This article by Michael Brenner, a professor of international relations at the University of Pittsburgh, is a trenchant summary of the relentless attack on public education launched by the Obama administration and backed by billions of federal and private dollars.
Brenner begins:
“A feature of the Obama presidency has been his campaign against the American public school system, eating way at the foundations of elementary education. That means the erosion of an institution that has been one of the keystones of the Republic. The project to remake it as a mixed public/private hybrid is inspired by a discredited dogma that charter schools perform better. This article of faith serves an alliance of interests — ideological and commercial — for whom the White House has been point man. A President whose tenure in office is best known for indecision, temporizing and vacillation has been relentless since day one in using the powers of his office to advance the cause. Such conviction and sustained dedication is observable in only one other area of public policy: the project to expand the powers and scope of the intelligence agencies that spy on, and monitor the behavior of persons and organizations at home as well as abroad.
“The audacity of the project is matched by the passive deference that it is accorded. There is no organized opposition — in civil society or politics. Only a few outgunned elements fight a rearguard action against a juggernaut that includes Republicans and Democrats, reactionaries and liberals — from Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York to the nativist Christian Right of the Bible Belt. All of this without the national “conversation” otherwise so dear to the hearts of the Obama people, without corroboration of its key premises, without serious review of its consequences, without focused media attention.
“This past week, as the deadline approached for states to make their submissions to Arne Duncan’s Department of Education requesting monies appropriated under the Race to the Top initiative, we were reminded that the DOE has decreed that no proposal will be considered where the state government has put a cap on charter schools. In other words, the federal government has put its thumb heavily on the scales of local deliberations as to what approach toward charter schools best serves their communities’ interests. Penalties are being imposed on those who choose to limit, in any quantitative way, the charter school movement.
“This heavy-handed use of federal leverage by the Obama administration should not come as a surprise. After all, Obama himself has been a consistent, highly vocal advocate of “privatization.” He has travelled the country from coast to coast, like Johnny Appleseed, sowing distrust of public schools and – especially – public school teachers. They have been blamed for what ails America – the young unprepared for the 21st century globalized economy; the shortage of engineers; high drop-out rates; school districts’ financial woes, whatever.*”
Please read the entire article, and you will hear loud echoes of the many voices who have posted here: the demoralized teachers, the frustrated parents, the outraged students. We are the outgunned rearguard. And we will not be silent. Our voices will grow louder and louder as we demand an end to policies that destroy public education and demonize teachers and stigmatize students.
Join us at the first annual conference of the Network for Public Education on March 1-2 in Austin, Texas, where we will strengthen our resolve to stop the juggernaut of privatization.
Margaret Mead said it: “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.

it is stunning; I copied out a paragraph and sent it to the Governor’s email because only two people signed off on our Race to the Top (misnomer) grant; the commissioner and the governor. At least it is on the permanent , hard drive at the state house that I make this statement with help from M. Brenner.
LikeLike
Bravo for Brenner. Best articulation of the state if the real education nation in a long time. As Diane Ravitch herself said in a polite company setting last week in Raleigh “this might sound harsh. But it’s true.” So is this tour de force essay.
LikeLike
I used this paragraph from the Brenner article in writing to the Governor:
quote: “Such conviction and sustained dedication is observable in only one other area of public policy: the project to expand the powers and scope of the intelligence agencies that spy on, and monitor the behavior of persons and organizations at home as well as abroad.”
Obviously the governor is blind to the harms being done to education. I am in touch with Ed Markey’s staff calling them about the invasion of student privacy with tests and keeping records on the students over their life history and their family — a policy of abuse. I will continue to speak out; I know there are already school committees that have brought this message to the Board of Education.
I cannot give up on these issues because Arne Duncan is destroying public education; and your contracts with Pearson/Parcc and vendors such as InBloom will eventually be revealed to more of the public and the taxpayers in Massachusetts.
LikeLike
I also sent the Governor this paragraph from Brenner’s article (in a separate email)
STAFF:
this quote is from Michael Brenner, Professor,
quote; “A feature of the Obama presidency has been his campaign against the American public school system, eating away at the foundations of elementary education. That means the erosion of an institution that has been one of the keystones of the Republic. ”
Lech Walesa in Poland says Obama disillusioned him; well he did more than that to me I was just so naive I didn’t see what Obama had in mind when he put Arne Duncan in charge of education.
I know there are people who want the commissioner for child welfare removed; I have been telling you for some time I want Mitchell Chester removed because he supports these policies from Arne Duncan. I imagine M. Chester is out of state more than any other official because he has to go and push his agenda for Pearson/Parcc…. I imagine he already has the contract in hand to sign when he leaves and the teachers and school committees are asked to clean up his mess he has made with PARCC.”
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Crazy Normal – the Classroom Exposé.
LikeLike
Its really painful to acknowledge that the first Black President is the leader in this deform education movement. It makes me wish that Hillary had been elected. How could a black man work to destroy systems that so many black people helped to create. Public education for all and equality of treatment. Yes, the reality was different than the ideal but as far as charters, that reality is a complete reversal of what public education is about. We don’t dispute that charters have a right to exist, we just don’t think they should have public money to promote their private discriminations and causes. Promoting charters has lead to depletion of funds for public schools, demonizing teachers for lack of student achievement and deprofessionalization of the teaching profession. Yes Obama, this is what YOU started.
LikeLike
As a old white lady, I was so glad to see Obama elected. I remember how upbeat my poor black and Latino students were, and I celebrated what I thought was a momentous occasion with them and for the health of our country. Obama has abandoned them. I don’t understand how the same man can push the destruction of public schools and all they represent and turnaround and work toward universal healthcare. I don’t understand how he can dare to trumpet old platitudes about the greatness of the United States. It used to be a place where people could dare to dream. Now it is just a nightmare for so many.
LikeLike
You summed up many of my thoughts so well.
LikeLike
This is NEOLIBERAL education reform – it’s been coming in under BOTH parties. This MUST be recognized.
LikeLike
The neoliberal glasses through which they view the world:
Black + White + Brown + Yellow + Red = GREEN
LikeLike
Amy, your’re right!!!!!!
LikeLike
Neoliberalism is the cancer, the poison, that is destroying democracies all over the world. What these criminals want is to pilfer public treasuries for private gain. They want to turn the US into what Chile was under Pinochet regardless of Chile’s current policies.
LikeLike
That was why he was picked. The “race card” could neutralize opposition to his extremist policies on education, especially among the African American community, Social Security and Medicare, and a whole host of other issues. He is NOT a Democrat or even close to being one.
LikeLike
Exactly.
LikeLike
There is precedence for that, by the way: Cory Booker. Look where he is now, and look where he is likely to be if this neoliberal insanity isn’t stopped.
LikeLike
Here’s where I’d like Harlan Underhill to chime in with me and cry out our mutual disgust and loathing of Barack Obama . . . We see him from different angles, and our overlap is small and narrow, but the part that we have in common has traction and stickiness . . . .
Obama and his wife are an affront to democracy, but so are the cronies they aid and abet . . . .
LikeLike
It is the painful truth about Obama, and I have said it for years. This president will be seen as the worst president in the history of the United States for his education policies alone. His policies are a naked assault on public institutions that support democracy, and they are there to further enrich the backers responsible for his candidacy in the first place. No Republican would have EVER gotten away with what he has done, but that is why it was critical the neoliberals and plutocrats infiltrated the Democratic Party to destroy it from within. Obama was their puppet, and they are getting ready to put forward another puppet to run on the DP ticket in 2016.
The warning signs were all there about this fraud clear back in 2007, when he ran for president. Although the media refused to vet him, being also in bed with the plutocratic/neoliberal interests, his rhetoric attacking public education and Social Security were there if you’d have paid attention. Not enough people, thanks to 24/7 propaganda about his “historic” presidency. It didn’t matter how utterly without credentials he had or how corrupt his Wall Street/plutocrat connections were.
I don’t want to say “I told you so,” but I warned people long ago about him. But even he exceeded my already low expectations of him by appointing the utterly corrupt, intellectually challenged Arne Duncan to head the Department of Education. Duncan should be impeached and removed for violating the separation of powers between the federal government and state/local governments on education policies. He is literally dictating, through blackmail and other schemes, how states and school districts will run their programs. Completely illegal, but he in turn is taking marching orders from corrupt billionaires like Bill Gates and Eli Broad. The real Duncan hasn’t been run out of town on a rail is because 90-percent or more of Congress actually supports destroying public education. That’s how utterly compromised both political parties have been in the past ten years or so.
LikeLike
Second paragraph should have “not enough people did” pay attention to what he was saying.
Last paragraph should read “the reason” in place of “the real.”
I always type faster than I should.
LikeLike
You’re right. I said the same thing in 2008, but people didn’t want to hear it. They still don’t.
LikeLike
Both you and Mr Rendo have gone beyond the pale in your discussion. President Obama needs to spend some time with Diane. He would listen.
Hard to disguise hatred. Easy to find Obama bashing on the web.
We will never get anything done….either side of anything….when hateful rhetoric is used.
I am tremendously mad and let down in this president’s position in education. But, right now, there is more public awareness as to what is actually occurring in our public schools. I think it is called a “movement” or a “revolution”. It is picking up steam.
and to end on a political note, (as long as we are talking about bad guys) does anyone remember Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, and Cheney? Now there were some nasty, deceitful fellas.
I just may stick to my baseball website. Go, Diamondbacks!
LikeLike
Elaine,
I have never voted GOP. I have only voted Democrat.
I knew what to expect with GW Bush, and he, Cheney, and Rice should be rounded up as war criminals and arrested peramently.
I am bashing Obama because he campaigns around as a liberal, as a progressive, and he governs in an opposite manner.
As Paul Krugman once stated, he is a mild version of the current culture of the Republican party and its extremism.
Yes, there is much dialogue generated about public education, and the conversations are invaluable.
Obama is not . . . . .
Stick around here, lose yourself in more politics than in baseball, and then we’ll all stand to change the world for the better. I know where my priorities are . . . . .
LikeLike
Oh, please, Elaine. Stop it. Repeat: Obama is not a Democrat. I have been a lifelong Democrat and saw this fraud coming a mile away.
LikeLike
The “D” after his name has really inoculated him from criticism, but the Democratic Party has been slowly hijacked over the years by neoliberals and Wall Street gangsters. I am plenty old enough to remember how things used to be in this country, even accounting for the racist southern Democrats, and things haven’t been this horrible and divisive. The GOP in the old days, meaning the sixties and seventies, were never this off the charts, but now we have fakes as Democrats trying to look reasonable when in fact they will do exactly as the neoliberals want and what the GOP would do if they had the chance. Washington politics has been enthralled with Milton Friedman neoliberalism since the Reagan years (and even a bit during the Carter years with that administration’s emphasis on deregulation), and it is has been disastrous all around for the vast majority of Americans.
Wake up and smell the coffee, please.
LikeLike
Susan Nunes,
“Oh, please, Elaine. Stop it. Repeat: Obama is not a Democrat. I have been a lifelong Democrat and saw this fraud coming a mile away.”
TAGO all the way! LOVE it. Could not have said it better myself.
Thank you . . . . . . .
LikeLike
Elaine, I would love to talk to President Obama. Maybe when my blog reaches 20 million hits, he will invite me to talk. Right now, he listens to business leaders, Chamber of Commerce, Business Roundtable, Gates, Broad. Not me.
LikeLike
That is his constituency, Diane, very sad to say, not to the millions who naively voted for him.
People should have read Paul Street’s work about him early on. They’d have seen what was coming.
LikeLike
Diane,
Given the opportunity – where would you even begin?
LikeLike
NY teacher, I have the 3 minute elevator speech. Also the 5-10 minute ones.
LikeLike
We’d love to hear your 3 min. elevator talk (bullet points).
LikeLike
NY Teacher, I only give that 3 minute elevator talk in elevators or–if I am ever invited–in the White House. Otherwise come to any event where I am speaking and you get the 30-minute version. Same speech, more explanation.
LikeLike
Diane,
If the president calls you, talk to his wife also, who is just as bent as he is on privatizing education . . . .
LikeLike
I’m curious. What has she said or done to make you think that? she doesn’t get that much press.
LikeLike
Obama can’t take the time to speak with Diane: he’s too busy playing golf on Larry Ellison’s private course in the California desert, to which he retired after a photo op in the Central Valley, where he was urging “shared sacrifice” in the face of a five hundred-year drought that threatens to turn America’s fruit and salad bowl into a salt-encrusted desert.
When these people talk about “shared sacrifice,” it’s time to grab your wallet and triple-bolt the door, because they’re coming for everything you’ve got.
In the Coachella Valley – average annual rainfall: 4.83 inches – where Obama played with his 0.01% owners, private golf courses use 17 percent of the Valley’s water.
If anyone thinks this man, a Trojan Horse for the Overclass since Day One, cares one whit for this country’s public schoolchildren, other than as data sets to be monetized, please contact me: I have a great deal on a bridge to sell you.
(swampland.time.com/2014/02/17/obama-golfs-water-guzzling-desert-courses-amid-the-drought)
LikeLike
He deserves the criticism. He is in power now and has the power to change his harmful policies. He has done a great deal of damage in this country as far as education goes. He claims to want to increase the middle class but has turned the teaching profession into a 2 yr job with low pay and benefits. Why promote charters when the only people rewarded are the wealthy CEOs? How does that help the middle class? What bull.
LikeLike
I really have to disagree. This is not just about Obama, it is the deep disappointment of old-fashioned liberals who believed the progressive rhetoric in Obama’s campaign speeches & thought perhaps he might really represent a change to the bipartisan policies that led us down the garden path from 1980 to 2008. No hatred of Obama here. Just resignation, recognition that he is part of the same-old same-old. I end up feeling about him the same way I did about Bush Sr & Carter — well, at least they’re cautious, not reckless; perhaps their choices will save us out of some of the worst alternatives.
LikeLike
This begs the question as to why the teacher unions endorsed him for a second term. Didn’t AFT head Weingarten urge members to support Obama rather than Romney in July, 2012, without apparently getting any meaningful concessions from Obama? Ditto NEA president Dennis Van Roekel.
Suspect the only meaningful changes in their political responses is to change the leadership of both national unions. The Badass Teachers, Karen Lewis, those grad students whose tweets brilliantly assault TFA, this (Ms. Ravitch’s ) blog and others like EduShyster, Mercedes Schneider, etc. are all contributing more than the two being paid to lobby for teachers and public schools.
LikeLike
Susan,
I voted for Obama because Romney made no secret of his desire to privatize public education and destroy any rights for teachers. I don’t regret it. I would do it again. But in education, he has been a disaster.
I just hope public education survives the rest of his term, and that the next candidate does not go begging hat-in-hand to the same hedge fund managers and entrepreneurs who forged Obama’s anti-public school agenda.
LikeLike
Hillary wont have to beg. Her machine is firmly in place and the neoliberal carousel will keep on turning.
LikeLike
This is a top down heavy handed administration which punishes those who do not follow them. Why teachers somehow thought they were immune I simply do not know.
Remember: Then they came for me–and there was no one left to speak for me.- Martin Niemoller
LikeLike
Readers should open up the link and read the whole article. Hits all the points.
Obama has thrown public education and public school teachers under the bus.
LikeLike
It is an outstanding article. I still can remember the national media doing hit jobs on teachers a few years ago about evaluations and qualifications, etc. You know that bs came straight from the White House.
LikeLike
“I still can remember the national media doing hit jobs on teachers a few years ago ”
Have the his jobs stopped? Slowed?
I still seem to hear “ourfailingschools” quite a bit, also “dropout factory” and the good old dependable lazy and or greedy teacher. And that is just from NPR. Imagine what can be heard on FOX!
LikeLike
I have taken to scrawling pretty PO’ed notes back directly on every $ solicitation I get from DNC, Dem party, Obama, OFA, DNCC, DSCC any of that claptrap– and junk phone calls- I figure if they hear the Message: Do. Not. Repeat. Privateer. Talking. Points. enough maybe he will stop. But it has not proved a successful tactic, not yet anyway. But it only takes a minute and I have to hope it registers on those jerks at some level.
Meanwhile a fellow parent from Athens GA wrote this compelling piece for Valerie Strauss recently as an Open Letter to Obama: http://wapo.st/1exP9XA
LikeLike
A wonderful letter about a very sad subject.
LikeLike
COMPULSORY SCHOOL ATTENDANCE 101
Compulsory school attendance is nearly universally considered to have become a permanent given of our advanced society and a foundational institution that cannot be avoided or eliminated in all US states, except for formal exceptions, such as homeschooling and on-line courses authorized through approved and strictly regulated processes. Schooling by fiat is generally regarded as the main reason for much of the economic and scientific progress we have witnessed in the US and as the vehicle that is essential to and most responsible for a superior level of education. These intrusive laws have been profoundly misunderstood and over-rated, as have the schools they mandate, however. Conflicts and controversies in the field of education that have become chronic and widespread are rarely connected in any meaningful way to the original passage of unconstitutional laws that established attendance requirements and presumed to prescribe education. This course is an attempt to illuminate and explain what is actually happening and why.
The following is a cursory breakdown relative to the process of establishing a schooling system in its entirety and of the myriad incidental issues that arise, along with the particular dynamics, beliefs, attitudes, conflicts, and habits which inevitably develop as a direct consequence of these laws.
I.) DEFINING WHAT SCHOOL WILL (AND WILL NOT) BE.
The drafting of an attendance law within a state governing body establishes a fundamental need for oversight and control via some entity that will have the authority to determine for all participants a very comprehensive list of things relative to consistent times, duration, ages, and various other parameters for the schooling of youth. As a state government with legislative authority and concomitant responsibility for all that falls within its purview, those in charge MUST make extremely consequential and definitive decisions. These are not mere recommendations – they each have the force of law and must all be mandatory to a large extent, in order to assure structure, order, consistency, compliance, clarity, etc. Questions that MUST be answered are:
A.) Who will teach and how will their qualifications be determined?
B.) What will be taught to whom at what stages or ages, and what will not be allowed into the “curriculum” or allowed as influences, values, ideology, (i.e., subversion, communism, religion, sexual images or information, etc.)?
C.) How will student accomplishment or achievement be ascertained and reported and what sort of standards for academic progress and attainment will be acceptable for certification?
D.) What kinds of behavior will be tolerated or encouraged? How will behavior patterns be inculcated? What will be the consequences for behavior that is deemed intolerable? What will be entered into the student’s “permanent record” and by whom? How will academic performance be separated from behavioral indices? Will corporal punishment be permitted and how will it be administered, and if so by whom? What sort of dress and appearance will be permitted? What about “free speech” and student rights? Is there a standard for verbal abuse by staff? Will students be allowed to hug, touch each other, or communicate during class sessions? These are just a small sampling of the issues relative to conduct and the range of actions prescribed in response.
E.) What will be the responsibilities of parents and what will they be encouraged to contribute, or not allowed to do with respect to schooling? Grand programs have been launched to increase parent “involvement”, yet why is it that parents are frequently made to feel inadequate and incompetent and why do they so seldom feel welcome or find any actual place for themselves in the classroom? If the state is ultimately responsible for schooling, will the parents be excluded, or will some level of participation be expected from them? If the teacher or some other school official is the designated expert or authority on a topic or in a subject area, what will happen if the parent wishes the child taught differently? When does the presence of the parent in a classroom become a “distraction”, an interference, or a nuisance?
F.) What shape will the hierarchical bureaucracy take? There must be a chain of command to respond to and interact with state operatives and there must be a degree of consistency that prevents any perturbations at the lower levels from disturbing and frustrating or provoking those at the higher levels, whose responsibilities are immense. Authority becomes increasingly diffuse, stratified, and anonymous to parents and students.
G.) Who will select instructional materials and prescribe methods, techniques, and the overall philosophical approach, or the school “culture”? No discretion can be left to the teachers who have daily and somewhat intimate contact with students in creating, designing or choosing texts, instructional and resource materials, or curriculum, since unknowns and unpredictability or any measure of flexibility would wreak havoc if they were in conflict with organizational objectives or the directives of authorities.
H.) What decision will be made about whether or not to try to reintegrate students who are in violation of rules, suspended or expelled, absent without excuse, or otherwise not willing or able to comply with the daily demands and requirements? Truancy, dropping out, refusal to cooperate or remain passive, defiance of rules and authority, and other problems present the necessity for an entire cottage industry of enforcers, alternative classes or schools, special programs, researchers, and exceptions to guidelines.
I.) When every child is required to be registered and to attend by a certain age, how is the message convincingly conveyed to all children that schooling is a personal privilege and a benefit, and how is it possible to allow for initiative on the part of each child after initiative has been pre-emptively usurped? Can what is forced upon one ever be processed as a privilege? Can initiative be replaced subsequently by a weak substitute and remain a viable attribute? We know the answers to these questions.
J.) Is it likely that children whose experience has been predetermined and designed for them by others for twelve formative years and whose feeling, desires, and impulses have been subjugated to the needs and whims of others in a programmed and crowded school environment will have the inclination or skills to participate in democracy as adults?
The foregoing is merely the tip of a monstrous iceberg. The opportunities for new issues and questions about policy and procedure to arise are nearly infinite. In each state, there do in fact exist huge corpuses of rules, regulations, guidelines, procedures, and all manner of legal and official statements that are part of the codified law, all which attempt to define or anticipate every possible circumstance and every potential nuance of meaning or behavior that could ever arise to create a liability for authorities. No such system could possibly exist without a cumbersome and lethargic bureaucracy of immense proportions, fraught naturally with complications and misanthropic influences.
II.) RELATIONSHIPS AND HUMAN DYNAMICS.
If there is any truth to the old adage that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely, no one should be surprised that schools are plagued by various types and degrees of corruption. The passage of laws requiring attendance necessitate a top-down structure with power distributed rather arbitrarily to various authorities, officials, and administrators. Their power is not always conspicuous to observers, however it is immense, anonymous to students and most parents, and extremely difficult to challenge.
One always hopes that those who hold power will exercise it wisely and that they will have benign intentions, with knowledge commensurate to their ability to manipulate and control people, resources, and organizational structures. Some are indeed completely dedicated and uncompromising. Yet, that is asking the impossible for the institutions as a whole, as the chaotic history of public schooling shows very clearly. Even the very best administrators are subject to pressures and demands from all directions.
A.) A great panoply of research from diverse fields shows that in learning and education, there must be a high degree of trust between teacher and student for students to thrive. There must be a relationship that is mutually respectful, affectionate, and authentic for optimal benefit. By setting schooling up at the outset to look and feel more like social engineering, paternalistic bad medicine or remediation, or punishment, and by establishing conditions that are inherently imbued with elements of arbitrary power and authority, we have poisoned the atmosphere and the water. We have erected monumental and monumentally destructive barriers against ourselves that are virtually insurmountable. The teacher has thereby unwittingly or involuntarily become the default role taker, the rule enforcer, the nanny, the informer (reporting on any infraction or misbehavior to parents, administrators, and in the permanent record) and an authority figure to be feared and obeyed, to the detriment of her or his relationship with students. The growth and development of students academically and otherwise is overshadowed by political correctness and the demands of the monolithic system.
B.) With a hierarchical authoritarian paradigm, the interests of children are secondary to politics (small “p”) and institutional mandates. Teachers must sacrifice autonomy and frequently their primary mission as well because, regardless of loud and grandiose rhetoric and assurances of child-centered policies, there is an organizational need for standardization, for compliance with dictates, for “accountability”, for competing among and between individuals and classes, and for projecting the proper image to the parents and the community, at all cost. Testing, grading, behavioral evaluations, and the production of material evidence of work performed and supposed progress made are essential to demonstrate administrative and individual competence, despite the failure in many cases to actually enhance the lives or skills and abilities of students. These systemic needs and the hypocrisy that is built into the institutions are solely the consequence of the legal framework within the state apparatus.
C.) With the exception of a tiny minority of individuals from affluent families, all parents have attended schools, where for a decade and more the message has been hammered home for them that, if one; “pays attention, works hard to complete assigned materials and tasks, obeys authorities, and stays in school, they will receive a good education”. This is presented as a virtual guarantee. All are aware that school is mandatory. Therefore, why should any parent not expect the schools to be primarily responsible for educating their children in their stead? What would make them feel adequate to perform that function if official state supervised schools require twelve full years to do the job? What would make children believe that their own parents are competent in the field of education to second guess a teacher, or that they might venture out on their own to learn?
D.) In this unhealthy scenario, the teacher must have quiet passivity to reach all students; discipline is a matter of urgent concern; obedience and compliance are powerful social expectations, and parents are required to support the school in maintaining “good order”, structure, study, and discipline. If the child deviates in any way from what is demanded and expected, the parent must be informed. Pressure is applied to obtain their assistance in forcing the child to conform. The parent in all too many cases is thereby pitted against the child and alienated from the child, compromising their relationship in a profound manner. These results come with the territory. No amount of PR and no amount of professional advice or advocacy can render these pernicious tendencies harmless.
E.) The unmistakable message relative to education given compulsory attendance is that education is something that is “received”, or provided to the child (or done to the child). Under these circumstances, how would a child imagine him or herself to be the primary agent of his or her education? Perception is everything. Experience is habit forming.
III. THE INCREDIBLE MORAL DILEMMAS
A.) If education were just a matter of training in technical skills, language, and facts or information, schooling administered through conscription might satisfy a majority of citizens. However, there is a major moral component to any comprehensive and real education, by any reasonable definition. One cannot be educated without regular close encounters with values, morals, ethics, philosophy, human behavior and history, interpersonal relationships involving intimacy and honesty, religion, etc., etc. Yet, schools must receive students from any and all cultures and treat them all uniformly. Schools must admit children from diverse ethnic and religious backgrounds. Is there anyone anywhere naïve enough to believe that schools can somehow strip the curriculum and the entire milieu of bias toward any moral tenets, philosophy or worldview, while still transmitting knowledge and information relative to these things at every stage and in every segment of coursework?
B.) Furthermore, as an agency now of government, schools are prohibited from promoting or favoring any particular religious or ideological viewpoint. It is against the law to exclude the personal preferences students and their families practice with respect to religion, or to promote one religious or moral system over others in even subtle ways. The result is precisely what we have seen for many decades. We have schools whose graduates are often confused about customs, traditions and moral values and who are sorely lacking in moral development or maturity. We have the most bland, ill-defined, and meaningless set of platitudes and guidelines imaginable. We have education minus 90% of what education is and must be to be called education.
IV. THE GREAT INDOCTRINATION TRAP
A.) The required presence of children with widely differing abilities; unique learning styles; widely divergent backgrounds and interests; both identified and unidentified handicaps; language differences, and various other issues and problems demands a ‘lowest common denominator’ approach. Unless budgets permit individualized instruction, all must be served and none can be ignored, neglected, or left behind. In addition, as in the above section, values are a problem. Homogenization is essential. Great care must be taken not to offend any group or to provoke any special interest to challenge the content of instruction.
History must reflect certain consensus views, while telling stories that cannot be misconstrued to be promoting any ideology or value system. What is left after everything of meaning and relevance is removed is an officially approved, inert, neutral, colorless, disconnected from everything else mishmash of facts and statements that are floating in a sea of trivia and improvised reality. The curriculum is thus nothing more than an indoctrination in what ostensible experts have distilled down to the least provocative or interesting data and skill sets possible.
B.) An even more insidious type of indoctrination stems from the need for conformity and uniformity, passive compliance, and unquestioning acceptance of authority and of the pronouncements of authority figures. Those in authority are also the authorities in subject matter, whether or not they have the requisite experience and expertise. The child is indoctrinated with respect to obedience and servility and to his or her intellectual inferiority. This is not subtle or left to chance. There are constant reminders of what sort of conduct and attitude is acceptable and woe be to any child that doesn’t fit the mold. This is why mind and behavior-altering drugs such as Ritalin have gained such popularity. If the child still has a spirit, that spirit must be broken, or the child will be expelled or otherwise disposed of.
V. REFORM IS A MIRAGE
A.) Change is not difficult. Change is not slow or torturous. Change is not coming to a school near you soon. Change that truly matters or on any significant scale and that can persist over time is effectively blocked permanently expressly because of the laws that compel attendance. With the exception of experimental projects, temporary test programs, and research that is limited and subject to death by defunding or neglect, there can be no reforms of any consequence, because reforms that matter and benefit students automatically negate the authority structure and circumvent restrictive rules, conditions, traditions, and policies.
B.) Ironically, the people who have been most critical of the schools and their stultifying environments and who have in the past advocated for reform have suddenly become their staunch defenders! A pernicious new breed of so-called reformers is trying to privatize schooling or to operate schools on business models hoping to turn schools into training academies strictly to mass produce market-oriented automatons. As always, the core problem is being ignored in order to address superficial or secondary problems, leading to more of the same all over again, regardless of which interests win this particular round.
SUMMARY:
Traditions often have great value and are worth preserving. However, some traditions are better sent to the dustbin of history. Compulsory school attendance belongs in the latter category. It may be hard to imagine that the entire population of the country, with the exception of about thirty stubborn contrarians such as this author is dead wrong about something that has been elevated to such a place of veneration and virtual worship as compulsory attendance has been, but that is what the facts conclusively prove. The idea that we should all roll over and play dead, acquiescing in the acceptance of something we know to be harmful to children, while continuing to perpetuate these legally mandated systems that are dysfunctional and destructive, because everyone has been conditioned for 150 years to tolerate their baleful consequences, is repulsive and quite frankly disgusting.
Overturning the attendance laws in one state, let alone all fifty states is not a task for the timid. Some people will wring their hands or throw them up in the air when confronted with the impossibility of swimming upstream against such a powerful current. A relentless tide may be a more accurate metaphor. Some people will wax philosophical and say that, “what will be, will be”, or they will ask, who are we to oppose traditions and mythology so firmly entrenched?
Who we are is Americans and what we are is adults responsible to generations of young people who must have and who deserve institutions that are not perennially gridlocked by sclerotic conditions, kept as they are in perpetuity by unyielding laws and the power those laws assign to clueless and clumsy people unable to extricate themselves from the labyrinth of bureaucracy, political trappings, self-interest, and muddled thinking. Dare to challenge them and throw caution to the wind. To do less is gross negligence.
CSA 102 will cover the federal government’s increasing role and the myth of local control. I know this is painful to accept and it is traumatic to think one has been barking up a dead tree, but we all eventually have our moments of truth. Sorry.
LikeLike
Great news Hope it spreads. One can only hope..
LikeLike