Louisiana Educator is a blog written by one of that state’s finest educators, now retired, Mike Deshotels. He reviews Reign of Error here.
It is hard to pick a single excerpt from his review because every paragraph is compelling. (I tried but was not very successful.)
Deshotels writes:
In this, her latest meticulously researched book, Ravitch describes the myths upon which the current corporate reform of our education system is based. This expert historian of education carefully discredits the assumptions upon which the current education reform movement is based, and explains how extremely harmful much of the reform movement can be to our education system.
The first chapter of Reign of Error is titled: Our Schools Are at Risk. The author explains how major power brokers including some of the richest persons on the planet are proposing radical changes to our system of public education based on a manufactured crisis in student achievement. These influential power brokers propose to magically cure the ills of our education system with various forms of privatization. Ravitch explains chapter by chapter how the cure is much worse than the alleged illness. Many of these ill conceived proposals have already been adopted by Louisiana’s legislature and our state has become a leader in the corporate reform movement.
Dr Ravitch exposes the charlatans of the education reform movement for what they really are; non educators who have figured out how to make a buck on education by scaring the American public into believing that our present public education system is sub-standard in comparison to that of other industrialized countries. The so called “reformers” would have the American public believe that professional educators are really just a bunch of slackers protected by powerful unions who care little about preparing our children to be high achievers in the world education competition.
Their solution is to destroy the teacher unions, do away with teacher job protections and fire teachers who are not able or willing to raise student test scores in the very limited curriculum which they have chosen to emphasize in our schools. At the same time, the corporate reformers propose to transform education in our country into a system of autonomous schools often run by private groups or entrepreneurs who compete for students and taxpayer funding. Public school parents are to be given the right to select any school they feel best meet their child’s needs. Somehow this competitive environment with achievement results measured by expensive and oppressive government imposed testing in a few preferred skills will transform our entire educational system into one of the best in the world. Ravitch shows that none of this transformation is based on scientific principles of education practice. It is all based upon mostly dis-proven tactics such as merit pay, virtual Internet instruction, vouchers, and a depressingly restricted curriculum.
The danger to our education system Ravitch points out, is the opportunity and incentive for corruption, cheating, and extreme profiteering by large corporations as well as numerous small time “rainmakers”. Entrepreneurs will use our schools to pocket our tax dollars while transforming our schools into dreary test-prep factories treating all children like identical raw materials instead of the wonderfully complex individuals they are. Meanwhile the teaching profession will be demoralized, and replaced by low paid “test teachers” who will no longer stimulate the creativity in our young people, a trait that has made our country a world leader in innovation.
Here in Louisiana we have already seen a major demoralization of our teaching profession exemplified by increased early retirements of some our most respected teachers. The diversion of public funds to vouchers, charters and course choice and the exemption of the privatizers’ employees from the Louisiana retirement system is already causing serious damage to our public education system.
The latter part of the book proposes real solutions to closing the student achievement gap and for truly improving and enhancing our educational system based upon sound principals of economic, social and educational practice.
If this book had been written specifically to address the challenges educators now face in Louisiana it could not have been a more perfect guide. I strongly recommend this book to all my readers, educators and parents who want to be accurately informed about the real threats to our education system. It is definitely not too late to change the course of this education “deform” movement, but we must begin now to properly arm ourselves with the facts and join this battle for our schools and the teaching profession.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
I got my copy in the mail from the US the other day and have already given up underlining important bits – there are too many of them!
LikeLike
We were lucky to have 40 copies of Reign of Error at the September 27, 28 CORE convention in Chicago and sold half of them to the teacher and other leaders of the Chicago Teachers Union. (Karen Lewis, who wrote the dust jacket’s biggest blurb, already had her copy). Deshotels’ review is spot on for Chicago and Illinois, and so we are adding to our plans here quickly.
This afternoon, we will continue selling “Reign” at the Chicago Teachers Union’s House of Delegates meeting. Because of the discount readers can get for buying multiple copies, we are able to get the book to people at a cost of $20 per copy.
Next Tuesday, we will make a shift in our CORE “Book Club” study groups. The one that I had been facilitating on “How Chicago Segregates” (an important topic) is going to shift to devote at least four months to studying Reign of Error. That will be part of our preparation for the 2014 campaign against stupid tests (we don’t have a name for it yet, but that will probably be one here in Chicago). As everyone knows, such a campaign has to be coordinated by teachers, principals, school boards, parents, and, of course, students. Political leaders will be invited to join — and to pass laws requiring that parents be allowed to opt out our children, instead of the insidious current situation, where state lawyers and Board lawyers are telling us we don’t have the right — AS PARENTS! — to keep our kids safe from poisonous frauds like most of the testing programs currently in our public schools.
it’s going to be a fun year. Saturday, one of the CORE workshops for the leaders of the militant caucus leading the CTU was “Testing.” Those of us who have been opting kids out (we have two; one is now in seventh grade; the other in third) are looking forward to working with the growing number of teachers and parents who are building this movement.
Following our workshop, at the recent CORE convention, we passed a resolution to join with groups to build this 2014 movement against these toxic hoax testings.
It will be expanding as we organize more. One of the ways we will be bringing our brothers and sisters up to date and up to speed quickly is by reading “Reign” together.
LikeLike
“. . . to keep our kids safe from POISONOUS FRAUDS like most of the testing programs currently in our public schools.”
You’ve got that right, George!!!
And Wilson has explained why they are POISONOUS FRAUDS in his “Educational Standards and the Problem of Error” found at:
http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/577/700
Brief outline of Wilson’s “Educational Standards and the Problem of Error” and some comments of mine. (updated 6/24/13 per Wilson email)
1. A quality cannot be quantified. Quantity is a sub-category of quality. It is illogical to judge/assess a whole category by only a part (sub-category) of the whole. The assessment is, by definition, lacking in the sense that “assessments are always of multidimensional qualities. To quantify them as one dimensional quantities (numbers or grades) is to perpetuate a fundamental logical error” (per Wilson). The teaching and learning process falls in the logical realm of aesthetics/qualities of human interactions. In attempting to quantify educational standards and standardized testing we are lacking much information about said interactions.
2. A major epistemological mistake is that we attach, with great importance, the “score” of the student, not only onto the student but also, by extension, the teacher, school and district. Any description of a testing event is only a description of an interaction, that of the student and the testing device at a given time and place. The only correct logical thing that we can attempt to do is to describe that interaction (how accurately or not is a whole other story). That description cannot, by logical thought, be “assigned/attached” to the student as it cannot be a description of the student but the interaction. And this error is probably one of the most egregious “errors” that occur with standardized testing (and even the “grading” of students by a teacher).
3. Wilson identifies four “frames of reference” each with distinct assumptions (epistemological basis) about the assessment process from which the “assessor” views the interactions of the teaching and learning process: the Judge (think college professor who “knows” the students capabilities and grades them accordingly), the General Frame-think standardized testing that claims to have a “scientific” basis, the Specific Frame-think of learning by objective like computer based learning, getting a correct answer before moving on to the next screen, and the Responsive Frame-think of an apprenticeship in a trade or a medical residency program where the learner interacts with the “teacher” with constant feedback. Each category has its own sources of error and more error in the process is caused when the assessor confuses and conflates the categories.
4. Wilson elucidates the notion of “error”: “Error is predicated on a notion of perfection; to allocate error is to imply what is without error; to know error it is necessary to determine what is true. And what is true is determined by what we define as true, theoretically by the assumptions of our epistemology, practically by the events and non-events, the discourses and silences, the world of surfaces and their interactions and interpretations; in short, the practices that permeate the field. . . Error is the uncertainty dimension of the statement; error is the band within which chaos reigns, in which anything can happen. Error comprises all of those eventful circumstances which make the assessment statement less than perfectly precise, the measure less than perfectly accurate, the rank order less than perfectly stable, the standard and its measurement less than absolute, and the communication of its truth less than impeccable.”
In other word all the logical errors involved in the process render any conclusions invalid.
5. The test makers/psychometricians, through all sorts of mathematical machinations attempt to “prove” that these tests (based on standards) are valid-errorless or supposedly at least with minimal error [they aren’t]. Wilson turns the concept of validity on its head and focuses on just how invalid the machinations and the test and results are. He is an advocate for the test taker not the test maker. In doing so he identifies thirteen sources of “error”, any one of which renders the test making/giving/disseminating of results invalid. As a basic logical premise is that once something is shown to be invalid it is just that, invalid, and no amount of “fudging” by the psychometricians/test makers can alleviate that invalidity.
6. Having shown the invalidity, and therefore the unreliability, of the whole process Wilson concludes, rightly so, that any result/information gleaned from the process is “vain and illusory”. In other words start with an invalidity, end with an invalidity (except by sheer chance every once in a while, like a blind and anosmic squirrel who finds the occasional acorn, a result may be “true”) or to put in more mundane terms crap in-crap out.
7. And so what does this all mean? I’ll let Wilson have the second to last word: “So what does a test measure in our world? It measures what the person with the power to pay for the test says it measures. And the person who sets the test will name the test what the person who pays for the test wants the test to be named.”
In other words it measures “’something’ and we can specify some of the ‘errors’ in that ‘something’ but still don’t know [precisely] what the ‘something’ is.” The whole process harms many students as the social rewards for some are not available to others who “don’t make the grade (sic)” Should American public education have the function of sorting and separating students so that some may receive greater benefits than others, especially considering that the sorting and separating devices, educational standards and standardized testing, are so flawed not only in concept but in execution?
My answer is NO!!!!!
One final note with Wilson channeling Foucault and his concept of subjectivization:
“So the mark [grade/test score] becomes part of the story about yourself and with sufficient repetitions becomes true: true because those who know, those in authority, say it is true; true because the society in which you live legitimates this authority; true because your cultural habitus makes it difficult for you to perceive, conceive and integrate those aspects of your experience that contradict the story; true because in acting out your story, which now includes the mark and its meaning, the social truth that created it is confirmed; true because if your mark is high you are consistently rewarded, so that your voice becomes a voice of authority in the power-knowledge discourses that reproduce the structure that helped to produce you; true because if your mark is low your voice becomes muted and confirms your lower position in the social hierarchy; true finally because that success or failure confirms that mark that implicitly predicted the now self-evident consequences. And so the circle is complete.”
In other words students “internalize” what those “marks” (grades/test scores) mean, and since the vast majority of the students have not developed the mental skills to counteract what the “authorities” say, they accept as “natural and normal” that “story/description” of them. Although paradoxical in a sense, the “I’m an “A” student” is almost as harmful as “I’m an ‘F’ student” in hindering students becoming independent, critical and free thinkers. And having independent, critical and free thinkers is a threat to the current socio-economic structure of society.
LikeLike
Whether or not a student internalizes a mark as an accepted “story/description” of them can be counteracted by a good teacher. A mark is simply an indication of content mastery. It is not a statement of a person’s worth. Good teachers reinforce that over and over. Then they help that student master more content if needed.
My kids recently moved to BASIS, an accelerated program. They were far behind peers who came from private institutions and other high achieving charters. Their grades were lower than in their public school and lower than many of their peers. I said to them, “look how far you’ve come!!!!! And you will only get better. I’m so proud of you. What are you learning from all this?”
I reinforce to my kids I do want them to get 85% and above because that tells me they are sufficiently mastering the content. They missed that by good margin in two classes and they are still proud of themselves because they do know how far they’ve come. It isn’t about the grade. It’s about the message that is delivered with the grade. That IS within the teacher’s control.
LikeLike
I need a little help to understand the privatization movement. If the various types of charter school children are not subject to the tests that the public school children must take, how do we see results of testing that show that the charter schools are, at best, no better than public schools in their results?
LikeLike
Differs from state to state.
LikeLike
In AZ, they are subject to the same tests. It is also important to note that all charter schools are not created equally. Some do have far better results than the public schools in their area.
LikeLike
Yes, an earlier post showed us that the BASIS schools have very high attrition. Getting rid of low performers produces higher test scores.
LikeLike
Ma’am. My kids were not particularly high performers in their previous school. They were barely above average in math and couldn’t consistently multiply and divide after 4th grade in public school. The BASIS method has improved their math exponentially. That is fact.
LikeLike
HALLELUJAH!!!! These are the things I have been screaming about, almost verbatim, for years in letters to the editor, to Arne Duncan, and our politicians. Don’t try to tell me that this is about improving education. Insofar as I am aware I am the only teacher in the history of our high school who in a North Central evaluation was written up as “his students show proficiencies and skills far superior to anything seen in Indiana”. I took my choir – yes I was a choral teacher, ergo must be intellectually inferior – to Ball State University and the head of the Music Education department came out and spoke to my students that many of the college students would find it difficult to do what they had just done. The whole choir, not just selected students. I had made choir an academic subject in that students read the music, all 4 parts at once, no piano and most importantly sang back [could understand musically] in solfege melodies played on a piano plus the same with harmonies played on the piano. This when people were screaming for more academics. In addition, the great composers of Europe plus the United States and great folk music were sung and performed. YET, a principal who had been fired by an adjoining town, been hired by our school board, sent me from the high school when I DARED question whether something that principal had advanced when EVERY department head had voted against it and I dared ask if that had helped our school. A pin could have been heard if dropped at that time. A year later I was out of the high school and teaching in the elementary schools. There is much more to this story but will stop there.
SO, do NOT try to tell me that this is about “improving” education.
LikeLike
How much time have you spent in charter school classrooms? A BASIS classroom? My kids come home from BASIS bubbling over with all the cool new stuff they are learning. They get to do experiments – in the 5th grade. They read great literature. They are learning deeply about art and music. Their Latin teacher is hilarious. Oh, and they can actually do math now.
Did it ever occur to you that these teachers love their subjects deeply and want to share that with the next generation? Did it ever occur to you that many gave up far better paying jobs to make a difference in the lives of kids? Did it ever occur that, specifically in math and science, they saw what was happening in our public schools and wanted to help – not hampered by bureaucracy but free to do the right thing for the kids? You all claim to want that, and I truly believe that you do want it. Maybe teaching at a charter school is your answer.
I’m glad that BASIS is looking for ways to reward teacher efforts with merit pay/bonuses. They spend far more time helping students than my kids’ previous public school teachers. They go through a rigorous selection process. The ones who don’t teach well are addressed without interference. I’ll not claim BASIS is a perfect solution but it is much better than the public school my kids came from.
Likewise, I won’t claim that every public school is as bad as the one we experienced. I am for school choice. As a parent, when my public school is not meeting my kids’ needs, I require options. I don’t want to have to fight through the bureaucracy and nonsense to get things to change. Kids grow too fast. There just isn’t time.
When parents have the option to ‘vote with their feet,’ they have better leverage to force change. When they stay in a school and complain, they just become “that parent” – marginalized and made irrelevant. Perhaps our elected officials, school administrators, teachers, etc. have forgotten that these are our kids not theirs? No, not all parents are good parents but many are. Stop trying to take away their options for a great education for their kids.
I find it hilarious that everyone is shocked that the BASIS founders make $350k/year between the two of them when the average salary for a school superintendent is ~$150k. How hypocritical. What other exorbitant salaries are we paying for in the public schools? For me personally, BASIS is delivering results while getting less money per child to do so. If they can manage to do that and make a profit, more power to them.
LikeLike
I posted a blog earlier this year that quoted an Arizona blogger, David Safier. Safier deconstructed the legend of the BASIS schools. https://dianeravitch.net/2013/05/05/deconstructing-the-legend-of-basis-charter-schools/
Here is the key quote:
“As Safier writes, “An obscenely well funded coalition of organizations exists to sing the praises of schools like BASIS as part of their continuing efforts to push their privatization agenda.
“BASIS schools begin with a reasonably high achieving group of 6th grade students (recently they added a 5th grade). Of those 11 and 12 year olds, only one out of three will make it to their senior year. The other two-thirds withdraw, mainly because the expectations and pressure are so great, they know they won’t be able to succeed. The biggest student dropoff is from the 8th to the 9th grade. Any middle schooler who’s struggling to keep up knows the pressure and expectations will be far greater in high school as the coursework becomes increasingly more demanding and they’re required to take a number of AP courses. However, even among the ninth graders who make the cut, between 30% and 50% don’t last to their senior year.”
I hope your children make it to the end of high school. Most don’t.
LikeLike
My argument is much of your work seems intent on removing BASIS and other charter schools from the equation. These options are critical for parents to force change in public school education. BASIS attrition is irrelevant to that argument. It is providing a choice and it is highlighting a gap.
LikeLike
And you didn’t answer my questions…have you spent any time in a BASIS classroom?
LikeLike