Ed Berger, one of social media’s eloquent voices and a champion of free public education, has decided to sign off…at least for now.
As he explains in this post, he is “going dark.”
He and his wife are going to Mexico for a few weeks, and he is at least temporarily dropping out of the blogosphere, perhaps to write a book of historical fiction.
This is what Ed Berger believes:
I believe in free education for all. I do not believe in schools for profit. I am dead-set against public tax dollars going to religions for inculcation. I abhor the takeover of our schools to push political ideologies. The awful idea that corporations can run schools is ludicrous. I believe that if democratically elected school boards are bypassed, or fail to function well, children are deprived of access to the American Dream.
I spent over 5 years researching and writing, Vital Lies: The Irrelevance Of Our Schools In The Information Age. It is about where we are, how we got this way, and where we need to go. I have focused on the pulse of America and find that the so-called education reform movement does not represent the interests or the needs of students or our society. The primary drive that motivates “education reform” is access to the education tax dollars citizens pay. They are for profit, not for kids.
We need Ed Berger, and he knows it. Something tells me he won’t be silent for long.
Fighting for what is right is in his blood. I predict he will be back.
Take a break, Ed. Rest up. We look forward to hearing your voice again.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Your stamina is a good role model Dr. Ravitch. I imagine people do get weary. I do, and I’m just a mom who wants there to be school for her kids. I hope Ed comes back soon.
I want to read his book. I have been thinking about how the concept of schools really is kind of like music in this era. In college I was told music is a dead language. And it is true that most people cannot read it. But it is still an enriching pursuit and part of the human experience. I suppose schooling is falling into that category more and more too.
LikeLike
I know how Ed feels.
He is passionate about the evil occurring in this reform and the corporate takeover of our schools.
Take a rest Ed…but do not give up…your voice is so needed..
LikeLike
I find it interesting so many “educated” people who write on this blog fail to know the definition of free. They probably believe Santa brings gifts at Christmas. No country has “Free Education”, it has to be paid…usually from a govt. which ‘invests’ (aka, taxes) in education.
I do agree we need to halt corporate intrusion, but also believe states should control public education, not a central authority.
We will differ as public money for education belongs to the child, not a school or district. This is the only way to ensure poor performing schools improve.
And, the concern of religious schools ‘inculcating’ should not be a school’s concern, its the parents decision what school THEIR child attend.
With less corporate, including union, involvement and parents being actively involved public education will improve.
It is more than a coincidence the problems which have risen to the service run parallel with the increased authority of the US DOE. ajbruno14 gmail
LikeLike
Saying the money belongs to the child is directly contradictory to “halting corporate intrusion”. If the money belongs to the child, s/he can take it wherever s/he wishes (or wherever the parent wishes).
Further, saying the money belongs to the child is like saying the money you pay for roads “belongs” to you as a driver – everyone should just take their own money and build their own roads. Like roads, schools are a common endeavor, they don’t belong to any one person, but rather to the people collectively.
LikeLike
I disagree. First, I don’t make the leap to corporate intrusion in the case of money and student. Corporate intrusion is what we are seeing within Common Core, which I believe you mentioned earlier.
Consider we constantly hear, ‘the cost per child is equal to X (perhaps $4000)” So, if the child goes from school A to school B….why shouldn’t the $4000 school A has be “sent’ to school B?
Those who object are trying to have it both ways, tying student with money (usually to say not enough) than objecting if the child goes to another school, usually outside the reach of the school he leaves.
Additionally, if school funding comes from taxes, mostly from personal property taxes, isn’t it “fair” the hard earned dollars of parents follow the child? It does to me.
I do like the analogy of money and roads, but here is a distinction. If a school A receive $4000 per child and has 100 students which totals to $400,000, should the school be provided with the same amount if ten students moves to school B? I’m not saying I have the answer, but why should a school keep more money then is required, and if so…where does the $40,000 for school B come from.
On a different lighter note, we can only imagine how this math problem would be constructed in Common Core. regards, Anthony
LikeLike
AJ, here’s what I think should happen.
Do away with Charters. If you send your kid to private school you get a tax deduction based on a tiered schedule (salary based).
The dollar figure per head is for planning purposes. But to actually attach that amount and hand it out is just yucky feeling to me. It’s like rationing. It doesn’t feel like something that belongs in a Capitalist society.
LikeLike
Consider we constantly hear, ‘the cost per child is equal to X (perhaps $4000)” So, if the child goes from school A to school B….why shouldn’t the $4000 school A has be “sent’ to school B?
Because the “money” is coming from the property taxes of people that live in Town A. The decisions on how that money is spent is made by people that members of Town A have elected. Town A has “Representation” in how their Property Tax money is spent. The other way you describe – none of these things are in place, and people are taxed, their “money” is spent, and they had no representation.
Watch out for this “Money follows the Child” idea. This is concocted by people at the top who want their hands on property tax money to redistribute as they wish. It’s not in the best interests of kids, schools, or taxpayers.
LikeLike
Ah the choice party trick.
“Educated” is right.
It’s a money grab AJ. Those who believe Public education is the best way to utilize pooled money via taxes are sad to see what has taken a very long to build up torn apart.
Your words, particularly the ones that mock and reveal a cavalier attitude that is still somewhat reticent (like why are you reading this blog if you are that certain of choice? Choice is prevailing–Go enjoy it while it lasts) are not convincing, if that is what your intention is (I still can’t figure out what your intention is), but I will say this. If you are a McCrory fan, I hope you are a wealthy man. Because his actions do not indicate that he really cares about you unless you are. Or unless profit can be made from you.
Dollars following a child is not a prudent use of collective spending power. It would be like putting money out on Halloween for people to go buy their own candy. It sort of defeats the beauty of a shared experience, which is one of the attributes of public schooling.
But you are correct in that DOE has overstepped its bounds and out of insecurity for a myriad of reasons our previous Governor accepted a poison apple on our behalf. But that factor does not clear the way for throwing collective wisdom and wise fiscal use (and that does not mean no taxes, so if you are in the no taxes group I got nothin for ya except enjoy those roads, stop lights and emergency services while they are still there for you).
It is hard to accept that we have to navigate through life with fellow citizens and not despite them. But once you accept that, it ain’t so bad. You might even discover you like people.
Try it
LikeLike
Out the window. I forgot to finish a thought
2 wrongs don’t make a right.
In my opinion Race to the Top is wrong. And choice is not wise.
LikeLike
Hey ajbruno,
I have a question for you.
Respond to this man who has no children :
He writes….
“That $4000.00 you mentioned is part my money!
Why should I fund your children’s education at all?
If I have no neighborhood school to boost my property value, no games, plays or festivals to attend at low to no cost, what is in It for me?
Why should my money follow your child right out of my world?
What if I deeply disagree with the religion you want to spend my tax dollars indroctrinating your offspring into?
My money does not belong to your child.”
So,
Should we discontinue public education and just let everyone pay for what the want or can afford?
Or shall we ask everyone to chip in toward education and in return give them some benefit and some voice?
LikeLike
Please don’t leave us! We need you and your help!
LikeLike
Ed Berger,
Thank you for speaking up for children in Arizona and across the nation. Please keep fighting for what is right. Your research, passion, eloquence, and powerful voice are important and appreciated.
LikeLike
Take a rest Ed, but come back ready to fight. Things are heating up in Arizona. If you haven’t seen the latest–please see: http://www.azcentral.com//news/politics/articles/20140212arizona-furor-over-huppenthal-robocalls.html?source=nletter-
Then see: http://www.arizonaea.org/home/530.htm
People in this state are finally getting angry. Maybe it was a good thing that Mr. Huppenthal blundered. By the way, Brahm Resnik is the reporter that told me he wants to interview Dr. Ravitch if she comes to Arizona. I’m still working on that. February 22 is the showing of the movie “Standardization….” at ASU. Badass teachers are trying to get the word out about the movie. I am angry but excited that things are heating up.
LikeLike