Edward Berger is a blogger who lives in the southwest and is passionate about preserving public education and democracy.
In this post, he writes an eloquent tribute to “Reign of Error” and expresses his understanding of the organic connection between communities and their public schools, an insight that seems to elude those who call themselves “reformers.”
He writes:
“American communities are democratically operating groups of citizens who tax themselves to pay for bond issues to build schools and who vote to pay taxes to provide better education for all. They do not do this for the wealthy or for those who want access to our tax dollars for personal or corporate profit. They do this because they know that education is their access to the dream.
“As our failed political-economic system has allowed a few to accumulate the nation’s wealth, those few, by nature of their power, work to destroy the voice of the people. To maintain their power, they destroy communities and their schools, and any form of democracy – i.e., elected school boards. They force top-down coercive destruction that squashes the hopes and dreams of the people – i.e., the present US Department of Education, Pearson, Melinda and Bill Gates, Eli Broad, and several dozen more destructors. They buy and manipulate elected officials, subverting Democracy – i.e., ALEC and a list of individuals like the Koch Brothers. They have taken over and destroyed education, communities, and workers – i.e., Wisconsin, Arizona, North Carolina, Louisiana , and parts of NY City, Pennsylvania ,and Ohio, to name a few. It seems to many that Americans will soon be enslaved by the few.”
And more:
“The people of America, in order to preserve a vital and necessary public education system, now have a source of correct information. The few will fight to destroy the America of the people, but We The People are stronger and we can stop the stupidity and greed, heal the damaged teachers and community schools, and come out of the reign of error with improved schools, and the freedom to elect our leaders and work to serve every American.”
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Community.
Yes. Community.
Reformers see their efforts as viable because they understand community differently than those for whom a school is central to community. They have the means to create the definitions of community (sports teams, gated communities, big box stores, sleek and shiny life with lights and sparkles and free tee shirts). Those who have either never had that understanding of community either because of limited means or because of preferences for other standards of “the good life” (organic food, freedom of unique expression, theatre, mom and pop businesses) seem, to me, a bit more tolerant of human frailty and human need; mindful of human development, warts and all. I see a culture clash between these two understandings of community. And to see the battle played out on the level of community schools is maddening because it seems a balance between the two could be easy to reach (it seems we maintained balance in this throughout the 80s). It is the desire to strike a balance that seems to be lacking.
I am certain I am simplifying the equation a bit here. But I am also certain that the equation of public schooling does not have to be as complex as we are making it. The problem is the complexity of the psychology, ideology and basic values of those pushing reform, really. Maybe an effort to focus on THEM as psychological wonders to be studied could help us turn some corners. Maybe if we start offering up psychological analyses of Jeb Bush, Rhee, and others, much the way historians study leaders of the past, we could peel back some layers that are preventing real answers from coming about. Afterall, every day we work to understand the complexities of our students’ complex personas so we can figure out how they best learn. . . perhaps we can do the same to those who wish to block what many of us see as critical to community and democracy.
LikeLike
Btw, I am reading The Death and Life of the Great American School System now. Glad to learning all that I am!
LikeLike
Joanna Best, you have eloquently articulated the mystery.
“The problem is the complexity of the psychology, ideology and basic values of those pushing reform, really.”
I am mystified as to why people who have little or no direct professional or personal experience with public education believe that they are qualified to shape and implement its policies. I am equally mystified as to why the public turns over its public schools over to people who are so profoundly unqualified to run them, or why anyone would give the slightest credence to anything that any of them might think or say about public education.
John King, New York’s Commissioner of Education has three years of teaching experience. He taught for one year in a private school in Puerto Rico and two years in a charter school in Boston. According to New York’s 2013 High School Principal of the Year and New York’s 2010 Educator of the Year, Dr. Carol Burris, “After his short career as a teacher, he became the co-director of Roxbury Prep, a charter school with fewer than 200 students during his tenure. Five years later, he became the managing director of Uncommon Charter Schools.” I was unable to find information confirming the percentage of students in New York State who attend charter schools. In New York City it is 5%. It is probably safe to assume that it is no more than that statewide, but if I am wrong, anyone who reads this, please feel free to correct me. If I am right, than our state Commissioner of Education has zero experience working in the sorts of schools that 95% of the students for whom he is responsible attend. He attended public schools in New York some decades ago. His own children attend a private Montessori school, so his personal experience with public education is dated and limited. How is it that someone so obviously lacking in personal experience and professional credentials has been given the responsibility of overseeing New York’s public schools and why would he apply for the position to begin with?
He was appointed by the New York State Board of Regents. The Regents Chancellor, Merryl Tisch, attended private schools, taught in private schools and sent her children to private schools. She has zero personal and professional experience with the public school sector, yet for some mysterious reason, she decided that she should be appointed to a position which is one of the most responsible for creating and implementing public school policy. The result has been a disaster and not only for people who take issue with the CC standards and the assessments. Even people who like the idea of assessments, standards, accountability, VAM and all the rest of the reform stuff agree that here in New York, the implementation has been a debacle because the people doing the implementing are incompetent.
Bill Gates is a brilliant technocrat and businessman. He has arguably changed the world with his fancy gizmo and he’s made a few bucks to boot, but he has never been an educator. He attended a public elementary school and attended Lakeside School, a private junior and high school. His children attend his private alma mater. Why would someone who has zero professional experience as an educator of any sort and who’s only personal experience with public education was many decades ago as a small child believe that he is qualified to reform or in anyway whatsoever dictate the future of public education? More importantly, why would anyone else believe this? Why does he give TED talks about public education? Why does Charlie Rose invite him to be on his television program to talk about public education? Why would anyone listen to or care about Bill Gates’ thoughts or opinions about public education much less allow someone so thoroughly ignorant about public education to have such a profound influence on it?
All of this defies common sense. In no other sphere, public or private, business, finance, medicine, the military, you name it, would we allow people who are so clearly completely ignorant about that which they are responsible for managing to have such power and responsibility. What is it about public education that leads people to believe that no experience whatsoever is required in order to understand it or oversee its development?
LikeLike
I think many folks see education as an extension of parenting (as only an extension of parenting). Therefore they feel justified in having answers (history, research, child development, community and democracy be damned is how they act).
LikeLike
There is a huge lack of common sense in this country. It’s about MONEY, after all.
LikeLike
Joanna, I am hoping you can get this out so that others can share your insights. Thank you for enlightened explanations of why reformers are not qualified to have input into something they know little about..
LikeLike
Here is a piece by Robert Reich in the Huffington Post worth a read and connected to this article:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/privatization-government-cuts_b_3797449.html
LikeLike
Beautiful. Well stated.
LikeLike
I apologize in advance if I insult anybody, but at this point in time I am astounded by the naive “Why?” questions. The school reform movement is a way to weaken further an already weak critical citizenry AND to capture public dollars for private profit. Gates may have other issues. The power and authority that comes simply from the public’s awe of wealth overrides their critical ability to question someone like Gates outside of his area of expertise.
Berger is on point when he notes the public passivity in allowing authoritarian careerists to dictate a field in which they have little or no expertise, but this too leads back to the weakening of civics education in our public schools. Many, probably the majority of us do not know what our democracy is supposed to be, nor do we understand our critical responsibilities within our possible democracy.
Reformers don’t see us as community. Reformers see the rest of us as a market from which they can massively profit. Or in Gates’ case, a population that can be commodified for the efficiency of the market needs.
LikeLike
Maria,
why? is always in order.
In fact, education is “why?” If we think we know the answer, we can dig deeper.
Otherwise there is nothing left to discuss. Accepting defeat and characterizing others in complete negativity is not productive. “why?” is productive.
LikeLike
By this point, we should know why.
LikeLike
So, how do we muster a criticl mass to actively counter the power over education that the wealthy have purchased.
We really do not need more words; we need action.
If we can obtain that critical mass, all the money in the world will not be able to defeat the power of democratically minded citizens.
LikeLike