is happening and no one is listening to the real teachers. I don’t think those with money and power even care about best practices. Their kids don’t attend public schools and this is an experiment meant to benefit a very few.
It is best to bond with your students and families while teaching, learning, subverting and spreading the word. It’s working for me.
Linda, I agree – the current reliance on tests to measure school quality is inaccurate and ineffective, and more teachers should be at the table.
oh sir this is something with which I could not agree with more…I said the exact same thing except in a more long-winded type of way on this thread. I know Diane does not put a lot of stock into these international test scores whether they take in account poverty or not…but then she turns around and makes the case that k-12 education is NOT mediocre based on these test scores based on U.S. low poverty students performing better on TIMMS and pisa than low poverty students from other countries. if she doesn’t believe in the merit of these test scores then why wouldn’t she just throw out the results all together in terms of them being able to judge our schools. she can’t use them to support her position that our educational system was fine before corporate reform but then discredit them when people cite different studies about them that don’t take into account the poverty factor.
whether a study into the meaning of these test scores takes into account socioeconomic breakdown should be irrelevant then to her. what I’m saying is it should only be relevant to make a case against the corporate reformers. but in terms of using these test scores to try to support the position that K-12 education is not mediocre in this country, when she never agreed with the merit of these international test scores in the first place, seems disingenuous.
Diane, you responded by saying that the tests are misused and they don’t predict anything about the future, but you never really addressed my main point that you can’t use these international scores to prop up our schools at the same time your trying to discredit them…as you do here.
“Wouldn’t you expect a Harvard professor to cite the far better US scores on the 2011 TIMSS tests, where black eighth grade students in Massachusetts tied with their peers in Finland in math? If the Daily Howler noticed, why didn’t a Harvard professor? “
Reflective Teaching, we’re on the same page. I read your post using test scores when convenient to demonstrate one’s own point, and I agree that your comment was not addressed. I definitely believe that many folks here, including Diane, have strong hearts and the best interests of kids in mind, but I don’t always agree with methods of communication or reason used here.
I think there are some bitter, angry people – and for good reason. Teachers these days are expected to do more with less, not given credibility when due, and held accountable for things they don’t have full control over – just to name a few problems. However, there are better and worse ways to respond to this, and I’m concerned that the momentum this group has will be less than maximized if a positive, constructive, fair, and professional approach is not adopted.
I apologize because I know these comments don’t necessarily belong here, but I wanted to respond to Reflective Teaching because I know your comments (and mine) are generally in the minority. I want Diane and others to know, though, that at least some of us aren’t coming here to antagonize or promote an alternative agenda. I wouldn’t read this blog if I didn’t agree with at least the core philosophies, which is why I take the time to post my comments – I hope folks at some point might here those of us advocating for a slightly different tone, even when a frustrated and bitter one is certainly understood, if not justified.
You just handed him his …’ask me no questions and I’ll tell you no lies’…ASS!
Awesome post Diane!
Comparisons between countries always make me uncomfortable…not just U.S. poverty, because other countries have impoverished children, but the fact that in many countries around the world, going to school is a privilege for the elite, not a right granted to all. In U.S. public schools we teach EVERY child, we don’t get to pick and choose just the best or just the rich…
HERE HERE!
One of the best teachers of challenged kids I ever met was a high-school teacher in Indiana who had gotten a Ph.D. at Columbia under Lionel Trilling, who read a half dozen languages in the original, had an encyclopedic knowledge of European and American literature, and could prop his feet by the fire and read Aeschylus in the original without a dictionary. It was consistently a pleasure to watch this guy at work. He knew his subject, he knew kids, and he cared deeply. He could often find connections between them and traditional studies that were transformative, but he was very unconventional and was continually being hauled before his school administration to explain himself. Being an intellectual doesn’t make one a bad teacher of challenged students. (And, for that matter, having a teaching position at Harvard does necessarily mean that one is what I would call an intellectual.) I suppose that it’s possible that there are people who know a lot in their subject areas but are lousy teachers, but in 30 years in education, I have never met such a person in a K-12 setting, only in universities. My experience has been that subject-area knowledge and good K-12 teaching are highly correlated.
With regard to this article itself, It’s a great pity that Dr. Mehta helped perpetuate the myth of the comparatively low-performing American student and that the New York Times abetted him in this. I read the article this morning with some horror, and I’m very happy that Dr. Ravitch has, as one has come to expect from her, risen to counter it with the facts.
I am afraid I have seen my share of those who knew their subject matter cold but could not teach most K-12 kids. I had 5 student teachers. One was 4.0 junior Phi Beta Kappa . But he could not understand why his students didn’t all have the same passion for his subject that he did, and was too impatient with them, not taking the time to understand from where they were coming.
I have seen brilliant scientists and mathematicians who absolutely could not teach adolescents.
I also note that sometimes, like athletic coaches, good teachers are not necessarily the best at what they are offering in their own knowledge, that is, they are not natural experts, but they are effective teachers because they had to figure out how to make sense of it. I was a decent soccer player, but no where near as gifted as my contemporaries. Yet I was a superb coach of JV players, because I understood how to communicate to them what they needed to learn, because I had been through it.
IT is always better to have thorough knowledge, but also not mandatory. The best math class I had in hs was statistics and probability- which helped me immensely in my poker and bridge playing – and John Genereux, who taught to a bunch of us who were juniors, had never taken the course and was perhaps 4 pages ahead of us in the text. He knew math, he knew how to learn math, and because he was learning the subject as he taught us he understood the problems we would encounter.
Just saying to be careful of universal statements, because it takes only a single counter example to disprove them.
I don’t mean to be a buzzkil, but you realize that if the “low-performing American student is a myth,” Dr. Ravitch is one of the main creators of that myth, don’t you? She argued for years that American students were lagging behind students in other nations for years. So either she was doing the analysis wrong in the same way she argues Dr. Mehta is, or schools have somehow dramatically improved over the last decade or so.
I don’t understand why you bother with this blog if all you are going to do is insult Diane. It is one thing to point out an inaccuracy or debate, but you are RUDE.
Didn’t Dr Ravitch cover all that in the most recent book?
What she previously thought, why she changed her mind, what she thinks now.
I feel like that was asked and (honestly) answered.
Do you not agree that she has covered this?
No, I don’t think it’s ever been covered, but maybe I’m forgetting something. Why would U.S. schools have been “underperforming” relative to the rest of the developed world in the 1990s, but now aren’t? This isn’t a matter of philosophy or policy. It’s about the basis for factual assertions. Did U.S. schools get better? Was less data available back then? I don’t think it’s enough to say “I changed my mind generally about charter schools and education reform because I learned that reform isn’t working.” What about all the factual assertions about how bad the U.S. school system is? Was that just a bunch of bunk in the first place?
Dr. Ravitch has a rational mind. She saw the evidence pan out in front of her and admitted to seeing how her previous conclusions were incorrect. That’s rational. What’s NOT rational is sticking to a point when the evidence shows you something contrary. That’s all covered in the scientific method. You test your hypothesis, and then discover if it holds true in reality or not. When reality speaks, it’s wise to listen. And unfortunately, the testing has been happening over and over and over ad nausea-um, and the difference between reformers and Diane Ravitch is that she’s saying,”IT’S NOT WORKING!!!! ” She observed the results. The reformers want to keep testing again and again and again… hoping to get different results… and we’re starting to pile up human casualties.
You are beyond “a buzzkil,” Flerper. You are fingernails on the chalkboard.
Use your good manners and show some respect. Enough with confronting Diane on her prior positions! That time has long past, so drop it already. 3rd request!!!
If I am not one of the three requests make me the fourth. He and TE need to start their own blog and they can argue with each other. Goodnight.
Linda,
The problem with that is flerper and I often see merits in each others positions. Little learning goes on if one only spends time in an echo chamber. I have had to explain this to my kids when they catch me watching Fox News.
Fox could use a blogger/supporter. Word press looks pretty easy. Best of luck.
You misunderstand. I am not a supporter of their point of view. I think it is important that I understand their point of view and refine my own approach based on their criticisms.
Linda, look at this way. They make you sharpen your arguments not just your tongue. 😉
I certainly recognize that nobody wants to hear stuff like this.
I just reread this article and didn’t find it so offensive after all. However, I couldn’t help thinking how this professor automatically absolves himself from our K-12 education problems. Does he think because he’s a Harvard professor that he’s above it all? Or worse, does he think if people just read his book, all our problems will be solved?
Our education problems are cultural and they are deep. We are all likely to blame, if that word can be used, although we might not realize it. Here’s a true story of how this Harvard professor and his education department colleagues are part of the problem:
My son went to Harvard. One of his roommates was the son of two educators who really wanted to be a high school math teacher like his mom. When I first met him I didn’t say much about the usual aspirations of Harvard students, but after a couple of years I finally asked the question that I was dying to ask:
“Are you getting a lot of pressure to be something other than a high school teacher?”
“Yes, I am, but that’s always been my dream and that’s what I will be.”
A couple of years went by and the young men graduated. “Robert” went on to graduate school and was rethinking his original goals. He explained that his professors expected so much more of him.
Today he is another field; a worthy one but not more worthy than high school math teaching. However, it is more prestigious by American standards and certainly better paid.
And so there it is: In our culture being a k-12 teacher is not considered a good choice for our brightest students. Even when these people choose teaching, they are often counseled out or pressured out once they begin. Almost all of us contribute to our nation’s inability to attract and retain talented teachers:
The university professor who encourages the talented student who wants to be a teacher to “consider law school” (that happened to me and the person who said it was a professor of education!)
The physician who discourages his bright daughter from continuing as a second grade teacher (“We didn’t send you to Cornell for that.”)
The principal who treats his accomplished first grade teacher like a high school girl.
The young man who laughs when his mom suggests he consider high school teaching (That happened to me also);
The big city school superintendent who thinks nothing of telling the local newspaper that “I left teaching after a few years because I knew I wouldn’t be satisfied with that.”
The citizen who complains about teachers because “they have the whole summer off.”
The retired teacher who tells a young teacher “If I were starting again, I’d choose another field.”
The big city “chancellor” who spouts disrespect for the teachers in her district.
The major university that proudly announces the fact that “We don’t prepare people for the classroom, but for leadership positions in education.”
Etc.
If we don’t have the teachers we want in this country, we are all likely to blame. It’s a cultural problem and it won’t be easy to change. Bashing teachers, as we are doing now, is absolutely the worst thing that we can possibly do if we truly want to improve the profession. Of course that’s a very big “if.”
I guess those Harvard professors and parents are telling kids to major in something entirely different and then go into education through the back door to dictate policies. It’s clearly much easier for people who know little to nothing about our field and have no experience to get the most lucrative positions.
Hell, Chicago’s last mayor appointed a district superintendent, er CEO, who had been a cop and whose prior job was running the city’s transit system. No credentials? No experience? No problem! This is just EDUCATION. Here’s $200K+ per year….
The author may teach at the Ed School at Harvard, but a little Googling revealed that his doctorate from there is in Sociology and Social Policy. I found nothing indicating he has any formal training as an educator.
He’s another one of those guys whose parents were educators, a la Duncan –who also studied Sociology at Harvard. (WTF? Even entertainer’s kids are encouraged to study the craft and gain experience if they want to go into the family business.) Don’t you just love it when out of field people work in education and then complain that our field needs better gate-keeping? Right, starting with you and that guy at the top who’s making the whole country race to him –for money or else!
The author also went to a Progressive private school…
Same old same old ingredients for a public education policy wonk, ahem, “reformer.”
Aside from the inherent limitations of comparing all learners as though they have the same opportunity I didn’t find a great deal that I disagreed with in Dr. Mehta’s opinion. I certainly wish that he had offered guidance as to how we remake education into a profession. It is very hard to expect teachers to act professionally when on all fronts they are degraded and treated unprofessionally. Money is the least of those degradations. There probably are some more effective approaches to preparing teachers but discovering those or disseminating those is not encouraged; in fact “less is more” is touted. I’m wondering if medical and law schools or MBA programs are being encouraged to shorten, to minimize, to require less effort and thinking from those candidates so that they when they go into an increasingly more complex and ambiguous world they will respond with compliance…because that is what we like to see in a good doctor, lawyer, or decision-maker. To say one thing–“education is a profession” but do another–“don’t make any informed decisions, particularly if they aren’t the ones I would make”–can’t lead to cohesive, focused outcomes such as all children in this country being well-educated through a public system.
Please respond to this op-ed piece in the NYT, Diane. Those of us who live in Boston and are connected to the Boston Public Schools have been subject to the whims of the HGSE for years. Harvard is as much in the bag of Broad and Gates as any other “reform”actor. I fear this is the beginning of the wagons circling in response to the outing of Rhee.
actually Mehta’s piece was in the works well before Merrow put up about the memo on Thursday. He is after all promoting a book.
This article essentially says that we need to focus more on improving the teaching profession by giving teachers more extensive training, knowledge, and support. Are you too blinded by the fact that he (now obviously) correctly grouped you into the less helpful extremist camp with Michelle Rhee to read the rest of the article and notice that he is offering one of the few visions of school reform that focuses on supporting, rather than testing, teachers, and acknowledges that the choice movement is relatively unsuccessful? You’ve made this point plenty of times. But because he acknowledges that some charter schools work, some alternative certifications work, the United States could improve its inner city schools, you write him off as one of the “dumbest articles.”
As a teacher in a horrible inner city charter school that DOES NOT treat teachers like professionals, and sees the deteriorative effect on students, I welcome his voice because he recognizes that education will not improve if teachers remain on the bottom of the hierarchy. He has some ideas to help make that happen. But despite the fact that your vision is not so different, you write him off and lump him in with all the reformers who have no respect for teaching as a profession.
In doing so, you are doing more damage to teachers than any of the pro-market reformers because you provide them with a scapegoat, someone who attacks any reflective look at the profession. People read your blog and decide that teachers are too self-interested and narrow-minded to have a seat at the table. It’s a shame.
Linda, You’ll be happy to know that I am leaving this blog now. It’s depressing to hear all this negativity. And, Hanna, I’ll keep you in my prayers.
Just so you know, I am not a Rhee fan or a Ravitch fan. I am a student fan. I just want every child to have the same opportunity for learning. Take it from a rural South Georgia retiree who lives and worked in one of the poorest counties in Georgia. I know exactly what it’s like for some of these kids, whether they are migrant workers, military kids, or just generational poor kids in the county.
If we put our minds together instead of bickering and fighting, just think what we could do.
Brightest and best? I have a research PhD in chemistry and 33 years of college/university teaching and ten years of high school teaching yet I sit at home jobless because, for reasons still unknown to me, I ran afoul of a crazy specialized high school principal and, as an untenured teacher, am now banned from the NYCDoE for life. (My first two years had perfect evaluations.) My five-star student rating is still posted to RateMyTeachers.com.
As long as the NYCDoE processes principals through its “Leadership Academy” and hires 27 year old COOs, as they did recently, NYC schools are in trouble.
Supposedly good science teachers are in demand. Can’t prove it by me!
Sorry dude.
The myth of in demand science teachers, is just that, a myth.
No teacher shortage…at least not in most well populated cities/towns and surrounding environs.
(May not be the case in rural areas, there perhaps all educated, credentialed teachers are in short supply).
Just like the big need for more STEM majors.
Myth.
Maybe it was a TFA temp he lost out to…in some cities they come in after teachers are laid off…a scab is a scab is a scab.
Diane, I think your response to this article sums up why, ultimately, you will be ineffective in changing education in this country:
1) You continue to use unprofessional language, such as calling the article “dumb.”
2) You refuse to acknowledge that there are changes that need to be made in the teaching profession. Yes, we are performing equally poorly compared with other countries when you control for SES, but “equally poorly” should not be good enough.
3) You fail to acknowledge any of the valid points made by folks you disagree with.
DIane, there is no question that SES plays a role in education, and that we (as a society) should attempt to improve conditions of kids living in poverty. However, you are severely out of touch with the current public schools if you advocate that focusing on teacher quality/improvement is of no concern.
agreed with everything you said here…even though Diane is an excellent outspoken advocate against the corporatization of education…the corporatization of education, even though its the most pressing problem, is not the only problem with America’s schools…and furthermore advocating for teacher quality/improvement and higher standards, divorced from tying standardized test results to measuring teacher performance of course, does not constitute “teacher bashing.” and anyone who says it does is being overly defensive
and also her tendency to call people names gets a bit annoying….she’s a scholarly woman and a professional…this blog should remain professional and respectful in its criticism.
“But the bottom line is that NO country is serving kids living in poverty adequately. We can conclude that teaching kids living in poverty is hopeless until poverty is fixed, or we can attempt to examine our practices and identify ways to reach struggling learners more effectively.”
Very much agree with your last point here….i think connecting school content to children’s lived experience is necessary to be an affective teacher in poorer areas..what do you think?
Thanks Reflective Thinking. I agree with you – I really side with Diane on most educational issues, and believe she is in a powerful position to make change, which is why I think it’s frustrating to see her use strategies (e.g., name-calling) that I think will be ultimately limiting.
With your last point (connecting school content to children’s lived experience), I think part of the issue is being an effective teacher for kids from impoverished backgrounds is complex, and there probably isn’t one strategy that will do it, but I think you raise an excellent point, and I’ve been particular excited to see some of the “linked learning” initiatives getting more attention, particular in the STEM/STEAM area, which is exactly what you’re talking about – not compromising on academic content, but connecting that content more with kids lived experiences. So, overall – yes – I think your point is extremely relevant :).
edededucation @ 2:39
She did not engage in name calling.
She called the article dumb.
She did not call the person dumb.
There is a difference.
You probably know this, yes?
Ang, you are right. However, I the use of the word “dumb” is still unprofessional, and I would guess that calling someone’s work “dumb” would still be be offensive as name-calling would be.
i just looked up that linked-learning initiative you spoke of…i concur that job training should be one aspect of schooling and allowing students to become active learners rather than passive ones. but when I said connect content to student’s lived experience, I meant something slightly different. obviously the job of an educational system in a democracy can not just be to produce future members of the workforce. it also should be to produce citizens who are critical thinkers, capable of advancing the cause of a vibrant and critical democracy, because God knows America is becoming less and less of a democracy everyday…and its certainly a big reason why America, of all the industrialized nations, has such rampant poverty. I read a lot about radical educational theory and critical pedagogy from authors such as Henry Giroux, Paulo Friere, Peter Mclaren, Joe Kincheloe, (all who were or are teachers) and I wonder what you think about this quote, as a person who has been in the public schools,(I haven’t I can only refer to my own experience as a student)
“Instead of defining schools solely as extensions of the workplace or as front-line institutions in the battle of international markets and foreign competition, schools as democratic public spheres are constructed around forms of critical inquiry that dignify meaningful dialogue and human agency. Students learn the discourse of public association and social responsibility. Such a discourse seeks to recapture the idea of critical democracy as a social movement that supports individual freedom and social justice. Moreover, viewing schools as democratic public spheres provides a rational for defending them along with progressive forms of pedagogy and teacher work as essential institutions and practices in the performance of an important public service. Schools are now defended in a political language as institutions that provide the ideological and material conditions necessary to educate a citizen ry in the dynamics of critical literacy and civic courage, and these constitute the basis for functioning as active citizens in a democratic society.”
For example, I’m thinking that especially with schools in poverty-stricken areas but not reserved to those, social studies classes should be about much more than just teaching students an “objective” body of knowledge and then testing them on it. Just because a student is able to remember the supposedly linear causality of the American Civil War that a teacher taught to him as a fixed body of knowledge and reproduce it on a multiple choice question, does not mean that student can critically think and problematize knowledge. Since history is constantly written and re-written by people with different perspectives on the same event, it is important that students are taught to problematize popular accounts of history and analyze them for their purposeful inaccuracies, biases towards and against certain groups of people, and hidden agendas. in this way students become active researchers, rather than passive absorbers of “unquestioned truths.” and i think teaching methods which were built around this theoretical construct would be especially helpful in poor areas because it would allow students to analyze and problematize their lived experience and how its affected by sociohistorical forces and, in this way, knowledge would become liberating and emancipatory.
I know I said a lot here, but what do you think?
You are onto something. Schooling a child is always in flux and adapting to that continual change is part of the great work we do as teachers. Unfortunately, the corporate world got onboard to reform it their way. We teachers know that real change and adaptation happens at the school level. It is the boots on the ground that walk the journey in educating our students. The power has been instead given to those furthest away from the students, teachers and parents. Politics do not belong in education. Get rid of the DOE. It has outlived its purpose.
How much control would you be willing to give teachers and parents?
Reflective Thinking, definitely – that sounds like a very important outcome of education. I do think it’s important to understand that “basics” such as learning to read enable those higher-level thinking skills, though. While that sounds like a no-brainer, too often I see a false dichotomy set up between “basic skills” and “higher-order thinking,” as though we are choosing basic skills OVER higher-order thinking, which is not true.
Overall, though, I agree with you – I think we’re definitely on the same page.
Sandy, unfortunately “real change” doesn’t just happen at the school level. It takes a system. Teachers are absolutely critical agents, and perhaps the most important ones, but we shouldn’t ignore the roles that others play, including corporations. I disagree with corporations setting the agenda, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t involved in the process.
And that is why this isn’t working and will not work as a faux reform movement. We are not included. We are ignored and tossed aside. It is another top down control method with nothing but disdain and disrespect for teachers. They do not control our minds.
Experienced teachers know how to subvert. Gates/Coleman/Broad et.al. don’t get it and they never will. Years from now this will just be another clusterfudge and they will somehow find a new narrative to blame the front line workers again. However, the people are talking (teachers, students, parents, etc) and just so you know the parents of my students don’t buy any of this.
Teachingeconomist, I appreciate you insightful question as usual. I’m not sure who it was directed at, but in terms of giving teachers/parents control, I’m not sure what you mean by that?
I was asking the question of poster Sandy. She stated a desire to get the politics out of decisions about education and advocated making decisions closer to the student. It seems to me that unless families (I will group students and parents together) have a some educational choices available to them, Sandy’s plan just trades one set of politicians for another set, be they state or local.
Linda, I agree that the “corporate reform movement” isn’t working and won’t – in part because of what you said (teachers/educators aren’t included that much), and also because the strategies they’ve selected just don’t seem that effective.
I encourage to read more and talk more to those in the trenches…the people who spend every day with the kids. Here is another account:
http://atthechalkface.com/2013/04/14/im-a-teacher-and-im-tired-by-elaine-rybski/
Thanks for the link Linda – will check it out. I would say, though, that I have quite a bit of experience with the trench, and those in it. I know you’ve accused me of being an “outsider” in the past, but this isn’t the case.
Ah, sorry teacher economist – thanks for clarifying.
You might check out the philosophy of the Sudbury Valley School in Framingham, Mass., if you are interested in schools as democratic institutions. The cognitive dissonance you are experiencing in reading this blog is that the ones who talk most about democracy are really the closet authoritarians. Their tradition goes back to the progressivism of Woodrow Wilson and John Dewey, essentially a version of socialist communism. The conflict over the schools these days arises from a general challenge in the country to the infecting boil of socialism embodied in President Obama which is slowly poisoning the national intellectual blood stream (lots of the zombies are on this blog) and through that the economics of prosperity in this country. Don’t let my hyperbole put you off. You are asking the right questions and identifying some of the glaring contradictions in the Rhavian synthesis. She herself does what she animadverts at, and uses for her own arguments the same assumptions which when others use them she condemns. This is not rudeness—just truth—but liberals always try to shut people up when they advance a truth because then do not have the brains to refute it. They are the slightly educated version of union thugs. If you keep up your truthfulness, you’ll never get a job in public education. Move to Switzerland where you can get your Toblerone fresh. The old America is dead or dying. A few of us old geezers keep trying to point out the error of their ways to the public sector lampreys, but they persist in being insulted. Most hide their domestic identities, but they can’t hide their ideological souls. Take warning.
HU, you sound like Charlie Brown’s teacher: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ss2hULhXf04
I know you don’t mean it as a compliment, but I laughed anyway. The true cause is Lucy’s brain—mean, low-thinking, and narcissistic— which can turn the wisdom of the ages—which I profess to possess—into the whaa whaa whaa she hears. That’s the question of the ages: how do we engage the Lucy’s of the world in the classroom? How is that teacher thing working out for you?
Can’t say I can recall a child ever falling asleep during a lesson in my class, but I believe in active learning, not a lot of lectures to try and prove that I am a sage.
Thank goodness there are not many teachers who would blame the student and characterize their “brain” as “mean, low-thinking, and narcissistic,” rather than engage in self-reflection and consider whether their own hubris is resulting in boring, self-righteous lectures that are just attempts to show off “the wisdom of the ages—which” they “profess to possess.”
Am I the ONLY one on this list with a sense of humor? If you can’t take pompous pontificating you’re no friend of mine.
I already knew that, so we’re good.
“Thank goodness there are not many teachers who would blame the student and characterize their “brain” as “mean, low-thinking, and narcissistic,” rather than engage in self-reflection and consider whether their own hubris is resulting in boring, self-righteous lectures that are just attempts to show off “the wisdom of the ages—which” they “profess to possess.”
I can only speak from my experience as a student in college, but there are plenty of professors like you describe here. of course, professors in college are much different from teachers in that most don’t have formal teacher training and not only are unwilling to deviate from the traditional lecture-style pedagogy but really have no idea how to. I know, because I have confronted some of my professors on this. maybe then its not hubris, but really just lack of knowledge or ability to consider different pedagogies. Although if I do remember correctly from my high school days, straight lecture and multiple choice tests to test how much you memorized after was pretty much the flavor of the day, so it wasn’t much different. Although back in high school I never had the courage or understanding of educational theory to confront them so….but that’s just my experience…not trying to draw any univeral conclusions…all I know is I never wanna be that kind of teacher, who thinks teaching just constitutes lecture, once I do enter the profession
um Harlan “Their tradition goes back to the progressivism of Woodrow Wilson and John Dewey, essentially a version of socialist communism.”
I’ve read Dewey extensively…not sure how advocating teaching for a more vibrant democracy automatically somehow means teaching for socialist authoritarianism. after all, supposedly America is supposed to be a democracy, although I would contend we’re becoming less and less of one everyday what with crony capitalism and “corporations are people” and superpacs, 1% vs. 99% and what not, but none of those things have anything to do with socialism
Try Dewey’s RECONSTRUCTION IN PHILOSOPHY and see if you don’t think its socialist.
It’s true. There are too many ineffective teachers who bring anger, hostility & ineptness into the classrooms, whether it is a wealthy community or one steeped in poverty. Students bring a lot of angst to school with them, too, and that combination can make a very vulnerable environment in which they are expected to learn. I know of one school where I used to teach that has a handful of teachers who are bullyish to students, present negative attitudes and are clearly miserable educators. They put on a happy face when being evaluated, but once they are alone with the students, they revert right back to the grim personalities that wreak havoc on student learning all day long. We all know that learning is blocked when there is a suggestion of threat, danger or harm to us. My heart still aches for misused power that is in play in some classrooms. Yes, there are some really bad teachers. What do the admins do about it? Simply move them elsewhere hoping to get rid of them only to inflict hardship on the next batch of students in another school. Principals fail to be honest about the teachers that are transferring, further hiding the truth. We would do these ineffective, unworthy teachers a favor by suggesting they find another line of work where they will do no emotional, educational or social harm to children. Until we demand that poor teachers be dismissed or retrained, nothing will change. All the testing in the world won’t change the one on one interaction between the teacher and the student. In fact, when there is misuse of teacher power that deflects the opportunity for learning, putting those types of teachers under pressure tends to create an even more harmful environment for learning. It’s one thing to have high expectations, strong, effective disciplined classrooms and caring attitude…but when tyrants rule the class and call themselves teachers, nothing good happens there. Get rid of the bad ones, keep and encourage, compensate and reward the good ones. So easy but apparently hard to do in reality. Pollyannish? No. Administrators need to do their jobs. Why it’s so difficult to fire bad teachers is where we should begin reform. Either they become teachers through ineffective training in college or supervisors ignore their duties in redirecting those prospective teachers from entering the profession in the first place, or the administrators lack the will, skill or ability to do what they are there to do…supervise their teachers. Ask any teacher on a campus who the outstanding teachers are in that school, and they will tell you. They know. Ask them which teachers are not effective, miserable or failing in their jobs, and they will tell you that those teachers exist, too. A local private, Jesuit high school evaluates teachers by surveying three groups: administrators, parents & students. Don’t even get me started on how well students especially and their parents know very well which teachers are the most effective…notice, not the “nicest” of “easiest” or “most fun”…effectively teach so students enjoy their classes and earned respect. It is very uncomfortable to be aware of bad teaching going on in the classroom down the hall. I always tried to encourage and assist those teachers who struggled, which all of us teachers do in the beginning and throughout our careers. It is very hard work, that drains us of energy, joy and belief in our work sometimes. But, with encouragement and support of the right kind, ineffective teachers can rebound and improve. That’s where we need to focus our reform…right on campus, one teacher at a time. Those who don’t respond to interventions, bid them a goodbye and replace them with someone who does. Teaching isn’t for wimps or lazy people. You must be bright and know the curriculum with compelling insight and be able to communicate that knowledge with joy, humor, interest and clarity. Told ya, it’s damn hard work and take a uniquely qualified person to do it well.
Why is it the administrators are not held accountable for the hiring and determination of due process rights being granted to these “bad” teachers?
Do we somehow have an abundance of great administrators granting due process rights to legions of horrible teachers?
Doesn’t the fish rot from the head down? When will they be evaluated and held accountable?
Sandy, thanks for your reply. I have worked with some of those teachers you describe (ones that, for example, abuse power). However, I think that there are many more well-intentioned, hard-working educators that also may not be using the most effective strategies in all circumstances. For example, I worked in one school in which none of the teachers used small groups for reading instruction, and not because all students were on the same level. Most of those teachers were compassionate, but simply weren’t using best practice in that department. This is exactly what I mean by a “false argument” – that folks advocating for improved practice aren’t blaming teachers for causing problems or calling them lazy/worthless. We’re simply saying that we aren’t doing everything we could be in some instances. That statement, though, is misread and filtered through a polarized lens which is not healthy for improving education.
Linda, for the first time we may agree :). You’re absolutely right – we should examine all parts of the system, from the political process to administrative practices on the building level, to identify areas in need of improvement (and areas of strength).
Please see, though, that advocating for teacher improvement is NOT the same as saying teachers are the only ones that should improve.
So why don’t you start posting equally about the need to reform administrator training and hiring?
Why don’t you post equally about politicians riding on the reformy train just to make a name for themselves?
Why don’t you post equally about policy wonks taking leadership positions when they don’t understand and even respect the front line worker and the job to be done?
Why don’t you ask for reform of the faux refomers?
You never do…you just argue and point out inaccuracies to embarrass Diane.
Write to Obama, Duncan, Bloomberg, Rhee, White, Kopp and the entire gang of edubullies and ask them to get their act together.
Take your indignation to the next level.
Go! Do it!
Sandy,
Please submit evidence that there are so many bad teachers?
Really.
I have been teaching for a long time.
I have been a dept. chair. I have had many, many student teachers over the years.
I have only known (and helped to remove!) a few actually poor teachers.
I have experienced 3 types:
Some had been poor all along..not well suited to the profession and as Linda points out (@ 2:52), the real problem with them was …Who the heck hired this person?! It should have been obvious that they lacked the skills necessary to teach. So, administrative problem.
A few of the bad teachers I encountered were terribly misplaced…not everyone can work in every environment (some people really do not cross racial lines well, others have issues with other religions, etc.) In other words, they may have been OK in another school, but our school was too diverse, tolerant, in town, etc. for them.
Again, administrative hiring problem.
The last type of problem teacher was the saddest for me. This type was once fine, but had some sort of problem, (health, emotional, family, etc.) perhaps what one might call burn out. They shut down, became the worksheet type of teacher began to disengage from the kids. This is the kind that can be helped, but what they really needed help with was the underlying problem.
But i am talking about a handful of teachers over a career!
The vast majority of teachers I have worked with are neither wimps or lazy. They are smart resourceful, hardworking people.
I really believe the few “poor teachers” have been amplified in the mind of the public.
Teacher quality is not a big issue in my experience and it certainly is not the thing holding children back. (Hint: see poverty, etc.)
However, it will be very soon.
Most of us are leaving (retiring) and given the crappy working conditions (incessant testing, accountable for things over which you have no control, revolving door administrators, ridiculous curriculums, national experts who are clowns, etc.) who would want the job now?
Linda, a few responses. First, I definitely see where you are coming from in that most of my comments on this particular blog are focusing on teacher quality, but that’s because I’m just responding to Diane’s blog posts and relevant comments here, so I’m not really choosing which conversations to start.
Second, I would add that my main agenda as a commenter on this blog has been to question assumptions made, rather than to advocate certain positions. If you were to read my comments on other blogs or sites, you’d probably see a much more balanced position.
As a whole, I support a balance, evidence-based approach to these discussions, and seek to contribute in part by questioning assumptions which I think are inaccurately derived. So, most of my comments aren’t intended as much to defend folks such as politicians as they are to question assumptions I see being made about them. In this particular post, I see a lot of discrediting the author’s opinion simply because he’s a professor, not a teacher. While I do think it’s important to consider that his perspective isn’t based on current classroom experience, that doesn’t mean he’s automatically wrong and not qualified to speak on the matter.
Ang, I realize your comment wasn’t directed toward me, but I had some thoughts: first, educational conditions vary, so your experience might be very different from others. You have experienced many good teachers, others might have experienced the opposite. My own experience has been quite varied, which supports the perspective that “location matters.” I’ve seen some schools with a high number of great faculty, and others the opposite. So, in terms of “evidence,” I think we’re all working off of our own personal experiences in this particular conversation.
Second, I think it’s hugely important to make the distinction that there are many teachers who aren’t “poor” but might need to start making some different decisions in terms of instructional strategies, behavior management programs, etc. I commented earlier that – even in schools where I’ve seen a large number of teachers missing out on some important strategies – many of those teachers aren’t necessarily “bad” or “poor,” but just need improvement in some areas, as we all probably do (unless there are any perfect folks out there). They may even be “trying their best,” but that doesn’t mean there aren’t other strategies out there that might work better.
I guess my bottom line with this last paragraph is that we shouldn’t polarize the conversation – it’s a false dichotomy to talk about “great” teachers and “poor” teachers because an extremely small amount fall completely into either one or the other.
Finally, you mentioned what’s “holding kids back.” Again, I’d say we should be less focused on finding the ONE thing holding kids back, because there isn’t. However, I’d say that I’ve experienced where some teacher decision-making has led to less improvement than might be possible, even given SES. To return to my previous example, the school where no teachers were using small group reading instruction is an example where teachers didn’t necessarily cause kids to be struggling readers, but weren’t taking advantage of a powerful intervention condition that certainly could have helped. To say that teachers in that school could have done nothing more to help those students would be inaccurate.
diane IS focused on teacher quality. That includes keeping quality teachers. The “reform” movement is focused on test scores which are of very little value in determining who is a quality teacher.
Oh, and before you go there, my students did very well on tests whether you looked at scores or were you to look at improvement, but that had NOTHING to do with why I was considered an outstanding teacher – by my school, my school system, my parents, and most of all by my students.
teacherken, yes – retention is definitely important, but my comments were focused specifically on improving teaching quality, not just maintaining it.
then please tell me how our current obsession with tests has anything to do with improving teacher quality?
The effort being promoted to quantify the value of a teacher by the results of students’ tests will have the same outcome as trying to push a rope. It’s just too unwieldy in nature. Keep standards high, provide tons of support and encouragement among staff & admins, rally parents to participate if possible, spend time establishing a working relationship with students, families and peers, implement best practices in the art of teaching and never give up…but stop with the expectations that all children can learn in the same way on the same day and prove it by one high stakes test per year, not to mention making my salary & reputation vulnerable to the results. We must lighten up about such an irrational mandate which flies in the face of all this high takes testing nonsense. Just as I don’t evaluate my job as a parent by that ONE DAY when my child was misbehaving, neither should we evaluate a student by ONE TEST or more. We have the privilege of working with young human beings, each one developing in a unique way. That doesn’t mean I don’t expect a lot from my students…I expect them to be human and no amount of testing them will deter me from remembering that fact. The tests give information but they in no way explain whether a human being is job ready, college ready or life ready. If that were true, we’d all be up a creek without a paddle in life. I no more think my test scores were tipping points in my life than I think wearing the latest fashions did in my past. I made the difference, I made the commitment and I did so with lots of encouragement and second chances. I’ve had about as much success as anyone has a right to in my life and I can point to a handful of teachers who had a lot to do with it because they didn’t give up on me. Teachers are critically important in the lives of students. We should never underestimate that truth. The influence of our deeds in the classrooms extends far beyond the tests. And what a big responsibility that is…and so rewarding.
Teacherken, I agree with you – I can’t imagine the current obsession with state tests is improving teacher quality, but I’m not sure how that’s related to what we’ve been talking about?
The reporter should be proud of those Massachusetts students, and should have mentioned their accomplishments, people are so willing to point out the bad without praising the good.
One would think that a Professor of Education at Harvard would be informed before writing an article about anything. Having stated that something in America is wrong when a Professor writes an article for a newspaper like the New York Times, which has any wiggle room for questions of fact. Opinions are one thing, facts can not be argued. Dianne thanks again for expressing the facts in this and many other cases. Shame on the New York Times for being a rag no different than the New York Post or Daily News. I expect better.
To eded. Not sure this is in the right place but I apologize. It just doesn’t seem your are supportive. You seem more critical of Diane and teachers. But we will start anew.
Thanks Linda – somehow just came across this post, and I appreciate it. Definitely looking forward to future conversations…
I have one question for Diane…I have watch some of your speeches, I think the last one you gave at a college in North or South Carolina I believe it was UNC, and I know you hate it when people compare America to other nation based on these international test scores. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe you don’t put a lot of stock into these international test scores whether they take into account poverty or not. so based on that I ask how can you turn around and then make the case that K-12 education is not mediocre based on
U.S. low poverty students performing better on TIMMS and PISA than low poverty students from other countries. personally, if you don’t believe in the merit of these test scores at all wouldn’t you just throw out the merit of these international test scores in terms of them being able to judge our schools either which way and then just look at the actual school system itself. what I’m saying is you like to use these test scores to support your position that there was never anything wrong with K-12 education before the corporate refomers came in, and don’t get me wrong I certainly agree they’ve made everything worse, but then you tend to discredit them when people cite different studies about them that don’t take into account the poverty factor. what I’m saying is can’t we just stop comparing ourselves all together to other countries using these international tests? I say all this respectfully..I don’t seek any ire from anyone on this comment thread.
If I can say it a different way to make myself as clear as possible, Diane, your against test scores being used to judge teachers and students and the health of a country’s educational system period right, as I think most of us are here? so whether a study into the meaning of these test scores takes into account socioeconomic breakdown should be irrelevant then to you, right? what I’m saying is it should only be relevant to make a case against the corporate reformers. but in terms of using these test scores to try to support the position that K-12 education is not mediocre in this country, when you never agreed with the use of these international test scores in the first place, seems disingenuous. again I say this respectfully and don’t seek the ire of anyone. no teacher-bashing here. just an undergraduate student here who likes to ask questions 🙂
The tests are misused. Once a nation reaches a certain level of development, the scores don’t matter. We have economically outperformed all the countries with higher test scores sine international testing began in 1964. The scores don’t predict anything about the future.
I agree with you and the author of this article was wrong for using these test scores as a measure for determining that our K-12 schools are mediocre. But what I was saying was, that if you agree that these test scores are not a good predictor of anything you also can not use them as a justification for saying that our K-12 schools are not mediocre. what I’m saying is that they are a poor measurement no matter which position you take.
I think you misinterpret why Diane – and I and others – use the test scores. They are the standard used by the “reformers” to justify the actions they are taking, and we are pointing out that the tests upon which they are relying do not show what they claim they do about American education. Further, Diane will often point at what NAEP has to say, and since she was on the relative governing board under both a Democratic and a Republican president, I think her words on that topic have some cogency.
I will further add that many of the international tests are not apples to apples comparisons, including some nations not testing non-native speakers, our testing in TIMSS a few cycles back people who had not had pre-calculus to see how they would do or comparing our students with one year of physics against those in Norway with two years. A final year comparison is not an equivalent comparison.
Iris Rotberg, with whom I studied and with whom I am coauthor of a monograph, has written extensively on these various international comparisons, as did the late Gerald Bracey. When I was her graduate student, she even brought in one of the technical people who had prepared one of the exams, and we had access to a great deal of information. There were problems with items. Some countries without coastlines dropped questions on coastal biology because they didn’t teach it. Yet we had kids on the Great Plains being asked those questions, even though also did not cover it – whereas in Maryland everyone even in the cities and the Appalachians has to learn about the Chesapeake.
Oh and there was one question on which US students blew away every other country. It was a physics question. It had to do with the stopping distance of an automobile. Now, is it just possible that most final year students in America have some personal knowledge of the subject outside of school, whereas that is NOT the pattern in most of the rest of the world? Would that mean that question is not a valid measure of the effectiveness of American education?
“They are the standard used by the “reformers” to justify the actions they are taking, and we are pointing out that the tests upon which they are relying do not show what they claim they do about American education. ”
I understand this, but then what do you both think these tests are valuable for, if anything?
I believe the point is that if we are going to try to compare our education system to others using these international tests, then we have to make sure we are comparing apples to apples. These are not carefully matched samples: the student populations are markedly different and the tests are of limited if any value in making educational decisions. That does not mean we cannot look at individual educational characteristics and practices of other nations to inform our own practice. We just cannot draw a direct comparison based on test data. We have to look behind the data to see what might be of value. When we observe the practices behind the data, we gain hard information that we can use. We can also draw some conclusions about what education can be expected to accomplish and what needs to be addressed by a wider segment of society. Considering our admittedly amateurish attempts to measure the effects of in-school and out-of-school variables, it would seem that raising healthy, happy, contributing members of society is much more than a job for teachers.
There have been attempts to match apples to apples. I will try to find the study Dr. Ravitch linked to that found both Finland and South Korea outperforming US students at every income level.
Here is what is wrong with education in America. Have any ideas how to change this problem? Our lack of engagement is the problem. I fight it every day. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/27/best-education-in-the-wor_n_2199795.html
Well, this topic sure generated a lot of comments, 253 at this point, and it really brought out Diane’s detractors.
So what IS this all about? To summarize, we have a non-educator who is the author of a Times opinion piece that begins by invoking Reagan’s 1983, “A Nation at Risk.” This should be a red flag for educators right there, because there was no research-base for that document nor citations provided in it. It was a piece of GOP propaganda. As the Sandia report and Berliner and Biddle demonstrated in the Manufactured Crisis, the problem was, and continues to be, the achievement gap which exists in all nations between lower and higher income students: http://www.epi.org/blog/international-tests-achievement-gaps-gains-american-students/
The author then goes on to cite PISA scores, without ever mentioning how they differ by income levels, thereby discounting the impact of poverty. Then he pits Rhee’s promotion of testing and teacher evaluations against Ravitch’s concerns over privatization of public education and poverty, as if they are somehow polar opposites. Apparently, the latter are not even worth addressing, as he makes no mention of privatization or poverty ever again. He does, however, talk extensively regarding gate-keeping for teachers and how he supports a bar exam similar to the Medical Boards for physicians. (No mention of exactly where funds will come from to pay teachers like similar professionals in other fields.)
The author declares “false debates” throughout, such as regarding comparisons between successes and failures at charters like KIPP and traditional schools, TFA and traditional Teacher Ed, etc. This looks to me like an effective way of suckering in people who are in all camps. Ultimately, however, the author refers to what has been happening in the name of school “reform” as just “tinkering at the margins.” Others, like Rhee, Ravitch, educators and students who’ve experienced the reforms personally might be more inclined to characterized “reform” efforts as rather radical tampering at the core of public education.
As a lifelong tinkerer, the only thing that all of this discounting and denouncing of virtually every effort at school “reform” says to me is that this non-educator author is hoping he’s got something to sell, probably on a level that he created through his own tinkering. I have to wonder how another non-educator who denies the affects of poverty would have a clue about this though.
But, anyone who thinks otherwise, start saving up your hard-earned dollars so you can learn about this non-educator’s version of “reform.” Book to come: “The Allure of Order: High Hopes, Dashed Expectations, and the Troubled Quest to Remake American Schooling.”
If it sounds from the title like no answers are provided, I suspect that’s probably because the author doesn’t really have any, and I would have to agree that this opinion piece is “dumb” because it’s really just a marketing ploy.
Yes, yes, yes….this is a book preview. I will wait for Diane’s and take a pass on Mehta.
Thank you Cosmic.
Did it ever occur to you that Diane started this blog as a way to sell HER book? This sort of thing, in addition to Mehta’s article is called one’s “platform” in publishing. Get know widely first, create a lot of buzz, then bring out the book. Just saying.
Harlan, there are easier ways to sell a book than by starting a blog where I have posted 10-20 times daily for a year. FYI: my last book was a national bestseller and I did not have this blog. I am not selling anything but freedom of expression. That’s why you are here. I get frequent requests from advertisers, and I reject them all.
Thank you, Diane, for your gracious reply. Freedom of expression IS a desideratum, unappreciated by some of your more intense disciples who in various ways like to yell “shut up” at me rather than try to clarify and then refute my observations. I am glad you reject advertising, but does sustaining this blog cost you cash? Will it diminish your sales? You are the best writer of any of us here, so you deserve your success. I will conclude that we are finally approaching productive discussion when the term “tea party” receives respect here.
Considering the fact that Diane’s last book was a blockbuster well before she decided to start this blog, sounds like you, besides beginning to become nasty, are chronologically challenged.
For your information, Diane was already blogging for several years, with Deborah Meier, at Education Week / Teacher, in a shared blog called Bridging Differences. She decided she want to write more frequently to address topics on a more timely basis, so she started this blog. Most of the people who follow this blog do so because Diane connects them with important material on education, and because she encourages discussion. That you can only attribute pecuniary motives to her participation here is more reflective of your mindset than hers.
The Archie of the 21st century…good one. Can we all just give up HU? It is pointless….let’s focus our energies elsewhere.
Thank you, TeacherKen.
I tolerate grumpy, disagreeable people who comment on the blog as a testament to the value of free speech and open discussion. In our society, there are not enough fora for that.
It goes both ways, Harlan. Many of us could say the very same thing to you, “I will conclude that we are finally approaching productive discussion when the term “liberal” receives respect here.”
“I will conclude that we are finally approaching productive discussion when the term “tea party” receives respect here”…
and teachers are not referred to (even ironically) as leeches.
Kudos to you, Cosmic Tinkerer, for one of the more insightful and cogent posts I’ve read on this thread.
And Harlan, my man, your intelligence is so clear. And so is your hardheaded “I’m Absolutely Right” ideology. Enough with the righteous hectoring and lecturing about incivility and hyperbolic rhetoric.
As long as you persist in calling Barack Obama a “socialist”—a man who has appointed the denizens of Wall Street and Hedge Fund America as his closest advisers, has made the federal DOE a “Privatizers Mafia” and is now advocating the long-time Republican “dream” of cutting Social Security—you aren’t going to be taken very seriously.
You want “old time values”? You want a return to “the parenting of yesteryear”? Okay. Try this on for size; In the words of my wise and wonderful mother, “If you want people to respect you, behave in a way that earns you their respect.”
When you make ludicrous claims about everything from the politics of the man in the White House, to the supposed “laziness” and “greed” of public employees to the “bad schools” caused by “bad unionized teachers”—all completely devoid of truth, how DO you expect people to react?
No offense, Harlan, but you do sometimes remind me of what Archie Bunker would be like with better grammar and sentence structure.
Very good, Puget Sound Mother. An educated Archie. Not so bad. If I’m not right all the time, may I take it as axiomatic that everyone else posting on this blog might at sometime or other also possibly not be right?
President Obama is proposing substituting the Chained CPI for the current one in his budget bill. My analysis is that he doesn’t want his budget to pass. He wants to blame Republicans for rejecting it. If he actually ever signed a bill substituting the Chained CPI for the current one, I’d be willing to reconsider your argument.
My main question, though, as always is “what about the deficit?” Is the president for smaller government, lower taxes, and obeying the constitution? No. He doesn’t qualify as conservative, therefore. It IS quite puzzling why he is facilitating the privatization of public education. It MAY be personal corruption, selling off the school systems to the hedge fund investors. It is a question I have been pondering for a number of months. Why would the president be happy to align himself with Bobby Jindal? I just don’t have an answer as to how it fits into his plans to gain government control of as much of the economy as possible. Obama care is certainly a first step on a socialist agenda. Perhaps he thinks that by privatizing he divides up the large public school union support he has had in the past—you voted for him, right?— and he can more easily control the economics of education. A truly organized teachers union movement might actually turn on him. But fragmented and disempowered, he won’t have to worry about it when the money runds out.
Perhaps his national security failure in relation to the Boston Bombings will open a few more eyes, especially after Benghazi. Of course, he may just be incompetent. But you liberals will keep supporting him even though you are on the same ship as I am, the U.S.S. America, in whose hull he keep boring holes.
I reiterate my premise that the public schools have failed in educating for democracy when Obama can win a second term. ANYONE who voted for him, in my register, is uninformed, willfully blind, or wants, as he does, to change America into a social democracy. My aim is to require people to clarify their actual assumptions for public inspection. I haven’t managed to trap Diane yet. She’s much too clever and slippery for me. teacherken is moving toward saying something like “Jesus was a communist and I am too. Everyone should be compelled to give up their private property.” Linda is sticking to the union, no matter what.
But for you, Pudget Sound Mother, I have some hope. Your mother’s admonition was a good one, but I go deeper. I say that if my commentary offends you, that is a choice YOU make, not a fault of my truth telling. Pity though.
Blah blah blah blah blah blah…same old same old
you do realize that the scandanavian countries which have the best living conditions in the world and the lowest poverty levels as well…..are social democracies with universal healthcare…and Finland, which many consider to be the best educational system in the world that doesn’t drive its students batty like South Korea and Singapore , in particular has a 100% unionized teacher workforce who are respected, well-compensated, and treated as professionals….socialism in its most extreme form is bad…but when combined with democracy and aspects of capitalism it can be good….have you ever stopped being an idealogue and got out of your little conservative bubble once in your life?? and please don’t call me a liberal just because I’m criticizing you here cause I ain’t no liberal, and I certainly disagree with Barrack Obama on many issues…but that doesn’t mean I’m a card-carrying conservative either…not everything is so black and white in this world…including political affiliation…no one has all the truth and for you to think that you have all the truth is quite sad actually. unless of course your just trying to be funny in which case I say lol my man.
You make a good point. Are you sure that the correlation between “best education system in the world” and “social democracy” is a causal connection? You seem to assume so. No need to attack me personally to disagree with me. I do use hyperbole to provoke, deliberately, even though it is to the taste of few. I’m not an ideologue, but I play the part from time to time. What should matter is the argument itself. I ask you to examine what is actually happening in the United States at the present in the context of government policy. I haven’t researched it, but I wonder what kind of debt and defecit Finland has. I’ll bet it hasn’t crawled out on the kind of limb the US has. We too, have a mixed economy, capitalist in theory, with a good deal of government safety net. My question only is whether the government is too big and is wasting money. To the extent that the people who work for public education mindlessly and ideologically support “big government” I think they are doing damage to the nation as a whole. As I have said, because the public schools have lost credibility (with me) as teachers of democracy, I imagine they have likewise lost credibility with many others, and that diminishment of confidence in the ability of government to do the best job possible, I expect the unpleasant privatization movement of the Rheemanites will continue, no matter her personal fate. I myself think economic growth is the only way to supply more money to the public schools, yet the great majority of public school employees, i.e. bureaucrats in essence, mouth a socialist line, namely that the citizenry as a whole do not have a right to the wealth they earn, but must by compulsion be subject to “confiscatory” taxation. It’s not likely to happen, but I support elimination of the income tax and replacement with the “flat tax” i.e. a national sales tax. That’s all. Examine your own conscience. Do you believe in the ownership by the individual of his own body? Start there.
firstly, never attacked you personally…notice I left room at the end for my misinterpretation of your intentions with my lol….if the ideological hyperbole is your flavor I suppose that’s that then…although I’m not sure what the logical reason is for putting on a facade…certainly you can expect people to have a strong reaction to your strong hyperbole…if you don’t want a strong reaction, don’t use hyperbole. your argument was ideological hyperbole…I responded to that. this is a blog…I can’t see your facial expressions so I can only discern your intentions from what you write, so whatever you write should be what you legitimately feel and I responded to what you wrote…frankly I like the more genuine commentary you presented in this comment so I will respond levelheadedly to that…
I don’t like to analyze the government in terms of big or small….I like to look at it from the perspective of whether its serving the best interests of the people…whether its corrupt and if its becoming more and more corrupt. certainly you can say right now a lot of our problems, including the continued privatization of our public schools, stem from the corruption, of our campaign finance system…special interests holding more power over our Congressman as well as in some respects our President then we do. some numbers to put this in perspective..although you might know these numbers already…2010 congressional elections-.26% of America donated $200 or more. .05% gave the maximum amount to any congressional candidate, .01% gave $10,000 or more to any congressional candidate. although I don’t have them, the numbers were similar for the most recent presidential and congressional election. we are becoming less and less of a real democracy everyday…we need to reform our campaign finance system so that instead of “dirty” money financing our elections it is the public that finances elections…there is plenty of proposed legislation out there that would do this…i.e. grassroots democracy act…American Anti-corruption Act. but see this reform will never come willingly from inside Washington…it has to be forced on our legislators by an educated and determined citizenry…I belong to an organization, Rootstrikers, that is trying to raise awareness of this issue.
Hasn’t it been proven that the institution of a flat tax would be regressive and disproportionately affect low and middle income workers?
Of course the individual owns his body, but the fact we live in a society..the fact we are human beings who depend on community to survive..who are inherently social beings by way of our genetics…means that we not only have a committment to ourselves and our self-interest but also to each other. that’s not socialism….its just a fact of our existence. a balance can be struck between individualism and the collective good but unfortunately all we hear is a lot of stupid and irrational name-calling when people try to advocate for “social justice” and “collective good”…that doesn’t help anyone and only further divides us as Americans. its practically an industry to divide us….just look at the dominant media.
of course everyone has a right to the wealth they earn…but America is very quickly becoming a society in which you constantly hear this self-serving and selfish rhetoric especially out of people who don’t work very hard to earn their huge paychecks and actually hurt others in that process…the income inequality in this country is man-made and therefore its possible for man to fix it,and the logic of “economic growth helps everyone rich or poor” doesn’t go very far and we are starting to realize its limitations….all you have to do is look at the numbers to see that the majority of wealth has gone to the top tier of earners over the last 30 years. I don’t see how anyone can logically call anyone who sees this fact as a problem “a demonizer of success”. give me a break. for god sakes,there’s already a systemic demonization of the poor and middle class already built into the system. right now, in this country, by virtue of government policy, capital is valued way more than labor and until that changes, we’ll continue in this downward spiral and eventually I believe you will see massive social unrest and rightly so.
I am not a big fan of Barrack Obama, but not for all the reasons the right-wing hates him…actually I believe he has been quite good at kowtowing to the desires of the conservatives in Congress especially in respect to economic issues. the fact is yes our debt is a problem but in the long-term, not in the short-term. unemployment is the more pressing issue right now and your not gonna create jobs by trying to make big spending cuts now since we are still in a depression. actually if you look at the numbers our yearly deficit fell last year and its projected to fall this year…so its really not trillion dollar deficits anymore. once we are out of depression then you can start worrying about paying off debt. the longer we have this class of unemployed who are out of work for many months and even a year at a time….the worse off we are..because then we are creating a permanent class of unemployed. plus the jobs being created right are largely service jobs, which are minimum wage, and therefore a lot more people are also underemployed which is bad for the economy. spending power is the key, and right now most don’t have it.
in terms of social democracy and best educational system being completely causal, I really don’t know. but they certainly respect their public employees over there way better than we do here. plus the idea of social democracy means lessening the excesses of capitalism which we certainly experience plenty of over here in America. lessening excesses of capitalism automatically means less income inequality and less poverty which certainly makes for a better school system.
I like these conversations, but I’m not going to engage you like I did in this comment if your just gonna use hyperbole, cause in the end, you admitted, you pretty much do it just for show and its not really how you feel about the issues. there’s a reason its to not to the flavor of many.
You have responded in unique good faith, so I will abandon hyperbole in favor of an attempt at serious discussion. You response is rather long and raises many topics. Would it bother you to proceed by question and answer, sticking to the immediate question? You seemed to assent to the proposition that one owns one’s own body. Then you went off on a long discourse which seems to me to contradict that assent to the proposition that one own’s one’s own body. So I’m just checking to see if you still agree with the notion that what ever else one may or may not “own” it is legitimate to say that one owns one’s own body, the hair, toes, etc. Do you still assent to the proposition?
That format is fine. I do assent to the idea that one owns one body. But I maintain that life isn’t so simple in a world of interconnected human beings where other’s actions affect you and your actions affect others. I was not contradicting myself. I was merely framing my response.
The world indeed is a complex place, and we may find that an internally consistent argument cannot finally be built even from an accepted common ground between the two of us that whatever else may be the case, or whatever else we may say, we can agree that you and I each own our own bodies. How could it be otherwise? If someone else owned our body we would be that person’s slave, and we know that that is not an acceptable situation ethically. Now if you and I “own” our bodies, what implications follow from that? Do we own the growths of our bodies? Do we own our fingernail parings? Do we own our hair? And can we sell, i.e. exchange for value some of the corporeal outgrowths of your bodies? If someone wanted to pay for my fingernail parings, or if someone wanted to give me some gold for my hair, would I be entitled to receive that gold and call it “mine” if I received it for a bundle of my hair? Would I “own” the gold I had received for my hair in the same sense as we have admitted that I “own” my own body? We need to be careful here, because we may, unconsciously be changing the meaning of the word “own” after the fashion of one of Wittgenstein’s word games. We might not be correct in saying that we “own” the gold we have received in exchange for the products of our body. We might extend the illustrations by referring to a mother’s breast milk. Does she own the product of her body? Can she exchange it for gold? Does the gold then belong to her, i.e. does she “own” that gold in the same sense that she owned the milk she produced? I am sure you can tell where I am trying to go with this step in the argument, but let’s not get ahead of ourselves. Let’s examine the proposition carefully. Do we then “own” the product of our bodies in the same sense that we “own” our own bodies?
“Do you believe in the ownership by the individual of his own body? Start there.”
Your own beloved Tea Party should start there, HU, since it aims to over-turn Roe v Wade and deny women ownership of their own bodies, as demonstrated in their platform.
Cosmic Tinker: You raise an excellent question about a pregnant woman’s ownership of her own body. This is an interesting side argument to the general question of “ownership” but a legitimate one. I would be willing to debate on this matter with you if you like. The question I would ask YOU however, is whether the foetus is a separate body from the mother’s body. We know, of course, that when the baby is born it is considered to belong to itself legally (although the abortionist on trial in Philadelphia just now seemed not to think so and is charged with killing seven live births), but the question I have is really much more complicated (to my mind, anyway). Would you admit or deny that a fetus, a growing baby is a separate body from the mother’s body?
I am not going to debate or get suckered in by your pedantics. A woman’s uterus belongs to her, not you, the Tea Party and/or Xtian fundamentalists. PERIOD.
Done with you.
“Pedantics” no less. If you say so, Tinker, it must be so, PERIOD. I had not thought there were so many quite uneducated people in teaching until I came to this blog. It is a revelation. The uterus is part of the woman, but the baby is not. I’ll be long dead before you become sufficiently philosophical to engage in reasoned discussion. PERIOD. What an argument!
Do you think there is no record of what you said in the past on this blog, while trying to sell your Tea Party? For example,
“Abortion is settled law and I support Roe v. Wade. ” March 19, 2013
The Tea Party platform states that it aims to repeal Roe v. Wade.
Life is too short to waste on people who play games in order to promote their agendas. There are enough hinky characters in education today. No need to deal with folks like that here, too.
There are one or two things in the tp platform with which I disagree, as perhaps there may be in the platform of whatever party to which you adhere. I can’t compel you to discuss these issues, obviously, and if you are not interested, that’s fine. Life is short, shorter for me than for you, but I still enjoy serious discussion from within a framework of rationality. I also know that most everything we try to discuss rationally has political penumbras about them, so enjoy kibitzing.
From what I’ve seen of your two recent posts I don’t think you actually have an interest in discussion. It seems to me that you prefer contemptuous dismissal of me and in your perception that I am agenda driven rather than truth driven I conclude you are seeing your own mental face in a mental mirror. I will grant you that as I work through a lot of the basic issues I am discovering myself to be more libertarian than I thought I was. But that’s part of the fun of being American at these times and of being pushed hard on the WHY of the what.
Harlan I thought I already explained why people perceive you this way. I thought I got you to recognize why it peeves people. You need to stop the hyperbole with everyone not just with me who actually got you to abandon it at least in correspondence with me. You can’t blame people for responding to hyperbole with the assumption that your a close-minded person. Clearly you are not a close-minded person and wish to discuss important issues with people. So stop putting on a facade.
although I will say that in reading your correspondence with cosmic tinker it is not hyperbole…but unfortunately people on this thread have already built up this perception of you. oh well…..
“I had not thought there were so many quite uneducated people in teaching until I came to this blog. It is a revelation.”
Once again, Harlan, you take the low road by injecting insults under the guise of your accepted truth. Perhaps you like the negative attention? Perhaps you like to incite the teachers on this blog with condescending commentary and blanket statements about teachers? Next you’re going to complain to mommy that people are being meanie-heads to you. I know plenty of children who operate this way: Engaging others, mistreating them, and then complaining when their targets fight back. Then when someone attempts to walk away from the fruitless arguing, you deign to insult that person again? THIS is your model of educated and intelligent debate?
While I agree that two wrongs do not make a right, I can say with great certainty that insisting on making an offensive remark about teachers in every third post and bringing politics into everything puts your ideology at a great disadvantage in this forum. Why not try sticking to facts instead of off-handed attacks and labels, i.e. liberals? Oh, I know it’s not nearly as much fun, but you’ve been told that others do not care to play your games. Your response, most likely, will be that they are cowards, or ignorant, or reaching, etc., etc.
I cannot, for the life of me, understand how anyone who claims to have devoted a career life to teaching–exhibits such disdain for teachers, nay…people, insomuch as to take every opportunity to blame them for the financial crisis and the false narrative of “failing schools.” What gives?
LG, I get the impression that Harlan really feels superior to other teachers, because he acts as if he is the only one who is an intellectual and not from “the bottom 60%.” I suspect there may be some ageism, too, even though he has no clue how old most teachers are here. (I have been teaching for 45 years and will be retiring soon as well.) Knowing that HU was an English teacher, I threw in the word “pedantics” as a play on the words pedantry and antics, just to see what he’d do with it. Predictably, he jumped on it and then talked about “uneducated people in teaching.”
I am so glad that this guy was not one of my English teachers when I was growing up. Beginning in grade school, I lived with a very abusive step father who ultimately killed my mother, not that long ago. I was a creative kid and I often invented words on purpose. I enjoyed writing, but I did not like reading. My step father made fun of me a lot and he called me dumb all the time. Before long, I believed he was right.
I was very fortunate to have had a string of really wonderful English teachers in middle school, high school and college who recognized my creativity, altered my perceptions of my abilities, nurtured my strengths in written and oral language, piqued my curiosity about literature and philosophical concepts and turned me into an avid reader –all of which set me on an entirely different course. Those teachers truly did change my life and I will be forever grateful to them for that.
I have to wonder if Harlan was ever capable of being that kind of teacher, the teacher who recognizes, values and supports creativity, because he just comes off as a pompous ass –superior, competitive, egocentric, insensitive and, as you said, he shows a lot of “disdain for ……people” in general. I don’t know why he behaves as he does, but I really have had enough of his games.
I did completely miss your combination of pedant and antics. It doesn’t change the point, however. Your history of abuse is terrible and I can see how my posts would remind your mis-treatment. I still claim to be a truth seeker, though I don’t claim to be a pleasant person.
Finally we agree…your last 7-8 words. Cheers!
Poor ranking is manipulated data. It use to be your opinion, my opinion, and the facts. Now it is your facts and my facts. Look at this link to see how the pisa results are a sham. http://phys.org/news/2013-01-poor-international-student.html
I read the reaction to the editorial and I am amazed that educators would respond in this way, as if a person should be suspect because he works at Harvard? And because he reacts to the current situation in education from the perspective he does, arguing that there is trouble in and with the system! Yes, poverty is one factor that exerts incredible force on students and the schools they attend. Is it then not possible to have excellent schools for these students? Is the problematic nature of their being the problem or is it that schools do not understand the nature and the nurture that lead to students who for some reason or other we cannot teach? And could the problem be that we are trying to teach them to be life “us,” to become well adjusted members of a society that we know is as right for them as it is for us? Do we study the culture of the poor? Do we take field trips into the neighborhoods and do what is necessary to help students understand better the world they think the know or do we do everything we can to deny a place in the schools for their realities. Do we talk about how poverty is a necessary residual of capitalism? Do we speak honestly about why, for instance, Chavez and, yes, Fidel too, are revered by large numbers of people in their countries and that large numbers of people in those countries hate America and have what a thoughtful and sensitive person would understand to be good reason for feeling as they do?
This editorial points to problems anyone with his or her eyes open would see, a school system that pushes ideas onto students and doesn’t ask much of them in regard to detecting the bullshit that may be coming at them. Are the teachers, all, most, capable of dealing with original thought and challenges to the material taught that should be coming from properly educated citizens of a democratic republic? If the schools are handling the teaching of citizens well, then why do so many make the choices that lead to policies made by policy makers elected by the public or appointed by those elected by the people get into those positions?
Teachers are not at all responsible with all that is wrong with the world, but they are participants in the educational system and, if that system is at all meaningful, then the teaching they do has an impact on the way people come to know, think, and make decisions. Teachers found a way to live with NCLB and too many of those who are now aware of the devastating effects of that legislation taught teachers how to teach as NCLB was meant to have them teach. There has to be some responsibility somewhere and the editorial should not be dismissed because it mentions Diane Ravitch and Michelle Rhee in a single sentence. Perhaps there is reason to see the two as having at one time agreed on the things they now disagree on?
I ask that the editorial be met first with the “believing game,” in which one hears out the argument and understands all that is legitimate about it. Then, the “doubting game” can begin, the questions asked of the information and the reasoning that is used to support the claims. What I read in the reaction to the editorial I just read way more of what one does when fearful of ideas rather than upset by the really value of those ideas for a sensible conversation about what is and what needs to be.
Bingo, lafered. I concur. Fearful. And because fearful, angry. What if Mehta might be right? Diane’s program is right for kids but utterly unlikely to be carried out because the money is gone. Michelle Rhee’s program is wrong for kids, but is gaining steam because it’s less expensive. They are extremes in that sense, but not in strict logic because I don’t see what the more moderate middle between them might be. Grrrrr.
Has he drunk the TFA Kool Aid?
How will the ‘best and brightest’ be inspired to go into teaching under these asinine conditions? Pay stinks, benefits shrinking, furloughs, unilateral changes to the contract, students and parents on the attack to the detriment of all, and administrators lacking backbone. Sure sounds like something that every Ivy League parent wants their baby to try…
Hey everyone how high do you think the comments will go. I say 380. Sorry felt the mood had to be lightened a little. hehe
I agree with “southside teacher?” The best and the brightest of our students want to go into professions where creativity, intellectual curiousity and rewards for high achievement go hand in hand. They also want to earn $$$$$. I’ve been a passionate teacher for 45 years and I’m not describing the teaching profession here. I admit I encourage my best and brightest to get PhD’s and pursue college teaching where some of the above are still operative.
Higher ed is worse off than K12 today. 70% of college professors who teach in America are non-tenure track contingent faculty, hired on a term basis and have no academic freedom or benefits and receive low pay. http://www.aaup.org/report/tenure-and-teaching-intensive-appointments
And BTW, the guy who wrote the Times piece was very fortunate to have secured a position at his alma mater. Many colleges don’t make a habit of hiring their own graduates in tenure track positions because they want to infuse the school with new blood.