Diane Aoki felt that something was wrong, terribly wrong, as No Child Left Behind changed the schools. It felt even worse when Race to the Top came in.

Everyone told her, “don’t worry, this too will pass,” but it only got worse every year.

When she read “Reign of Error,” it all made sense to her. She understood that “reform” was not about reform at all.

Things are bad, she knew, but “Reign of Error” offered her hope, hope that her own inner convictions were validated, and hope that it shouldn’t be this way.

She wrote:

This is what I love best about the book. Throughout the book, there is a thread of hope as she contrasts the corporate agenda to what it’s supposed to be, what it should be, what it can be. I highlighted those silver threads whenever I saw them, here are a few, with positive solutions underlined:

“Once upon a time, education reformers thought deeply about the relationship between school and society. They thought about child development as the starting point. “(P.19)

“The reformers define the purpose of education as preparation for global competitiveness, higher education, or the workforce. They view students as “human capital” or “assets ” one seldom sees … the importance of developing full persons to assume the responsibilities of citizenship.” (P. 34-35)

“Children who are poor receive less medical attention and less nutrition, and experience more stress, disruption, and crises in their lives…. That is why por children need even more stability, more support, smaller class sizes, and more attention from their teachers and others in their schools, but often receive far less, due to underfunding.” (P. 36)

“Of course we can do better. Students should be writing more and reading more and doing more science projects and more historical research papers and should have more opportunities to engage in the arts.” (P.54)

“If we were serious about narrowing the gap … schools … would have a stable, experienced teacher, a rich curriculum, social services, after-school programs, and abundant resources to meet the needs of their students.” (P.59)

Regarding teacher evaluation based on student test scores: “If by great, we mean teachers who awaken students’ desire to learn, who kindle in their students a sense of excitement about learning, scores on standardized tests do not identify those teachers.” (P.113)

“…there remains the essential question of why scores on standardized tests should displace every goal and expectation for schools: character, knowledge, citizenship, love of learning, creativity, initiative, and social skills.” (P.114)

“Also forgotten is that public schools were created by communities and states for a “civic purpose.” In the nineteenth century, they were also called “common schools.” They were a project of the public commons, the community. They were created to build and sustain democracy, to teach young people how to live and work together with others, and to teach the skills and knowledge needed to participate fully in society.” (P.207 )