I had an online interview today on the national broadcast, NPR’s “On Point.”
We had a very good discussion about the state of American education, the false claims of failure, and the solutions I proffer. We were then joined by a young woman whose name I don’t recall who used to work for Michelle Rhee’s The New Teacher Project (TNTP). She went into the familiar “attack the messenger” mode, saying that I was polarizing, that I needed to compromise, that she (or her organization) had interviewed 50 D.C. insiders, and they agree there is too much testing but are comfortable with the other corporate reform policies.
I pointed out to her that everything in my book is carefully documented, that my data is right from the US Department of Education website. She insists that charter schools are public schools, and I pointed out that when they have been taken to federal court for violating employee’s rights, they insist that they are private corporations acting as contractors and not subject to state laws.
After the program, I was forwarded some questions from listeners, and I answered them.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
That is cool; I wonder if they will replay it and when.
I suppose the “judge” is under the spell of seduction (as one of your other readers put it yesterday) that corporate reform offers. Indeed, “she” (corporate reform) is a mistress busting up the marriages between many states and their public schools.
Perhaps, as happens with mistresses, she will eventually die of disease due to her promiscuousness. ? Now is the time for those concerned about public schools, even as the states file for “divorce,” to be sure protection is in place and to hope for reconciliation down the road.
I wonder what that protection looks like. I am working on that. I can’t stop the affair. . .it is already happening. But I can do everything to make the schools my children will attend wonderful places for them to be. I hope so, anyway. I think your new book will help, Dr. Ravitch.
(Pardon any crassness in my analogy. But I think it makes sense).
LikeLike
rather I should have said “promiscuity.” I don’t suppose “promiscuousness” is a word.
LikeLike
WBUR puts this show on line the evening it is broadcast. Look under “On Point” with Tom Ashbrook on the WBUR website.
LikeLike
Good for you, Diane!
LikeLike
Diane,
The name of the woman who was included in the interview
is Jessica Levin. I would love to know some of the names of
the individuals she interviewed! Here in Wisconsin we don’t see
issue like charters and vouchers as simply “distractions” as she
contended.
LikeLike
So 50 DC insiders approve of most of education “reform”? Yeah, and I’m sure I can find 50 Wall Street insiders who approved of the repeal of Glass-Steagall. So what? That doesn’t mean it was good for the rest of us.
LikeLike
Diane, I heard you on WBUR this morning — you were great! Your co-respondent seemed to have forgotten to read your book, relying on a stereotyped characterization if your arguments while you had data and details. Tom Ashbrook should have asked her whether any of the respondents in her research were foundation heads or politicians or political appointees. It is easy to find plenty of good superintendents, principals, teachers and unionists (read “education professionals” who are resisting corporatization — it’s the Andre Agassiz’s and Arne Duncans who are the problem.
LikeLike
WNYC, the NPR affiliate in New York City has been a dependable loudspeaker for so-called education reform for years. Hopefully, the power of your message will start to break through the official lies.
LikeLike
NPR in Detroit has done plenty of propaganda interviews and stories for charters.
LikeLike
Good job, Diane!
LikeLike
I can’t wait to listen to the program. I seldom get an opportunity to listen to On Point live, but download the podcasts. I have been pestering Tom Ashbrook (WBUR)’ Diane Rehm (WAMU) and others to have you on their shows. They have a nationwide audience, and seldom have a voice to balance the misinformation from “reformers.”
From Waynesboro PA
LikeLike
Charter schools won’t be anything like public schools until they are required to register and accept students on a first come, first serve basis, like the public schools, and provide all the services the public schools provide, whether it’s transportation or special ed or free lunches. No meetings or contracts or lotteries.
LikeLike
Public schools do not accept on a “first come first serve” basis. They accept on a “come” basis.
LikeLike
As has been noted repeatedly, there are a variety of magnet schools that have admissions tests. Those seem to be ok with many respondents.
District schools in a number of states have set up special programs for students with whom they are not successful and they have set up special programs for students with severe handicaps.
Most state laws prohibit admissions tests for charter schools.
These issues are more complex than often described here.
LikeLike
Districts have an obligation to serve every student within a geographical boundary. No matter who, no matter when, any student who comes will be given a seat. Not every district school takes every student, but every district does. Charters have no obligation beyond their four walls. If you are not in their school (for whatever reason), they have no responsibility for you. It is this dichotomy that leads to the dual track of schools–the selective (through attrition and services, if not through admissions) charters and the “home to everyone” district schools. It is this distinction that would lead a dual system of schools to become one of the haves and have nots. Not everyone is equally concerned about this split, but most agree this split is/will be there.
LikeLike
Sara – are you concerned about the suburban/urban split that has developed over many years? There has been a Dual school system in this country for many years, long before the charter public school movement was created.
Many in the charter movement are deeply concerned about the lack of strong options for inner city youngsters. Many of us have seen how urban districts have squashed strong options within districts created by parents and educators. Nevertheless there are some great inner city urban public schools. But as Al Shanker noted years ago, people who try to create options in urban districts often are treated “like traitors or outlaws for daring to move outside the lockstep.”
Are you a teacher? If so have you worked in an urban district? Are you familiar with teachers and parents who have tried to create options within urban districts?
LikeLike
Can the other guys answer the hard questions with her ease and knowledge of the situation? I wonder? Great job. Let them ask harder questions so the answers are better and the other side has more trouble figuring out a counter that will sell.
LikeLike
Audio of interview, and script of questions and answers here: http://onpoint.wbur.org/2013/09/18/diane-ravitch-school-reform
Great job, Diane!
LikeLike
Very interesting. After trying to paint you as a bit of a fringe character, Jessica seemed to back off and suggest that the two of you actually agreed on several points. I think we may hear more about this “middle ground” that should be mined (but carefully). I hate to use WW analogies, but it is what comes to mind. After WWI the Allies were intent on grinding Germany into the ground, which they did. In the end, that policy helped lead the rise of the Nazis during the 30s when a wheel barrow of money was required to buy a loaf of bread, inflation was so bad. You will notice that we learned our lesson and applied it after WWII where we were instrumental in rebuilding the economies of Germany and Japan.
Please, someone come up with a less militant analogy!
LikeLike
Yeah, that middle ground will by “mined” by the edudeformers as in “mining a harbor” to prevent flow of ships and goods.
LikeLike
I know NPR has done positive reports on reform. I think this is a fair and balanced interview. Good job NPR for being willing to question yourself. Great Job DR!
LikeLike
Diane,
I just listened to your NPR interview, how appropriate that the show is called “On Point!” You were rock solid and persistently “on point” throughout, congratulations. I think the New York Yankees should hire you to coach players on reading curve balls, fast balls, change ups… You hit home runs off of all the “public charters” pitches. You continue to be our Hero.
As you tour the country, I think our job is to study Reign of Error from front to
back, inside and out so that we are able
to quote/ cite data confidently and automatically when the “charter pitches” are thrown our way. We all need to start swinging hard and hit the “reformers” out of the park, thanks Coach Ravitch!
LikeLike
“Jessica Levin, education policy advisor in the Department of Education under Bill Clinton, independent education consultant and former Chief Knowledge Officer for the New Teacher Project.”
LikeLike
Hmm. I still can’t remember her name and I have been in the policy arena for over 20 years.
LikeLike
If American education is doing so well, as Diane suggests, perhaps some of the reasons involve many caring, committed public school educators, creation of new options within districts, more programs for low income young children (strongly promoted by some corporations as well as some educators), and some charter public schools.
LikeLike
It was a nice discussion, but it was a little tactless trying to get a point in after Ashbrook was concluding the show. Not sure if that was a misunderstanding on your part or what.
LikeLike
Excellent Interview with Tom Ashcroft!
Meanwhile, here, in Vermont we will have a new Secretary of Education to head up the Agency of Education.
Her name is Rebecca Holcombe from Dartmouth College and it sounds like she is a real educator.
The Governor & State Board were very hush-hush about who the candidates were and I feared a broadie might be considered.
No way!
Proud to be a Vermonter,
Sooz
LikeLike
Suzanne how do you feel about the Vermont “tuitioning” program that gives parents in towns without a local public school dollars that they can use to pay for a public or private non-sectarian school in another community? I first learned about this many years ago. After interviewing more than 50 people throughout your beautiful state, I concluded that the program seems to have developed in part because
* not every town wanted to have its own school
* some towns decided that they preferred to give parents choices
* some towns decided that it made more sense to allow families to attend school nearer to where they lived, rather than the school located in their town (in part because of winter transportation problems through mountain passes)
Among the private non sectarian schools that parents were choosing were Burke Mountain Academy (for youngsters who wanted to be world class skiers) and St. Johnsbury Academy.
This is NOT a full-fledged voucher program…it only applies in communities where there has been a decision not to have a local public school.
Fascinating. Would be interested in your thoughts on it.
LikeLike
I appreciate the interview. I think you are right that the charter schools can’t strategically pick and choose concerning when they want to be considered public and when they want to be considered private. I appreciate how you mentioned that many of the non-profit charters are shell companies for for-profit vendors. The only point that isn’t brought out is the political point that charters and selective enrollment schools are a de facto mechanism for segregating and degrading poor and stigmatized families. I don’t want you to run away from the moral critique because that’s what’s at stake.
It’s the political point. The arguments are on your side, but until you baldly say that the reforms are at best classist and more often racist in urban centers, considering the legacy of public education in America, people are going to hide behind the rhetoric of school choice. School choice operates within systemic racism. It’s a lazy way to be racist, but that’s the evil in it. And that’s the evil that needs to be named.
LikeLike
Sounds like we agree that selective admissions public schools, whether district or charter, are a BAD thing.
For many low income and families of color, options with no admissions tests created by districts and charters are what they seek. Segregation for them was when they were forced to attend an inferior school because of their race. District and charter options can be an expansion of opportunity.
LikeLike
It was a terrific interview/question & answer session. You totally rocked it, I thought.
LikeLike
Jessica Levin has her own response up on Huffingtom Post, here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jessicalevin/will-the-real-education-r_b_3943453.html
She asks, “Will the real education reformer please stand up?” But then she stands everywhere but up. She tries to disavow her own ideological positions, while still promoting them. I’m not sure my comment actually posted. The “awaiting moderation” screen flashed up, with my own Huffpost noame, but then it disappeared again, and the tally said there were no posts awaiting moderation. It’s in the system, anyway.
The rest of this message is my comment I posted to Jessica.
“Jessica, if you aren’t “embracing” the agenda of corporate reform and private profit gouging, why don’t you direct this attack against it? Instead, you charge Diane Ravitch with failing to sufficiently rationalize your own promotion of “over-testing our children, punishing their teachers, and privatizing our schools.”
“They championed Race to the Top to promote the innovative, performance-driven cultures they saw lacking…” you say, in defense of your shadow panel. They just never spoke up when “their leaders talked too much about firing teachers and placed excessive emphasis on “objective measurement” as the solution to all problems.”
I’ve been teaching chemistry in a Title I school all this time, and I’ve seen your unprincipled middle-level corporate reformers in aggressive action, against my students and against good teachers. You’ve enforced “data-driven” gibberish, to establish your own careers.
You argue you’re not all as bad as you look, and I hope that’s true. But it’s your responsibility to demonstrate that, by coming forward with honest discourse. Listen to yourself:
“Reformers also created political alliances that narrowed rather than broadened their coalition. They relied on anyone who could help them, including politicians and funders with whom they had only a partial overlap of belief and values.”
You accuse Diane Ravitch of failing to disentangle your own career from the errors she exposes. That would be your job, though, and not hers.”
LikeLike
I think your analysis is spot on, Chemtchr!
Levin mentioned this “generation of education leaders” seven times and, behind the smoke and mirrors, most of those “education leaders” she’s referring to are not genuine educators. They are the TFA/LEE, TNTP, KIPP crowd, or TFA and spin-offs.
She’s trying to distinguish TFA et al. from those who fund them, the Waltons, Gates, etc. –not to mention all of the politicians who funnel public funding their way. However, the truth is that they are themselves implicated in the promotion of the corporate “reform” agenda.
It’s a foxy way to try to discount Diane’s cogent insights and divert attention away from the real issues, by trying to blame her for not seeing them as do-gooders separate from their symbiotic hosts. But they have strayed far from their initial mission, so that is way too much to swallow.
It’s actually a rather silly argument, too, coming from a lawyer, but not surprising if, as I suspect, she is the sister of Dave Levin, who established KIPP, and was involved in that endeavor herself in the beginning, as suggested by Jay Mathews. See: http://educationnext.org/work-hard-be-nice/ (Wendy Kopp also acknowledged both Dave and Jessica Levin in her first book.)
LikeLike
Diane, I believe this is the same Jessica Levin who is the sister of Dave Levin, one of the founders of KIPP. According to Jay Mathews, she was involved in helping her brother to establish KIPP at the ground floor: http://educationnext.org/work-hard-be-nice/
Wendy Kopp also thanked Dave and Jessica in one of her books: http://books.google.com/books?id=s1y4rqWfdF8C&pg=PR9&lpg=PR9&dq=%22dave+levin%22+%22jessica+levin%22&source=bl&ots=rfBgP8z5aQ&sig=uh6ElQDZNip5o_xScm2zrX5Odq4&hl=en&sa=X&ei=dO89Uvi4E4q8qgHGn4DgCA&ved=0CD0Q6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=%22dave%20levin%22%20%22jessica%20levin%22&f=false
No wonder she was defending non-profit charter schools and wanting to call them public schools. There should have been a disclaimer.
LikeLike