Last March, Lehigh University invited Michelle Rhee and me to debate on its campus in Pennsylvania. We both accepted. After agreeing, Michelle said we should both have a second on our team, not a 1:1 debate. I agreed. Months went by, and she said she preferred to have a third on both teams, and I agreed.
I think we have finally reached an agreement. I have my second and third lined up. I assume she does as well.
The debate will be February 6 at Lehigh University.
All are welcome! More details to follow.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
let’s hope she brings Steve Perry!
Bring RAID and eliminate that roach.
Rhee will need an army of Steve Perrys. She may yet ask for 5 on 5 and turn it into a basketball game instead of debate. She is doing pathetic damage control before the inevitable damage by putting herself in a crowd which will give her and Diane less time to speak and less focus on their head-to-head. Ignorant, unqualified, incompetent, and vulnerable, Rhee has been searching for ways to water down the obvious loss awaiting her.
Isn’t he her only friend?
Vultures of a feather destroy public education together:
That’s a really cruel comparison, you know. Cruel to vultures, I mean.
Please, don’t insult vultures. They serve a purpose in nature.
That’s great news! Hurrah!
Maybe they could live stream it? I really hope she doesn’t back out.
That’s my birthday.
I was wondering how to make 41 exciting. Now I know!
🙂
probably really dumb to tell my birthday online, but I always use a fake birthday for online identity anyway.
Young pup!
Because I’m 41 or because I’m dumb enough to post my birthday for all to see?
But oh yeah. . .privacy. What’s that? It’s probably stored on a cloud anyway.
Well, if I may, in advance:
¡Feliz Cumpleaños!
and since your a musician:
Gracias!
Ay, ay, ay , ay canta y no llores
Dih-dih-dih-dih Dora sings it well.
With all of my Hispanic students, I have grown fond of this one:
Estas son las mañanitas, que cantaba el Rey David,
Hoy por ser día de tu santo*, te las cantamos a tí,
Despierta, mi bien**, despierta, mira que ya amaneció,
Ya los pajarillos cantan, la luna ya se metió.
What an awesome gift from The Great Pumpkin!
I’m thinking of that Vonnegut story where the smart people have to have a bell clanging in their ears all the time in order to make them equal with the dumb people. You do realize you have a huge advantage here, right, Diane? Don’t hurt her too badly. 😉
D,
Harrison Bergeron.
Ha, the Kommon Kore is what lead to 2081!
Fiction holds more value than “informational text” ( what an idiotic term that is “informational text” ).
Thanks for the fond memory of K.V.
Oops,
Failing eyes ” led”me astray.
LOL. Kurt, who is in heaven now, would have loved your comment, Galton!
Great idea to make the debate available over the internet — either live or at least after the fact.
But — what are the odds that Rhee will develop a family emergency, medical problem, or scheduling glitch that forces here to cancel her appearance?
Will it/can it be streamed online for those of us on the other coast.
Shari
Will Michelle also have a phone to call a friend for an answer ?
There is a danger in having a lot of people debate, as in the presidential debates with a lot of people. It tends to favor sloganeering and talking points. Real debate gets informative when you get to the rebuttal of the rebuttal. Then what is when the difference between a significant, solid piece of evidence and hot air become more clear to the audience. This is what is lacking on public discourse, even on PBS.
I’m sure that Rhee is at least intuitively aware of that, and why she asked for this format. She and her associates will try to bulldoze with so many misleading ‘facts’ that the debate will never get engaged, and viewers will unclear how to evaluate the arguments.
If you and your associates have a coordinated strategy, and decide in advance on a focus, and keep hammering on what you think are the key weaknesses in her view, and the strengths in yours, your chances of really revealing the hollowness of Rhee’s case will be greatly increased.
sub text. Reading sub text. That will be important. What would they be saying if they had no words? What actions have they taken that indicate what they will say? What experiences have they had that contribute to why they would hold a certain opinion? If they were singing their words, what would the song sound like? If there was a soundtrack, what would it be? If there were children there watching (small children), what would be told to them?
Great analysis William, just what I was thinking. She wants to hide in a crowd and insure that nothing gets talked about in depth. Let her. Dianes team should just ignore her diversions and stay on topic and shame them for not stepping up to the discussion.
Have We seen this latest bit of propaganda….
http://sfadmin2.polldaddy.com/s/trick-or-truth?p=4&r=24BF45612B6DB68297CE85780CBB59BD&skip=2
Please stream it… I would LOVE to see you mop the floor with her AND her ‘team’…
I’d suggest VALERIE STRAUSS and LINDA DARLING HAMMOND as your teammates…
Looking forward to this!!!
Valerie Strauss and Richard Rothstein? Mercedes Schneider? Susan Ohanian?
Not that Dr. Ravitch needs backup. When I think of Diane Ravitch, I think of Kennedy’s line about Thomas Jefferson, delivered on the occasion of welcoming a group of Nobel Prize winners to the White House: “[T]his is the most extraordinary collection of talent, of human knowledge, that has ever been gathered together at the White House, with the possible exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone.”
Robert:
John Adams would have put a different spin on that quotation!
I suppose he would have! 🙂
She will probably bring the bully Steve Perry (I refuse to put Dr. in front of his name). My vote is that you bring Dr. Mark Naison from BATs! Also, as you know Dr. Ravitch, BATs will be there in vast numbers and we will try to control ourselves!
This will be better than Ali-Frazier! You go Diane!
I hope this is taped and made available to all of us. So wish I could be in attendance.
Avi Poster
aviposter@comcast.net
SO looking forward to this! Rhee didn’t feel capable to go it alone, needs someone to hold her hand…unfortunately I am betting that something comes up and she has to cancel. It is not even a fair fight, really.
Sounds like a duel, with second and thirds…good advice though about coordinating team effort and seeing this in the context of political debates. So have your sound bites at the ready, stay on point, and remember that a sense of humor can deflect some egregious stabs. She won’t always answer you but instead repeat her message, so be prepared for that.
Fun seeing you on Jon Stewart last night!
That is funny. 10 paces, back to back; turn; forward three paces.
I would pay to see that debate!
Ask her if she thinks these back room deals by ed reformers are “transparent”.
This is from 2002. Ted Mitchell was just chosen as an undersecretary at Duncan’s DOE:
“Occidental College President Theodore R. Mitchell told campus trustees that former Los Angeles Mayor Richard Riordan would donate money for a top-level executive position at the college if Mitchell ran for the Los Angeles Board of Education, according to participants in that trustees’ meeting.
Riordan has denied being part of an effort by billionaire Eli Broad to recruit Mitchell to run in the March 4 primary election against board member David Tokofsky. The Times reported earlier this month that Mitchell had told trustees that Broad offered to donate $10 million to Occidental if Mitchell ran for the school board. Broad has denied that.
Riordan did not return several telephone calls to his office requesting comment on his reported offer to Occidental.
According to participants in the Oct. 30 telephone conference between Mitchell, who was in New York, and the Occidental trustees’ executive committee, Mitchell told them that Riordan would pay for a position at the college similar to a provost. The proposed administrator would take on some of Mitchell’s duties to give him time to campaign for a school board post and hold office while remaining in his Occidental position, said participants who asked not to be identified.
Occidental’s spokesman said Mitchell declined to be interviewed for this story. ”
http://articles.latimes.com/2002/nov/12/local/me-schoolboard12
If memory serves, Dr. Ravitch spoke at Occidental College during this book tour.
“Broad, when asked about the reported offer by Riordan, said, “I’m not aware of that.”
Broad said he was considering his own $10-million gift to the college while encouraging Mitchell to run, but insisted that such a gift was not contingent on Mitchell’s agreement.
Mitchell told The Times last month that he considered his candidacy for the spring election and the donation as a “package.” He had said earlier that they were unrelated.”
There’s our new undersecretary of ed. Mr. Mitchell.
Hopefully Mitchell and Eli Broad have had time to get their stories straight since 2002.
Yipee! Light her up, light her up, light her up. Diana Ravich and Brooklyn in the house!
Michelle Rhee’s ideas and Diane Ravitch’s are totally different. I heard Rhee and was disgusted and outraged. I attempted to contact her to let her know her ideas are detrimental to students and not at all what will help students suceed.
I am confident Diane Ravitch’s message will resonate with those that are truly looking to improve our educational system.
Oh, please ask Lehigh University to livestream this event! If not livestreamed, recorded and made available.
SERIOUSLY! This needs to be streamed and recorded.
I would have preferred to see a 1 on 1 debate, too, but the fact that Rhee feels she can’t debate Diane without bringing along her posse says a whole lot about her level of competence in conveying the “reform” talking points independently. I’ve seen in videos how she can wilt when the discussion goes off script.
So, if Rhee brings along her most recent traveling band, Steve Perry and George Parker, they’ll probably be there to redirect the discussion back to the script. If she brings in Geoffrey Canada, prepare for noise pollution, because he tends to elevate his vocalizations a lot, as if a louder voice conveys a more plausible argument, but actually when he does that, he comes across as overly zealous and what he says is not particularly cogent.
This should be a piece of cake for Diane, especially since she can bring along more actual scholars! She has a lot to choose from, like Pedro Noguera, Linda Darling-Hammond, Martin Carnoy and Richard Rothstein, or David Berliner, Lois Weiner, Deb Meier, etc. A representative from the media might be interesting, as it was on Melissa Harris-Perry’s show with Trymaine Lee. Maybe David Sirota this time?
Hope it can be video taped and put on YouTube!
This is welcome news indeed.
The number three was not a casual accident. If you want to do “lefty cop, righty cop and messy middle” then you need to attempt to set it up to make it appear that Diane Ravitch and her “team” are part of some ugly extreme, while the rheephormistas are a varied, nuanced, thoughtful, joyful and child-loving bunch.
I am sure Diane chose well. I look forward to hearing her picks.
I am guessing, but I would be willing to venture that it took time for Ms. Rhee to get the “right” people for her team. I am not saying this is all or most of the reason for the long delay on her part, but who would want to be publicly put on the spot and made to answer for the Grand Caynon-like chasms between words and deeds that are the hallmark of the self-styled “education reformers”?
Michelle Rhee and her team are looking, I am sure, for tricks and gimmicks to make their side look good. It will not occur to them, nor can it occur to them, that facts, logic and compassion can’t be tricked.
To riff off a famous comment by the great American boxer, Joe Louis: they can run but they can’t hide.
🙂
Though I know you’re too gentle(wo)manly to do so, I hope you drive a stake through her heart.
Michael, would garlic do? A mirror?
A mirror! –reflecting her own abysmal track record, such as how she taped children’s mouths when she was a TFAer, etc.
It will be interesting to hear Minnie Mouse and Socrates debate.
Poor Michelle. If her intellect were as big as her ego and narcicissm, she’d be a contender for this debate.
Let’s hope her self absorption blocks her ability to intelligently talk. It usually does.
How appropriate on this Eve of the Hallowed, that someone spill some water on Ms. Rhee to see if she’ll melt.
Please Please Please stream it live, or at least record for You Tube. Also, I would put my paycheck on the fact that she has her “backup” answer more questions… Diane we are so looking forward to having you put her in her place…GO GIRL!
Do you think PCN would televise it?
Great to hear that Ms. Rhee has decided to take the time from her Erase to the Top tour to do this. Perhaps she will “explain” to Professor Ravitch how to be a great schools chancellor: Simply channel Lewis Carroll’s Red Queen: Train yourself to believe six impossible things before breakfast and stomp around yelling, “Off with their heads!”
All of this depends upon a moderator who is knowledgeable about the topic and the people chosen by both of you. Rhee is likely to choose cheerleaderss who take a lot of time to say nothing. You of course will choose people who can debate the facts, but there won’t be much of that if the people chosen by Rhee are armed with cliches and the argot of deform. Keep us informed.
My thoughts, exactly. The moderator can sway a conversation one way or another just by what he or she is willing to allow. I hope there is a decent one for this debate.
I vote Diane puts a student and a teacher on her team.
Wonderful news! I think this is a wonderful way for people to learn about the issues and what is at stake. Keep us posted.
This is going to be “epic,” as my kids would say.
I hope the debate is substantive and that the seconds and thirds aren’t a distraction. There are a lot of questions that I’d like to see answered honestly on both sides. Please do keep us posted regarding tickets and/or access to a recording!
This is going to be awesome! Michelle Rhee does not have an original thought in her head..she is so predictable…all the reformers are. Dr. Ravitch you will be able to handle her no problem. I would try to make arrangements to be there but what are the chances Rhee is actually going to show? I’d say pretty slim.
‘He who exercises no forethought but makes light of his opponents is sure to be captured by them.’ Sun Tzu
Checkmate.
Thanks for relaying that great advice. Maybe dead old folks do have a bit of wisdom to impart to us.
Be ready for the dueling studies trap. Rhee has a bunch of stuff that is just wrong or that she misrepresents the results of. This has been standard operating procedure for ShareholdersFirst for some time now. There will be little new from the deformers, just an attempt to stay on message and provoke and discredit those who disagree by misrepresenting their positions. They had a collection of 30? studies on their website they used in an attempt to refute the truths told about their lies. I would also say that the minute they try to avoid going into detail you should call them on that. Don’t let it be a battle of talking points. BIGGEST QUESTION: who will the moderator be and what are the rules/format?
Fortunately, Diane has the truth on her side!
Yes, Diane will be just the person to refute the fake “studies.”
10 to 1 says she backs out
I think she may show up if she has her backup team. She had to have a team before agreeing to debate Diane. What a coward.
hopefully it will be live streamed
Seconded; would love to watch this.
Yes! Yes please!! It’s my birthday and I just want to watch Diane put Rhee in her place.
yes this needs to be shared
Susan O’Hanian, and John Kuhn would be my top two picks to join in the debate! Richard Rothstein, Monty O’Neill, Alfie Kohn, perhaps a medical professional who can attest to the effects of long-term poverty on cognitive ability are among others! May Rhee get the public “stoning with words” that she has SO EARNED! And let the “stones” be metaphoric “BOULDERS”!
I’m guessing that for this special occasion, Rhee will be doing a lot of test prep with her “team”, but something more akin to how lawyers prep witnesses. No doubt, they will be reviewing all the research “reform” foundations bought from think tanks and their go-to economists like Hanushek, Goldhaber etc. So it might be a good idea for Diane to bring along her own economist, such as Marin Carnoy.
And “speaking” of economists… how about bringing Robert Reich to tackle the issue of poverty and its connection to public policy for the 1 percent. Ravitch could surely connect the dots as to how pubic policy designed for the 1 percent is denying our nation’s poor the right to an education (and pretty soon it will be the right to a free education which is denied as more an more public schools are closed in order to make way for more and more privatized education establishments run by for profit corporations),
Unfortunately, I discovered that on Reich’s “Inequality for All” website, he supports Obama’s education policies. What a huge surprise and let down that was!
I can imagine Rhee pressing on the issue of the relationship between poverty and educational attainment.
First, this avoids any discussion of the merits of various sorts of reforms.
Second, this gives her an emotionally potent narrative in which Rhee is the good guy who thinks that poor kids can be successful in spite of their poverty, and Ravitch is the bad guy who thinks that poor kids are destined to be poor and uneducated adults and that schools have no impact. This makes Ravitch look like a hopeless and pessimistic symbol of the status quo. It conjures up an image of a tired old union teacher who just pops in a DVD for class each day because those dang ghetto kids have such crummy parents they won’t learn anything anyways. And then in swoops Rhee, the Radical who believes that every kid deserves a chance to have a great teacher and a great school and that with those things they can succeed and step out of poverty.
Obviously, that is a ridiculous and incorrect way to characterize Ravitch’s views, but it will be relatively easy in the context of a debate to make it seem like an accurate picture.
I would urge Prof Ravitch to consider a way to counter an attempt at framing the debate as “poor kids can succeed” (Rhee) versus “poor kids are doomed by poverty to failure” (Ravitch).
CTEE.. I disagree that it will be relatively easy in a debate for Rhee to play the violin to claim that non corporate ed reformer types believe that “poverty is destiny” card because Ravitch HAS REALITY on her side and can easily state many REAL examples to counteract this.. the child who comes to school without eyeglasses and is expected to learn to read, the child who is bitten by rats or other vermin at night and fails to get a good night sleep day in and day out, the child who has tooth decay and is in pain in class etc… Diane has a million examples of ways poverty makes learning extremely challenging.
Wow, excellent point!!!
Following up on what Bernie said before, read Sun Tzu first of all.
She’s trying to get some of the Karma you got from your appearance with Jon….I’m not surprised this one one needs tag team…don’t let her snatch the glow. You have our hope in your heart, and she has only her greed. ^0^
I meant ONE NOTE…sorry, there’s no edit button!
Someone needs to ask Rhee where her scholarly work can be found.
rratto: you are a knowledgeable poster, so I am surprised you even ask that question.
Like so much else, her “scholarly work” is in a unique format: recorded entirely on miles of blood-stained masking tape, kept in a nuclear-proof vault buried deep in the bowels of StudentsFirst, sitting alongside the paperwork and computer files that prove she took her students from the 13th to the 90th percentiles.
Think I could make this up out of whole cloth? There is a 98% “satisfactory” certainty [thank you, Mr. Bill Gates!] that what I just wrote is rheeally rheeally true.
And I have no rheegrets letting you know.
🙂
it was a sarcastic question.. gee whiz
Oh, r…please don’t be too offended. My guess is that Krazy posted that comment tongue-in-cheek as he/she is wont to do.
LOL, Krazy! That scholarly work is to be found in the Twilight Zone–in an some completely alternate Rheeality where the way to create learners is to create a culture of fear and submission
Or the scholarly work and education experience of Secretary of Education Arne Duncan.
Will it be recorded?
Diane, please arrange a public one on one debate with Arne Duncan! That would put an end to all this misguided nonsense.
You are so amazing, Diane. I read your blog every day. I would do anything to be present and see this go down.
Her reforms are for “other people’s kids.” Her daughter goes to a an expensive, albeit top-tier private school. Affluence has a huge effect on achievement. So does poverty. Rhee obviously agrees. Otherwise, wouldn’t she send her daughter to a charter or magnet school? Thank you Diane for speaking for beleaguered public school teachers. We have taken a beaten. I feel like we are blamed for all the short-comings of society.
Some comments – Rhee does have a penchant for finding extremists that appear to come from different parts of the spectrum in order to make her appear reasonable – you’d do well to find someone that’s ex-TFA (and I know you know several prominent bloggers) and can speak to the merits of the organization and where it falls apart.
I know you know the research and you know it well – better than any of us – I’d focus on the strongest talking points of your research and in particular the claim/reality portions you wrote so wonderfully about – in a limited time and in a court of public opinion, you can’t nuance the points as well as you’d like when you’re sharing the platform with 5 other people.
Your strongest support will be letters, evidence, and stories, those with your knowledge of the research allows you to articulate quickly the finding of research and drive the point home with an example people connect with. Rhee will undoubtedly talk about all the poor kids trapped in schools that are being punished by union bureaucracy – don’t live with her in theoretical abstract land or get mired in the technical parts of studies – have some good examples of both personal and communal outrage in response to these policies that have been ignored.
The corporate conspiracy is unfortunately very real – this is a good chance to try to throw one of their biggest cheerleaders on her rear – don’t let her get away with blanket statements about what you represent or how your policies will harm kids – her offense will leave her defensive side wide open – do go for the jugular.
‘
The Failing RSD, Paul Vallas, Billionaire iPad buyouts, Pearson deals, Parental Outrage in NY, Underfunding of Philly, the purchasing of local control for pennies on the dollar, the critical failures of NCLB and how Congress’s failings allow it to now be used to bludgeon states into a non-financed RttT.
These are real, the parents, students and teachers stand on your side, Rhee has a bunch of guys (primarily white) with huge checkbooks on theirs. Bring the right ammunition (the truth) and use your uncanny knowledge of seeing through the machinations of those who seek to maintain income inequality for all to bring it to the people and make Rhee look like the amateur she is (though she has had years to practice these arguments).
Take her DOWN!!!!!
Diane. If you simply travel to Lehigh in a flying house, and “accidentally” land it on Rhee, it will be over and you can click heels and head home. Ding Dong ……….
Inoculate yourself before you go. Repeated exposure to “we want to put the best possible teacher in every classroom” can cause severe nausea and digestive discomfort.
Also how demonizing children’s teachers and destabilizing their communities is indeed what’s best for the children.
Can I bring pom poms?
…hopefully by the bus load. It’s nearly a two hour drive one way for me with a 5:00 a.m. wake-up next day, but I’m considering going. I’m guessing there will be a huge cheering section for Rhee made up of charter students. We need to balance that.
Let us not forget that Rhee was never qualified to serve in the position that she served in when she led the DC Public Schools! Ravitch would never take the helm as a superintendent or chancellor of a public school system and she has an amazing wealth of knowledge on the history of public education yet in America from years and years of research, of talking to school administrators of teachers in public schools all over the United States. Why? She understands how her real skills can be put to best use. But if she did chose to be a superintendent she would know enough to know “that which she does not know” and ask expert opinions of successful career principals like Carol Burris or seasoned teachers. Rhee led by being an “island unto herself” without the requisite knowledge to lead … was a puppet of more folk unqualified to lead (think Bill Gates, Broad etc) who pulled on the Rhee puppet strings to effect public policy and to implement every profitable policy they could. Rhee is an arrogant, self-absorbed power hungry megalomaniac who had a total of 3 years teaching (and do not forget her claims of how she raised student scores exponentially are false according TO THE DATA). I think the only “easy” thing for her to do during this debate is deflect the powerful punches that will be coming at her fast and furiously. She better have BIG BOXING GLOVES to cover her vitals!
Diane has the research and facts on her side–there may not be a need to bring up Rhee’s personal record. The debate ought to be focused on the issues, although, the issues of cheating and a lack of qualifications for those in high level educational positions do enter into it. Diane and her partners would need to finesse these points without making personal attacks. She always takes the high road and this time will be no different.
Why do I have this sick feeling that one of Rhee’s thirds will be a child or parent with some heart-rending story about being trapped in some low performing school with “lazy” union teachers and being “saved” by a parent trigger that was pulled? 10 bucks down people…
More ammo:
http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2013/10/31/national-educationreformadvocatesoughtcalderonasinfluence.html
Rhee’s team will repeat sound bytes again and again. It’s a very effective marketing tool. Be ready to counter them with your own sound bytes couched in facts/data as a rebuttal.
Just a general note: “Reign” does not conclusively rebut every single argument or aim of the “reformers.” It is a well-written and mostly well-constructed political document, not settled science. Too many commenters are implying that Diane should leave a copy of “Reign” on the podium, drop the mic, and walk out. Here are some weaknesses in “Reign” that Rhee could exploit.
She will point out the potential benefits of school choice for poor minorities warehoused in brutally segregated conditions, and this argument is factually as well as emotionally powerful. In far too many cases, the local zoned school is a dead-end, with hardly any graduates going on to 4-year colleges or being adequately prepared for the job market. How this happened is irrelevant. Diane’s long-term solutions may be better than Rhee’s, but her short-term ones (parents should work to “fix” the schools) aren’t. Choice isn’t just a consumer option; it is a lifeline for a not inconsequential and ever-growing number of families.
Diane will need to tread carefully with the arguments involving choice and studies showing small, incremental increases in segregation. The district model has been a primary enabler of residential segregation, not a passive bystander, and hardly any districts have taken active steps toward desegregation. Charter-created segregation is a microscopic part of a much larger problem.
If Diane relies on CREDO to rebut claims of charter school performance, it should be noted that the 2013 follow-up shows a positive trend line for charter performance, particularly for the most at-risk kids, and the localized NYC CREDO study shows charters with a considerable edge over district schools in math instruction.
Costs and scale: Rhee will undoubtedly point to the massive increase in K-12 spending during the past 15 years and the relatively small effect it has had on results, and note that countries we wish to emulate (Finland, Canada, etc.) spend much less. Any discussion of money is conspicuously absent from “Reign,” but it will be fair game in this type of debate. Any attempted connection to elite private schools can be easily batted aside on the basis of economics (we don’t have the money to spend $30/40/50K or more per child per year) and history (elite privates have always been just that, elite and private; there was never a time when public schools were funded at the same level).
I can’t wait to find out who will round out each team. If Diane hadn’t yet made her choices and was looking for suggestions, I’d nominate Bruce Baker and Richard Kahlenberg.
” Charter-created segregation is a microscopic part of a much larger problem.”
If you look at the populations both served by and counseled out of charter schools on average, you might rethink that point.
I don’t see a lottery system as a “microscopic part” of the problem. Lotteries segregate the population into erstwhile “haves” and “have nots.” Those children who have the familial support to push them win out over those children whose families have failed them. This is not a solution for the latter group.
More importantly, those children who are among the “chosen” leave behind those to whom fate did not grant an enrollment position in the so-called “savior school.” If you believe the public schools are so terrible where charters are popping up, keep in mind that charters strip resources away from these public schools thus weakening them even more so that the children who are left have next to nothing.
Charters that serve only “some” of the public proliferate a dual education system that divides resources thus killing communities. The charter system, as such, needs to either be fixed or eliminated. Public schools are not businesses, and no one should be profiting from the education of our public’s children.
It might be better to focus on community supports so that the public schools have a fighting chance instead of touting claims of successful charters knowing that many serve only a portion of the population. A portion of the population getting anything over the rest sounds like privilege to me. What else is segregation but the granting of privileges to some people but not others?
It seems to me that the desire to use school assignments to strengthen communities and the desire to use school assignments to encourage SES integration are in tension give the SES segregation in housing in the country. I think that was Tim’s point here.
As for lotteries dividing students into havesor have nots, the qualified admission public magnet schools like Thomas Jefferson High School in Virginia do Stuyvesant High School in NewYork are far more selective than any lottery based charter school. Should not they be the first target for those concerned with the creation of dual education system?
TE:
All these hard choices and philosophical conundrums remind me of Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem.
I would just call them conflicting incompatible goals.
“As for lotteries dividing students into havesor have nots, the qualified admission public magnet schools like Thomas Jefferson High School in Virginia do Stuyvesant High School in NewYork are far more selective than any lottery based charter school. Should not they be the first target for those concerned with the creation of dual education system?”
TE, we’ve had this conversation before. I’ll say again what has been said over and over: Magnet schools are public schools that run inside of public school systems, not against them. They use a philosophy of giving students with differing needs an education that is extra-traditional, but they do not strip away public schools of their much needed funds for operating costs, resources, and community environs. As well, public magnets do not run as businesses with CEOs and managers who are novice educators, at that. They are run as public education institutions by credentialed and experienced educators–they do not exist in the portfolios of those who can only find “success” be taking funds away from their public institutions while skimming a select group of students and leaving their public schools to rot with less funding for operating costs. Magnets, at least how they operate in my community, are true public schools.
So it is your position that schools with challenging standardized tests do not result in a division of students between those that have familial support and those that do not?
Perhaps I would understand your argument better if you could explain how qualified admission magnet schools do not divide students but lottery charter schools do divide students and how the students not chosen to go to Stuyvesant High School are not left behind, but the students not chosen to go to the Community Roots Charter School are left behind.
I’m sorry you do not understand how siphoning funds from public schools to educate a small portion of the population in an institution outside of the public schools does not lead to segregation. I cannot help that you are misrepresenting the argument of how school funding that belongs to the public and its system is appropriated to educate some of the population outside of the system. It is not my responsibility to teach you the logic of social systems. However, if you’d like to enroll in my school, I’d be happy to offer my services. 😉
LG:
As stated the issue was lotteries not Charter Schools.
Now the issue is one of funding. If it is strictly an issue of funding then if the actual marginal cost of educating a student is $X in a system, and less than $X is awarded to an alternative institution of the student’s choice to educate that student then in what way are funds being taken from the public schools?
I am not sure of how it is done now, but in the UK religious schools were given public funding that covered the operational costs of educating a student. All buildings had to be provided by those sponsoring the school, i.e., non public funds. Religious schools had to meet the same Inspection standards as regular State schools.
Would you countenance such an approach in the US? If not how are such religious schools different from schools for the academically gifted that exist in most large cities?
Let me quote from your post:
“I don’t see a lottery system as a “microscopic part” of the problem. Lotteries segregate the population into erstwhile “haves” and “have nots.” Those children who have the familial support to push them win out over those children whose families have failed them. This is not a solution for the latter group.
More importantly, those children who are among the “chosen” leave behind those to whom fate did not grant an enrollment position in the so-called “savior school.” If you believe the public schools are so terrible where charters are popping up, keep in mind that charters strip resources away from these public schools thus weakening them even more so that the children who are left have next to nothing.”
I interpret you as saying some students will be allowed to go to schools with strong teachers, engaged peers from strong families, and great resources. Others will be left behind in neighborhood schools which will not offer the advantages of the schools the haves are attending.
If I am understanding your post correctly, you have described what happened to students who pass the standardized tests to be admitted to TJ high school and those that don’t pass those tests.
“Now the issue is one of funding. If it is strictly an issue of funding then if the actual marginal cost of educating a student is $X in a system, and less than $X is awarded to an alternative institution of the student’s choice to educate that student then in what way are funds being taken from the public schools?”
Do you own the local roads if you drive on them? If you drive on other roads outside of the community in which you pay taxes, should you be allowed to pay your taxes to those other communities instead of to your own?
The “funds follow the individual students” is a famous fallacy promoted by charter school proponents. Per pupil funding is a formula that takes into account the entire costs of running a facility including personnel, building costs, resources, etc. That funding, while contingent on numbers in the population, does not belong to the individuals–it belongs to the community schools. If it only belonged to the students themselves, then tax shares would be adjusted so that those families with the most children would pay a larger share and those with no children at all would pay toward a small community-use fee.
When per pupil funding is sent to a school that is not part of the public school system, it can no longer be used for operating expenses for the public facility. That may seem fair providing the student is utilizing the charter institution and not the public school, but many charters counsel out at-risk students after the date (usually October 15) that the law states these facilities can keep the funding. When the charters get rid of the students they claim “do not fit in at the charter school,” the public schools must take them, minus the per pupil funding which the charter schools may keep. Taking funding away from the public school is bad enough, but requiring the public school to essentially take back the student without allowing for the funds to “follow” the student back to the public school is wholly unfair.
“I am not sure of how it is done now, but in the UK religious schools were given public funding that covered the operational costs of educating a student. All buildings had to be provided by those sponsoring the school, i.e., non public funds. Religious schools had to meet the same Inspection standards as regular State schools. Would you countenance such an approach in the US? If not how are such religious schools different from schools for the academically gifted that exist in most large cities?”
Many religious schools in the US get a portion of public funding for operating expenses such as transportation costs. At least those schools do not have the per pupil clause that charters have where they can “rid” their schools of the students who will not paint them as successful by sending them back to their public schools and then keep the funding.
“I interpret you as saying some students will be allowed to go to schools with strong teachers, engaged peers from strong families, and great resources.”
With that statement, you assume that public schools, even in at-risk communities, do not have strong teachers and charters do. One must subscribe to that line of thinking to validate your statement.
In regard to engaged peers from strong families, charter schools prey upon those looking for a “savior” from their dire circumstances. There are plenty of community problems that interfere with a student’s ability to learn that do not necessarily stem from a weak family–however circumstance may prevent a family from providing the necessities for a healthy lifestyle that support learning readiness. It is a no-brainer that supporting these students with the life resources they lack can contribute to better success in their education whether in public or charter schools. The schools cannot have any influence on student learning without these support services. Instead, the focus that is fueled by the reform rhetoric seems to be on the more advanced operations that are next to impossible without meeting a child’s basic needs for food, healthcare and emotional support.
“Others will be left behind in neighborhood schools which will not offer the advantages of the schools the haves are attending.” The only “advantages” charters can offer (besides segregating the students who are willing to “control” their behavior from those who are not) are longer hours with drill and kill training in the narrow subject areas that show up on standardized tests where there is no tolerance for ANY type of individuality. I know how controlling inner city charter schools can be. My ex taught in one where students were humiliated for the silliest infractions. Their schedules changed daily as math and reading “scores” went up or down. The amount of chaos and lack of stability was astounding.
In essence, charters create their own type of controlled community. The real world, with all its problems, still exists outside o school walls. Charter schools do not change communities for the better by “saving” them–they siphon off resources for a very small percentage of the population.
My point is that you can replace the word “charter” with the word “magnet” in your posts and they read as if that is the way you originally wrote it. You are making an argument against students being allowed to attend any school outside of their assigned catchment area, not an argument against students being allowed to attend charter schools.
My little town has two public high schools with a catchment line dividing the town in to the north/south districts. Would you allow students who lived in one building’s catchment area to take a class in the other building? Would you allow students to take all their classes in the other building?
Are the schools within the same district? Do they share expenses? Admins? Curriculum resource budgets? If any of these questions can be answered, yes,” then you have an apples-to-oranges argument–districting or catchment lines do not mean that these schools are operating in the same way as charters.
Charters exist outside of public districts, therefore the only connections they have to public schools can be found in the per pupil funding they receive. That’s called “take.”
Magnets along with other schools within districts are connected to their public school counterparts in the system in that all schools in that equation share resources. That’s called “give and take.”
Charters that siphon school funding take from their communities, and that needs to change.
I am asking about student choice here. Would you allow students to cross catchment (or district if that was an issue) lines to take courses in other buildings?
I would need a lot of information as to how this would be facilitated, i.e.. an itemized list of operating costs, scheduling and staffing implications, evidence as to why the course cannot be implemented in the neighborhood school, etc.
My district was very large and had several small neighborhood elementary schools. My brother attended the gifted program which was housed in one building, and its participants were bussed to that location each day. As the district started to build larger schools, the gifted programs could be housed within each of its larger buildings. In any configuration, the gifted program was operating as part of the public school district, not apart from it.
In many school districts, special needs students on both sides of the coin (gifted and disabled) are placed within specific programs for their cognitive talents. Would it matter if these programs were held in magnets or charters? Yes. Magnets work with the system–charters do not.
Let’s flesh this out a bit. One of the high schools in my town does offer automobile mechanics and students at the other high school can take the course if they have the transportation to get to the other high school for the class and back to the assigned high school in a reasonable time. Neither high school teaches anywhere near the curiculum of Thomas Jefferson in math, though perhaps if one of the high schools took all of the students in town capable of taking that course went to one of the high schools.
Might it be better for the students if the ones that wished to take automobile mechanics took all their classes at one high school (perhaps the farming classes should also be at the same high school because of synergy between farming and equipment maintenance) and students who might take vector calculus, differential equations, or calculus based physics all go to one high school so class size might approach something reasonable.
Would this create schools of the haves and the have nots? Just as background, the high school that teaches automobile mechanics has about 40% of students eligible for free and reduced price lunch while the other high school has only 25%. About a decade ago, the percentages were more equal, but the town has grown more in some areas than the other, and new housing is more expensive than old.
“Let’s flesh this out a bit.”
Always a pleasure.
“One of the high schools in my town does offer automobile mechanics and students at the other high school can take the course if they have the transportation to get to the other high school for the class and back to the assigned high school in a reasonable time.”
I’m assuming that the course is not part of a larger vocational curriculum for visiting students. Is that correct? If so, I can see it as an elective, but I do not know how I would feel about requiring students to take the time for transportation to just one class out of their entire day. What are they giving up in order to take all that time and does it impact the number of credits they need to take in order to graduate high school?
“Neither high school teaches anywhere near the curiculum of Thomas Jefferson in math, though perhaps if one of the high schools took all of the students in town capable of taking that course went to one of the high schools.”
Would you restate that last point? I think there was something missing.
“Might it be better for the students if the ones that wished to take automobile mechanics took all their classes at one high school (perhaps the farming classes should also be at the same high school because of synergy between farming and equipment maintenance) and students who might take vector calculus, differential equations, or calculus based physics all go to one high school so class size might approach something reasonable.”
I agree, although I do not know how feasible this would be given the population and its distribution over elective courses in your community. There are a whole lot if variables to consider here before one can offer an opinion on what is best for your community.
“Would this create schools of the haves and the have nots?”
Again, I cannot say one way or the other because
I do not have all the details. Sounds like there are many, many factors to consider.
“Just as background, the high school that teaches automobile mechanics has about 40% of students eligible for free and reduced price lunch while the other high school has only 25%. About a decade ago, the percentages were more equal, but the town has grown more in some areas than the other, and new housing is more expensive than old.”
Affordable housing is an issue everywhere. In my current community, those who bought houses some 20 years ago could not afford to buy a house in their neighborhoods today, although if they sold, they would have some equity providing they did not take out second mortgages or loans to pay their bills. The economy has indeed created a huge disadvantage for homeowners and renters seemingly everywhere.
The basic issue is that by specializing a little, there would be a greater variety of classes available to high school students in the town, but that specialization would require that students in the town are able to go to the school that more closely fits their needs rather than going to the school to which their residences are assigned.
As for your specific questions:
It is a class, not a program, so in order to take the class the students must return to the assigned school. Wouldn’t it make more sense to allow these students to take all their classes at one school?
The second point is basically a restatement of the first but on the academic side. There may be enough students in the town to warrant a physics class that uses calculus, for example, but not enough at one school to warrant teaching the class at either school.
Finally, I find your unwillingness to take a position on the creation of “haves” and “have nots ” surprising as you have taken a position on the creation of “haves” and “have nots” in each of the many school districts that have charters. I would think that you know less about the “many factors” to consider in those school districts than I have presented about my little local district.
“It is a class, not a program, so in order to take the class the students must return to the assigned school. Wouldn’t it make more sense to allow these students to take all their classes at one school?”
Yes. Makes little sense to expect students to drive across town during the school day for one class. It makes little sense for teachers to do this, too. There ought to be a class at either location…
“The second point is basically a restatement of the first but on the academic side. There may be enough students in the town to warrant a physics class that uses calculus, for example, but not enough at one school to warrant teaching the class at either school.”
…or the district needs to consolidate into one building. However, I do not know the implications of such a solution, nor have you offered such.
“Finally, I find your unwillingness to take a position on the creation of “haves” and “have nots ” surprising as you have taken a position on the creation of “haves” and “have nots” in each of the many school districts that have charters.”
How am I unwilling to take a position on the “haves” and “have nots?” I believe I clearly stated my reasons for said position in regard to charters. Charter schools do not exist as part of the districts in the communities in which they operate. Many charters do not teach every student, they siphon public funding, and they counsel out students who would make these charter schools appear to fail. By taking funding from public schools they are robbing communities and segregating populations into those who have access to resources paid for by the public and those whose schools are stripped of these resources. The icing on this proverbial half-baked cake is the practice of sending students back to public schools but keeping the funding they so readily took from these public schools. This is a very simple argument. Charters do not teach everybody–public schools MUST.
“I would think that you know less about the “many factors” to consider in those school districts than I have presented about my little local district.”
By your statements, I would think that you have no idea what I know about charters and public schools. You are not presenting the entire picture about what is going on in your community’s school (perhaps you are not privy to all the considerations), yet you wish for me to make a parallel that somehow argues against the concept that neighborhood public schools can be run to meet the needs of the majority of the public. If you are having difficulty following the logic of how so many charters rape the public schools of funding, I do not believe I can be of further help to you.
No institution is without issues, but taking public money to teach a portion if the public is wholly unfair. You appear to be trying to make an argument for “school choice” by mentioning the apparent “ills” of your local school–an argument that simply isn’t there–in an effort to show how your community’s public school is somehow “failing” a portion of the population and choice will somehow make things right.
Your school district seems to be in need of an overhaul if it is not offering the same access to basic coursework in both high schools. If this is your concern, organize a coalition of parents and teachers to work with the school board in solving this problem, but beware of the spectre called “choice.” History has taught us that “choice” refers more to an elite group of “chosen people” having the choice to consort with the populations they do not live near than to any actual school. People who live in one place and are educated in another can (and often do) ignore their community institutions, and that is never good for the community.
It’s taking on a sort of Vegas-style PPV vibe – thanks to Michelle Rhee of course. I’m sure Diane can take care of herself, but I’ll bet the privatizer’s tag team will come straight from central casting.
So excited to hear you are coming to Lehigh! Students here are fed a pretty standard diet of pro-corporate/reform/privatization speakers (not in regards to education particularly, but generally the speakers tend to have a pro-corporate tone probably without realizing it). It will be refreshing to see and hear someone who doesn’t ascribe to the status quo “privatization equals good” line and hopefully sway a few minds in the process.
Also, I’m sure you’re aware, but Lehigh sponsors two community schools in the Bethlehem area on the South Side. The Bethlehem Area School District and United Way of the Greater Lehigh Valley are pretty invested in the community school movement. It may be worth bringing up community schools as an alternative philosophy to privatization/charters/what have you as a way to aid schools primary constituency is living in poverty and point to Bethlehem as a thriving example. Many students at Lehigh volunteer in the schools and it could help put a real live face to the good that community schools can do.
Thanks for all you do, Diane.
I think she should go the opposite direction… She is speaking to Rhee’s followers… They have been misled by a profusion of ignorant manipulative data. She just needs to be simple and truthful. The only truth hurts are lies. “There are 3 things you cannot hide: The sub, the moon, and the truth” -The Buddha
Correction: The only thing the truth hurts are lies. “There are 3 things you cannot hide: The sun, the moon, and the truth” -The Buddha
Reblogged this on Newbie Academic in a 'Stan and commented:
Man… wish I was back in the States to see this!
Fascinating. Will this be televised? It should be. People all over the country will want to see this. The fight of the century– much more interesting than any presidential debate, or any sporting event.
Although I see no problem (as you didn’t) with having more than one person on each team, it is interesting that MR suggested that, as one might wonder from that if she was afraid to face you one on one…..
Frankly, I think you will trounce her, Diane, as you are very knowledgeable about education, and she knows nothing, someone who become a school district superintendent through some weird political game, totally unqualified for that job, from which she was fired, then tried to make a career of it with her foundation and books, media stunts, etc. (No school district would consider hiring her again.) On the other side you–noted education historian, formerly high official in the federal education department.
You could punch holes in her arguments like no one else could, and expose her as the idiot and fake she is. (Of course, not by calling her any names. The facts speak for themselves, and she has none, Zilch! There are no facts to support the kind of nonsense she spouts!)
It really should be broadcast on all networks like the presidential debates. At least try to get PBS to broadcast it, and try to get education reporters nationwide to come and cover the debate.
The fight of the century!
I would love to tape this and load to youtube for public consumption. Might be worth a flight from FL to PA!!
Only three hours from Albany and I have an 8-passenger minivan!! Can anyone say, “Road Trip?!?”
definitely interested in seeing a televised version. All Americans should watch to educate themselves. Hopefully Mr. Chris Christi will be one of those in attendance because he could use some facts.
Diane, You are the symbol of reason for all teachers here in the trenches, rebuking the Michele Rhees of the world who decry the need for public, nonpolitical, nonprejudicial education for the young minds of America. Creativity is protected by your covenant, and teachers are energized by your ability to align facts that elucidate the darkness of the perhaps well-intentioned economists and Rhee-esque dilettantes’ whims– those who threaten the growth of young mindsthrough their inexperience and poor judgement. Thank you for your recent book, and for your spirit to debate!
Deborah! You said it better that I could have- Thanks… And that you Diane.
how do I get tickets
Diane I wrote this after getting through a few chapters of Reign of Error http://lowermacungie.patch.com/groups/mark-spenglers-blog/p/tell-your-state-senator-to-reject-senate-bill-1085_f56ac8f0
Thanks for the inspiration