Over the years, we have seen a steady dumbing down of American culture, especially in the mass media. Whether newspapers, radio, or television, we have lost many of our well-educated, cultured, well-informed thinkers. Often they have been replaced by shock jocks, ranting talk show hosts, and an entire cable channel devoted to trashing liberals, liberal social programs, and labor unions.
I miss Walter Cronkite, Dan Rather, and dozens of other smart journalists who brought more than their opinions to their journalism. Bill Moyers is one of that breed. We need more.
Another thing I don’t understand is why people on the far right like to paint their own country in the most negative tones while pretending to be patriots. I used to see a lot of this in rightwing think tanks, where people seized gleefully on every negative statistic to prove what a bad country this is; how horrible our public schools are; how dumb our teachers are; how we are doomed. Michelle Rhee’s advertisements often make me think she really hates this country, that no one is smart enough or good enough for her. .
All of this is a long-winded way of disassociating myself from Glen Beck’s screed against Common Core and public education. It is called “Conform: Exposing the Truth about Common Core and Public Education.”
Here is a review by Hilary Tone of Media Matters that gives you an idea of how false and hysterical this book is. It is clear that Beck did not read “Reign of Error.” I won’t be reviewing “Conform.” I am not interested in reading or writing about crazy rightwing attacks on our great American tradition of public education or on our nation.
In the same vein as the one now being mined by Glenn Beck is a video about a Florida legislator denouncing the Common Core because it will make all children gay. Seriously.
This is crazy stuff, and it makes it difficult if not impossible to have a reasonable discussion about the pros and cons of the Common Core. The Common Core is not wicked, evil, or dangerous, nor are those who wrote it.
Perhaps my critique of Common Core is too sophisticated for those who want simplistic answers. I don’t condemn those who want to use Common Core. I don’t think they are wrong or unAmerican. If they like it, they should use it.
My advice to states that want to use it, who think it is better than what they do now, is this:
1. Convene your best classroom teachers and review CCSS. Fix whatever needs fixing. Recognize that not all students learn at the same pace. Leave time for play in K-3.
2. Do not use the federally funded tests. Do not spend billions on hardware and software for testing. Let teachers write their own tests. Use standardized tests sparingly, like a state-level NAEP, to establish trends, not to label or rank children and teachers.
3. Do not use results of CC to produce ratings to “measure” teacher quality. Study after study, report after report warns that this is a very bad idea that will harm the quality of education by focusing too much on standardized tests, narrowing the curriculum, and forcing teachers to teach to the tests.
4. Do not let your judgement be clouded by people who make hysterical claims about the standards or those who wrote them.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
The funny thing is, they hide behind the mask of calling themselves Christians. They are anything but Christians. Beck and so many others are darkness masquerading as light. They have sold their souls for the love of money….period. Thank you for this post of truth
Agreed.
Beck is Mormon.
And that’s Christian. As a Mormon, by the way, I DO NOT claim him.
Awfully judgmental there, Lionel. Do you really presume to know the condition of another man’s soul just because you disagree with him?
“By their fruits ye shall know them.”
It is hard to even know what people like Glenn Beck even think. His posture is only consistent in so much as he aims to promote as much froth, anger and anxiety as possible. His core demographic is ill informed, older, and whiter than average and, frankly, scared that the country is changing in ways they don’t understand. To people like Beck, that is a business plan.
And it allows people like David Brooks to assume he and equivalents of him on the left (assuming there really are any) are all that there is behind CCSS opposition. We are I’ll served both from the hucksters and snake oil salesmen AND by our venerable institutions.
“ill informed, older, and whiter than average…”
Why bring MSNBC, Obama’s cabinet, and the readers of The Nation into this?
Funny, but I’ve never read anything by Glenn Beck in The Nation. Must have missed that.
https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/659/03/
Nice try, but my comment was just as valid as yours.
You tried to go all ad hominem, and I simply pointed out that the exact same skewer you tried to employ can just as easily apply to those whose views you find more simpatico with your own. Glass houses and all that.
Fixing Common Core will be the death by a thousand cuts. It needs to be replaced by the previous curriculum. Not a fan of Becks, and it is hard to know where he is coming from, but he does attack Gates head on and the whole project for profit. Diane we can not fall into the arms of the union’s “role out” defense. You did not mention Gates and his profit motives to bring computers into all of the schools. For the time being, the enemy of the enemy is a friend. Your response is too tame. Protesters are becoming “pets”.
Agree with you 100% Joseph. This post of Ms Ravitch’s does not help the anti cc movement. It hurts it. We look to her for guidance and slamming a book that exposes common core as hysterical, is not beneficial at all. I’m disappointed in this blog post to say the least. beck may be opinionated, but common core is all garbage and why on earth would Ravitch nix his statements on such? Pros to cc? Hogwash. Very unhappy to see this.
What HURTS the anti-CC movement are the Agenda21/conspiracy people. THAT hurts. Pointing out that Beck is just a bomb-thrower is a fair criticism. He is MAKING MONEY off of CC. He’s a huckster. He wrote a quicky book to cash in.
Joseph, I have mentioned Gates on a few occasions.
When the enemy of my enemy is peddling psychosis and incoherent rage I spend too much time watching my own back to be effective.
Astute observation, Daniel.
“Another thing I don’t understand is why people on the far right like to paint their own country in the most negative tones while pretending to be patriots.”
Well, I don’t think they do. They never paint the private sector negatively, for example, and there is plenty wrong with US business leadership; the “status quo” business management practices where chasing short-term returns trumps everything, some of the ethical lapses we’ve seen, the incredibly top-heavy pay scale, the lobbying and capture of regulatory agencies, and on and on.
I also don’t remember a time when the far Right supported public schools. I remember a time when Republicans supported public schools, but not the far Right. Local Republicans support public schools where I live but the chair of our state legislative ed committee just made national news for claiming public schools are socialism and advocating shutting them all down and privatizing them. He’s actually in a position of power and he wants to close them all. Not a fan of public schools, I think it’s safe to say, Common Core or no Common Core.
I don’t read Glen Beck, but has he ever said anything positive about public schools or any public entity? Isn’t this more about the “public” in public schools than any other quality or characteristic?
“Leave time for play in K-3…” Or K-12? My 9th grader is today participating in a food festival, culmination of a research project in a regents global history class. The kids prepared food and researched its history as it pertained to human migration. My point: in one of NYC’s most competitive, traditional public high schools, this project provided some play elements and a needed break from end of year regents/SAT 2 prep. Would that this were more common throughout the school system, and maybe most of all in the schools with the neediest populations.
Ms. Ravitch you want to fix cc now? When did that change? I agree 100% with Joseph’s comment. This post of Ms Ravitch’s does not help the anti cc movement. It hurts it. We look to her for guidance and slamming a book that exposes common core as hysterical, is not beneficial at all. I’m disappointed in this blog post to say the least. beck may be opinionated, but common core is all garbage and why on earth would Diane Ravitch nix his statements on such? Pros to cc? Hogwash. Very unhappy to see this.
Many people in the “anti cc movement” are just as apt to disregard a teacher’s professional expertise as are those in the “edreform movement”.
I agree with Ms. Ravitch. Let teachers take the standards and decide to keep what makes sense and get rid of what doesn’t work in the classroom.
Are you a teacher with years of experience and expertise in teaching Stacy?
Diane is not saying anything different than what she has always said about the CC standards.
Diane’s comments about the standards, above, are no change from the position that she has taken on them from very near the inception of this blog.
First of all, Beck is a right-wing hogwash–not an educator. He likes to slam whatever seems ill-fit to his taste. CC is just one of those in his hit list. He bashes CC simply because of his ‘anti-government/public” position–not because he believes in the strength of public education.
I am so disappointed. Why bring each other down in the fight against Common Core? Republicans passed a major resolution against CCSS a year ago with little recognition. The far right and far left are both against CCSS yet for different reasons. We need to stay united. You attack those against CCSS more than those in power responsible for it’s implementation.
Yep.
Sorry, but I for one will not unite with people who think that CCSS will turn all kids gay or that it’s just a communist plot or whatever. Those people are delusional and just make it too easy to dismiss all opposition to CCSS as right-wing nuttery.
What about uniting with those that think it is a plot on the part of “the oligarchy” to destroy meaningful education for the masses?
AMEN.
Attributing motivation to oligarchs is similar to giving credit to a rat for seeking food pellets in a maze.
90% of Americans want money out of political decisions. Represent.us is an organization that may welcome Beck’s following, Diane’s bloggers and all people, who understand the privatization of America is the destruction of it.
“Another thing I don’t understand is why people on the far right like to paint their own country in the most negative tones while pretending to be patriots” – I am deeply offended by that comment. First, pointing out what is wrong in this country is how things get fixed. Are we just suppose to pretend everything is great and it will go away by itself? Second, how dare you call anyone a pretend patriot? Who left you in charge of measuring someone’s patriotism? Third, You rely on a very bias, and left leaning source such as Media Matters, to “prove” Beck’s book is garbage. How about a unbiased source, or better yet, have you read the book? I’m very disappointed with you and this post !
I have read Beck’s book because I think that it is important to understand what right wing ‘media stars’ with a large following are talking about. I am afraid I agree with Ms. Ravitch regarding the tone and the hysterical nature of the claims put forth by Mr. Beck . I am on my lunch break at school, without the book in front of me, otherwise I would lay out some of the more agregious parts of Mr Beck’s screed with the hope of generating a discussion on specific ideas. Then perhaps this might turn into a more fruitful discussion.
As you stated, Dr. Ravitch, “2. Do not use the federally funded tests. Do not spend billions on hardware and software for testing. Let teachers write their own tests. Use standardized tests sparingly, like a state-level NAEP, to establish trends, not to label or rank children and teachers.”
Yes, get rid of all Standardized tests!!! Like Demark have only one standardized test during the students’ academic career. Use the money saved to hire the needed reading specialists to work with the At Risk students giving them double daily reading sessions working in tandem with the classroom teachers guided by the Constructivists philosophy – not for drill and grill phonics.
More dumbing down as in this piece from Chicago Tribune that is being run nationally 😦 http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2014-05-19/opinion/ct-defending-common-core-edit-jm-20140519_1_common-core-standards-isat
I agree with you 100% on this post today! There is nothing to add!
If we continue to paint the people with whom we disagree with the caricatures portrayed in the media, we will get nowhere in this country. It is easy to see the plank in someone else’s eye and fail to remove the one in our own. I agree that logical, coherent arguments have been replaced with shock jocks, etc, but this is not a partisan issue – both sides are guilty. As to “an entire channel devoted to bashing liberal causes,” I would have to argue that one channel hardly balances the liberal bias in the mainstream media. I read articles on Fox, Rush, The Blaze, etc. But guess what? I also read articles on Slate, MSNBC, CNN, etc. The bloggers I read come from varying viewpoints as well.
I am a conservative, yet here I am on your blog, reading almost everything. What if I bought into the picture that conservatives paint about you? What if I just believed one negative review of your book, written by someone with whom I agree about other issues? I would not have bought your book, and I would not be here. I teach Comp 1 at a community college, and I am continually telling my students to read and process arguments from people with whom they disagree. I tell them to listen, process, and then respectfully disagree. So I am disappointed with you refusing to read his book and merely believing what this reviewer (from an entirely left-leaning source) said. I read another liberal blogger, who said while she didn’t agree with everything in the book, she had more in common with him than she ever thought possible. I would say the same about your book.
I don’t like the ranting and raving. I don’t like scare tactics. I like logical arguments. But we live in a culture that wants to be fed information through entertainment, so that is what we get. BUT, there are some good arguments to be found among the over-the-top showmanship. This is one reason I refuse to watch videos of any of these people. I read transcripts, so I can get to the point without having to listen to the other junk.
And while you may not have a problem with the liberal progressive agenda that is being pushed through curriculum in a very subversive way, many do. And that is why I am watching many of my friends, who have supported public education for years, pulling their kids out. They have had enough of the indoctrination. Again, I can use my Comp 1 book as an example. It is a book full of essays the students read, we talk about, and then they write their own arguments. Every one of the essays in the book (and this is the third one I have taught from) is from a liberal point-of-view. Every one. That is not helping to teach students to evaluate arguments; it is indoctrination. When every reading selection, every word problem, every science lesson is being presented in one certain way, it is not a healthy environment. But I agree with you that these issues are clouding the discussion about Common Core. I think the issues need to be separated, so that we can deal with them in the most effective way possible. But I also have a tendency to think that much like the issue of over-testing, it is hard to separate from CC.
As to the negativity disguised as patriotism, I had to laugh because I have heard that exact idea used to describe the left. Again, the plank in our own eye… Until we can all truly listen to each other and stop believing that ______________ are three-eyed monsters out to destroy America, we are going to get nowhere. It goes both ways.
“Do not use results of CC to produce ratings to “measure” teacher quality.”
I’m not a teacher or an expert on testing, but I am convinced some of the teacher-bashing in ed reform circles is political. Some. The truth is “ed reform” is as much political as it is substantive, and that makes sense: they’re lobbying to change laws.
It’s politically easier to attack teachers than it is to question the parents or even question student effort.
I don’t go along with this with my own child because I think it’s a poor message to send to kids. The fact is he plays a huge role in whether he learns something or not. I don’t really see him (or want him to see himself) as a passive observer of his own class. In my experience too, some teachers are a great “fit” for some kids but less of a great fit for others, and that makes sense to me too because these are human beings we’re talking about. I don’t want him to get the idea that “his teacher” is solely about him and his needs. He’s in a class in a public school and he has to deal with the needs of others as well as his own. That shouldn’t throw him for a loop and make him incapable of getting anything out of a class. He could have a perfectly adequate teacher and dislike him or her or just not appreciate an approach, whatever, and that teacher or approach might be great for his classmates.
The obsessive focus on teachers contradicts some of what I’m trying to teach him; that he has to take some responsibility for how he does in school and that school isn’t always and everywhere about his needs or wants. The POLITICAL message-making in ed reform doesn’t fit with what I want him to learn.
Really appreciate your stance on this Chiara, and as both a teacher and parent, I agree with you.
I think it’s political messaging, on the part of SOME ed reformers because obviously they have a lobbying arm, despite denials and insistence that’s there’s “no gambling going on here”.
It’s another contradiction to me. How can there be this huge focus on “grit” and their sort of scolding tone that no one works hard enough without including parents and students in that analysis of America’s educational shortcomings? That doesn’t make any sense. It’s ALL teachers? Really?
I think the public school advocates position and argument is more coherent, it hangs together better, because public school advocates don’t DENY the significance of out of school factors, and ed reformers do. Public school advocates are willing at least to discuss out of school factors.
I read some of the testimony in the California teacher case and I thought it was lunacy. “School” can’t solely be up to teachers. That’s crazy.
My sense reading it was it will be akin to the day care witch hunts in the 1980’s and 1990’s. You’ll recall we went on a decade-long tear of accusing day care workers of ritual, demonic abuse. That is now discredited. In fact, it’s used as an example of how completely insane some of these inquiries can become. The teacher trial was not as bad as the daycare trials, people were wrongly imprisoned for years amid that craziness, but it had the same kind of feel, where there was a decision to just GO AFTER a certain job or profession.
That was ‘about the children” too, ostensibly, although it was really about adult fears and political machinations.
Not a fan of Beck at all, but this passage strikes me as incredibly unfair:
“Another thing I don’t understand is why people on the far right like to paint their own country in the most negative tones while pretending to be patriots. I used to see a lot of this in rightwing think tanks, where people seized gleefully on every negative statistic to prove what a bad country this is; how horrible our public schools are; how dumb our teachers are; how we are doomed.”
This is common on both the left and the right. In the typical lefty formulation, the US is a bastion of racism, corporate greed, and religious fundamentalism running roughshod over the common people. People who don’t like the way things are tend to paint the current situation in the darkest way possible. Please stop pretending the right has cornered the market on this kind of thing.
I too am a conservative. I listen to Glenn Beck. I also subscribe to Diane’s blog. Though I don’t agree with either one on every issue, I do have much in common with both. I also read articles from the Huffington Post, NYTs, and the Wall Street Journal. I cannot form a valid opinion, nor should I, without listening to or gathering information both sides. Unfortunately, as Melody mentioned, the public school system has been steadily moving away from varied opinions and indoctrinating our children with a very progressive agenda. Conservative beliefs in this country are continually being bashed and viewed as backwards, racist and narrow-minded. If we mention God, we are shunned. Diversity of thought is quickly dwindling in our society and our children are being taught that you either think one way or you are wrong.
If you actually take the time to listen to Glenn, you would realize that he is not anti-public schools, he is anti what public schools have become. And until we fix those issues, he believes we should remove our children from the system. In the same vein, he is not anti-union, he is anti what unions have become. They are a big money making machine, and although, in most cases, they do form a strong voice for the employees, they are a far cry from their roots.
Countless times Beck has mentioned how great America is and that America is great because her people are great. But we have strayed from who we were – an open, free society who welcomed ALL thoughts and beliefs and touted the motto of “land of the free” and “in God we trust”. We are teaching our children that it is not okay to have a different viewpoint. How can we “progress” as a country if we all think the same and condemn and isolate those who don’t?
As Thomas Jefferson said — ‘It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are 20 gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.’
@ citizenfox… you wrote “…the public school system has been steadily moving away from varied opinions and indoctrinating our children with a very progressive agenda. Conservative beliefs in this country are continually being bashed and viewed as backwards, racist and narrow-minded…..”
Could you give examples of the “progressive agenda that is being pushed in public schools” so that we might have an honest discussion about what it is you are claiming? What conservative beliefs are being bashed? What are you really talking about?
I honestly do not see a progressive agenda being pushed in public schools. Please back up your claim with examples so that we might have an open and honest discussion about education and what it is we are teaching our children.
In 8th grade, our school district taught that the Republican Party is the party of the KKK and Neo nazis during a discussion of the 13 colonies. This was easily proven inaccurate and was subsequently pulled from the curriculum. In 7th grade world history Muslim prayer techniques were demonstrated through a video as was false inaccurate information provided about Christianity. Video was pulled from curriculum after threat of lawsuit. Finally, in 6th grade a test in social studies revealed the class was taught that communism was part of our US economy alongside capitalism. A UN handout was also discussed about population stabilization and control. One method Americans can use to help stabilize the popn is to have only 1-2 children. This was taught to 11 yr olds.
I don’t disagree there are many on the far right who have taken to degrading public education and public school teachers. However, living in a very NON-republican based state, NY – I can tell you, as you know, the hate flows strong from both sides. Obama is a Democrat. Duncan is a Democrat. His “understudies” are also all democrats. See a pattern here. The left is just as vile as the right and when it comes to the degradation of today’s public schools.
Here’s a very nice article tracing republican contributions to public education. In fact, many historical documents demonstrate strong disdain from democrats for public education. Today’s schools are bought and paid for by BOTH sides, moderate and extreme. If you have the money, you will get what you want. Simple. Capitalism at it’s worst.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jack-jennings/republicans-school-vouchers_b_1862559.html
Vouchers, in and of themselves, just as the Common Core, can produce a wonderful outcome. Vouchers that promote the moving from one public school to another, thus increasing competition among the public schools themselves is not a bad thing. I have a son who needs to move out of the school he’s in. The teacher is awful. The district is great. I know there is another program he could benefit from, but can’t move him, despite the issues. This is where a voucher system would be beneficial. Public monies going to private schools (and lets not kid ourselves, charter schools are in all respects private today) is a profound detour from our earliest republican roots. (oh and they were considered “radical” in their time”).
Your mistake is conflating Obama and Duncan with “the left”. There is nothing “left” about either one of them. Obama’s biggest sin – and what is killing this country – is not anything to do with “socialism”, but the fact that he simply continued on (and even worsened) Bush’s policies – foreign policy, national security, economic policy, education, you name it.
Beck tried to use me to promote his book, so I wrote this http://rlratto.wordpress.com/2014/05/07/my-6-minutes-of-fame/
Haven’t heard a reply yet. Surprised? Not me..
Beware of those with the tin foil caps.
Nice interview.
Part of the problem in American political discourse (when there is any) is that both sides are TOO QUICK to label the other as “Un-American”. One day it is the right and the next it is the left, as seen in the latest rant of Howard Dean that all republicans “are not American” and would “be more comfortable in the Ukraine or Russia.” He also screamed that GOP supporters should “stay away from our country.”
If the attitudes of both sides are that the other in un American, then is it any wonder Washington is in dead lock? Who would sit down with a person that says that about you? What kind of example are the educational policy makers/shakers showing our kids?
It may be that this is all for the cameras/blogs, etc, anyway.
Cross-posted at http://www.opednews.com/Quicklink/Glenn-Beck-s-Angry-and-Ign-in-Best_Web_OpEds-Attack_Books_Common-Core_Culture-140521-308.html#comment490198
Reblogged this on Lloyd Lofthouse and commented:
Discover why I will not be reading Glenn Beck’s book bashing Common Core. As flawed as Arne Duncan’s version of Common Core is, Glenn Beck’s thinking about public education in the United States is worse.
It will come as no surprise to readers of this blog that I oppose the Common Core State Standards.
I oppose them because I have spent a lifetime studying and thinking about curricular design and pedagogical approaches in the English language arts, and in my judgment, the CCSS in ELA
1. Instantiate and carve into stone a great many halftruths and outright misconceptions about the teaching and learning of grammar, usage, mechanics, decoding, reading comprehension, literature, writing, research, speaking, listening, and thinking
2. Draw a boundary in the vast design space of possible English language arts curricula and pedagogy and say, in effect, only what is within this boundary are you allowed to address, and so leave out parts of the subject that are of enormous importance and kill any real innovation and imagination in this field
3. Treat differing students invariantly
4. Were misconceived at their most fundamental level, at the level of the categorical conceptualizations of measureable outcomes in the various domains and subdomains that the standards cover
5. Are incoherently, often randomly, sequenced
In my judgment, the CCSS in ELA are so poorly drawn that they will do, are doing, enormous damage to K-12 education in English. I have, at this point, reviewed well over a hundred new Common Core-based ELA products, including textbooks, online products, and assessments. I can attest in detail to the extent to which the CCSS in ELA are leading to a dramatic distortion and narrowing of ELA curricula and pedagogy.
I think it shocking that some well-known pundits and consultants in English language arts education support “standards” this puerile and misconceived.
That in itself is a sad commentary on the state of education and scholarship in ELA methods. There are many, of course, who, like me, oppose these “standards” for curricular and pedagogical reasons. Many of those, however, have expressed to me personally their fear of saying anything negative about these “standards” because of the consequences that taking such a stance could have for their jobs. That that should be so should give people pause.
In the Soviet Union in the Stalin era, geneticists had to agree with Lysenko about transmission of acquired characteristics. If they didn’t, they would be fired, and sometimes, they would be shipped off to reeducation and labor camps. Do we really want to be on the same road? To empower a centralized Thought Police in U.S. education? The climate of fear that has been generated in support of the CCSS is very, very real. I endanger my livelihood by posting about these matters. I have thought long and hard about this. I feel that I have no choice because of the dramatically negative consequences of the CCSS in ELA for millions of kids.
It is not surprising to me that David Coleman thinks his list a good characterization of what the outcomes should be in ELA and how these should be measured. After all, he has neither the relevant experience nor the relevant training to understand why he is wrong.
That well-known eduexperts in ELA should support these “standards” is another matter altogether.
They should know better.
Shame on them for not learning more, over their lifetimes, about the discipline in which they work. Shame on them for their Vichy collaboration in forcing this puerile garbage on the country. Shame on them for the very real damage that they are doing to kids.
Free people don’t take secret tests.
Very, very well said. Clear and to the point.
TC: what Bob Shepherd said.
Thank you.
😎
In a country as large as the United States is, there will always be crazies. There will be people who think that the Common Core is a Socialist plot to make kids gay or to turn them against Jesus or whatever. We have more important things to do than to attend to such lunatics. We should be explaining to people, patiently, why the CCSS in ELA are wrong about matters like how people acquire the grammar and vocabulary of a language and how they become proficient writers, speakers, and thinkers. And we should do this EVEN IF WE RISK, THEREBY, not getting that job or that contract. Professional integrity demands that we do so.
And, before anyone jumps me for this post, I have not read Glenn Beck’s book, so I have no idea what it says about the Common Core. I saw one video by him in which he claimed that the Common Core was put together by a self-appointed group and foisted on the country via a program of blackmail called the RttT. And both of those statements are true.
For anyone who regularly reads or better, has read over the last decade and better, The Columbia Journalism Review, can easily understand how and where the mass media has gone awry. TRAGIC because the mass media is as an important educator as is our public schools. it, when, either becomes a propaganda machine rather than a purveyor of the search for truth, we are in deep doo doo. AND when both become that, forget democracy. Totalitarianism under whatever guise it is promoted supplants reality and the society which allows it is doomed. Germany, the home of Beethoven, Goethe et al fell from grace and followed propaganda and just look at where they ended up. One cannot build a skyscraper on sand.
Thank you to everyone for their comments on this thread.
*Put the word “everyone” in bold caps. 24 point.*
With all due respect, I offer the following observations.
1), This blog is entitled “Diane Ravitch’s Blog A Site to discussion better education for all.” I think it is helpful to remember that this website is a bit like Diane’s online living room. As long as the guests—that includes me—don’t violate some sensible ‘Rules of the Road’ we can participate, passively or actively, in the discussions. We can express opinions; the owner of this blog can express opinions. Agree where we can, disagree where we must, but say what we mean and mean what we say. There is no silver bullet, no magic potion, no elixir involved in reaching agreement, arriving at a consensus, or resolving certain issues. There is no final destination, a true Never-Ending Story. IMHO, that’s the beauty and the power of this website. It’s what keeps us on our toes.
2), The MSM [whatever its labels] is close to completely clueless about the issues involved in the ed debates. The various establishments—political, economic, educational—have pushed a framing of that debate in a very specific direction, i.e., to label all opponents of and opposition to CCSS and its requisite high-stakes standardized testing as being the exclusive property of a sliver of the electorate/citizenry. IMHO, that is the main thing that Diane is objecting to in her post. *Feel free to disagree with me.*
3), We can focus on what we disagree on, or we can focus on what we agree on. To each, his/her own. But, and I know this is tricky and subject to interpretation, let’s try to make even the sharpest discussions win-win rather than win-lose situations.
Just my dos centavitos worth…
From your local neighborhood KrazyTA.
😎
That’s funny, you dismiss a book by referring to a ultra-liberal political organization’s review of the book. Why won’t you read the book yourself, and apply something like your advice point #4: don’t let hysterical people cloud your view?
Read the book yourself. You’ve presented nothing of fact in this post to support any of your claims.
Please. Diane is already recovering from serious illness. You don’t want to give her brain poisoning on top of that, do you?
She created reasons why she could avoid dealing with the information presented, and only bashed the source with no facts to back it up. I don’t know of a teacher who would allow such a thing in a classroom.
Facts? Well you won’t get any facts from Glen Beck. He is an entertainer and doesn’t care who he hurts or slanders. He just wants an audience.
So why are you worried that they may be getting raises?
Actually, if you look at the book, there’s about 10 pages of sources and references to back up the claims presented.
Rick, I am here to defend one of the greatest traditions in American democracy: our system of free public schools, doors open to all.
So am I, Dr Ravitch. But you’re wrong, we aren’t a democracy. We are a republic. And I’m working to make sure that for profit motivations and nationalization desires don’t destroy public schools.
The book review quoted generously from the book, including such gems as: teachers get pay raises for not dying over the summer.
I can understand someone wanting to read this book to ponder/speculate on how Beck has gained such a huge audience,
but to better educate one’s self re the common core, I would think one would do much better to read Mercedes Schneider’s A Chronicle of Echoes, and/or give a close reading (and be sure to avoid any personal connections when you do, ho-ho!) to the lengthy analyses Bob Shepherd has been offering on this blog, among others.
Yup, in a statement about automatic compensation, and not rewarding those teachers who perform well. Instead teachers get raises regardless of how they perform, which allows even the poorest of teachers to get raises. Do you agree with this practice?
” Instead teachers get raises regardless of how they perform, which allows even the poorest of teachers to get raises.”
You need to get out in the real world. Most teachers – good or bad – haven’t had raises in years. You’ve heard we’ve been slashing education funding?
Anyway, just curious – what does a “poorest of teachers” look like? How do you distinguish good teaching from bad teaching? Test scores?
I am in the real world. Teachers all across our state have been getting raises.
Our district froze salaries in 2007.
What district is that?
Did Glenn Beck, in his extensive research, mention the PARS program in Montgomery County, MD?, which has ushered hundreds of teachers out of their positions even though their hearts were still beating? The quote looked to me like a broad generalization. And re trying to give bonuses to the better teachers, also known as merit pay, did he mention the school systems, such as Fairfax County, VA, that gave up on this practice because in the real world it was prone to abuse?, the same way attaching consequences, high stakes, to standardized testing has resulted in widespread cheating and gaming of the system? Ever heard of Campbell’s Law?
By the by, while we’re at it, did Glenn Beck mention anything about the teacher attrition rate?
But I’m with Jonathan Swift. Too many rotten teachers, including moi, have been enjoying a too easy time of it. It’s time we were cannabalized, roasted over an open fire and then served on toasted buns to the poor to alleviate the hunger we’ve obviously caused.
For those of you who want to cheat/do something other than a close reading of this paragraph, check out Jonathan Swift’s “A Modest Proposal.”
I am glad to see that Ms. Ravitch now recognizes that many of the voices that are chiming in on the CCSS debate are NOT people of good will, nor is their contribution to the discussion anything other than crass hate- and fear-mongering. I think that should be clear from the case of the legislator claiming that Common Core will turn your children gay.
Because that is exactly the entire point of the SPLC study of the far right’s involvement in the debate that she attacked earlier.
I note this:
“This is crazy stuff, and it makes it difficult if not impossible to have a reasonable discussion about the pros and cons of the Common Core. The Common Core is not wicked, evil, or dangerous, nor are those who wrote it.”
Compare this to the SPLC report she denounced:
“But these [Ravitch’s and other progressives’ criticisms of Common Core] and other issues are being obscured by a cloud of fear-mongering propaganda and extremist hyperbole. The attacks from the far right stand apart from the legitimate criticism because of their incendiary language, their apocalyptic warnings, and their reliance on distortions, outright falsehoods and antigovernment conspiracy theories.”
Many of us who are CCSS critics have been dismayed that progressive educators have refused to recognize that the far right’s involvement pollutes and destroys the debate with its toxicity, and were even more dismayed when they chose to attack the SPLC for doing its job and pointing this out. Perhaps this is a step in moving forward intelligently on the matter. We’ll see.
David Niewert,
I sought in this post to disassociate myself from those on the far-right fringe who attack Common Core as a “Communist conspiracy” or as a reason to attack public education. I agreed with the Siuthern Poverty Law Center’s critique of the far-right attacks on Common Core but believe that they gave short shrift to mainstream critics–not only me, but Anthony Cody, Carol Burris, Susan Ohanian, the Chicago Teachers Union, Mercedes Schneider, and others.
Would be a great blog had you actually read the book yourself. This shouldn’t be an issue of left vs. right it should be an issue that brings a country together no matter which side of the aisle you are on. Instead you have decided to bash someone’s efforts to open peoples eyes, based on someone else’s review of the book.
Being divisive serves no purpose. I’m in this fight because of my kids and if that’s not why you’re here maybe you should choose another battle to fight.
“Being divisive serves no purpose.”
Yet you extol the virtues of a book that spends the first third of its pages bashing teachers and their unions.
Hmmm.
I see word of this post has reached Beck’s fan boys and girls who are out doing damage control for him.
Actually it says exactly the opposite. So…
For example: “The problem is not the teachers; it’s the system they’ve been put into.”
Or this: “The key to saving American education is doing both of those things. We absolutely must attract more good teachers, but we also have to clear the pond of those who lack the necessary skills or motivation. In what is arguably the most important “industry” in our country we tolerate failure and reward mediocrity far too often. We allow poor teachers to hang around and plague our schools until they choose to retire.”
See why it’s important to read the book and not rely on what someone else says about it?
Yup, teacher bashing, just like I said.
It’s bashing teachers to say it’s not bashing the teachers but the system they are working in?
Huh??
I agree with NYS Parent. I’m afraid we are seeing “black & white” thinking on both sides:
“Another thing I don’t understand is why people on the far right like to paint their own country in the most negative tones while pretending to be patriots” – I am deeply offended by that comment. First, pointing out what is wrong in this country is how things get fixed. Are we just suppose to pretend everything is great and it will go away by itself? Second, how dare you call anyone a pretend patriot? Who left you in charge of measuring someone’s patriotism? Third, You rely on a very bias, and left leaning source such as Media Matters, to “prove” Beck’s book is garbage. How about a unbiased source, or better yet, have you read the book? I’m very disappointed with you and this post !
Dear Dr. Ravitch,
I’m confused…
Your post from Feb. 26, 2013, titled “Why I Cannot Support the Common Core Standards” clearly states your position (https://dianeravitch.net/2013/02/26/why-i-cannot-support-the-common-core-standards/).
I understand the desire to separate oneself from Glen Beck. I agree that a position such as CCSS “making all children gay” is absolutely ridiculous.
I realize your desire for national standards does not mean that you specifically support CCSS. However, I saw a Facebook comment stating, “I guess Ravitch is back to proCC again. Common Core is not ‘fixable.'” My understanding is that you’ve never been “proCC,” especially due to its lack of field testing.
As a reader of Freire, Apple, and others, I have wondered at times whether there is an ulterior motive behind CCSS to control teaching, learning, and knowledge itself (not to mention the profit motive).
At the NPE Conference, Mercedes Schneider said CCSS ignores her professional judgement and mentioned Common Core as “the hub of the reforms.” She further stated, “As it stands, Common Core needs to be crucified; it needs to go. Don’t just let someone rename it. Don’t just say, ‘Oh we’ll keep parts of it.’ I’m telling you, No Child Left Behind morphed into Common Core. If Common Core is so-called ‘removed,’ it’s going to morph into something else unless it’s completely destroyed. So I’m telling you, you need to watch out” (4:12-4:34 from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dj60huMRhQ).
I agree with Dr. Schneider’s statement. Frankly, I DO find Common Core destructive, especially since it ignores the professional judgments of teachers who actually know their students.
In your book “The Death and Life of the Great American School System,” you stated, “One constant has been my skepticism about pedagogical fads, enthusiasms, and movements” (p. 2). You also stated, “In my writings, I have consistently warned that, in education, there are no shortcuts, no utopias, and no silver bullets” (p. 3). Those statements mean a lot to me as well.
You mentioned your right to change your mind (p.2) as well, and I respect that. Based on your post today, I’m wondering if you have or if you’re in the process of changing your mind about CCSS. Perhaps your “advice [points 1-4] for states that want to use it [CCSS]” does not constitute a pro Common Core position and should not be construed as such. As a “fan” of yours (if I may refer to myself as such), I’m just wondering…
Sincerely,
Joe Nashville
P.S. Although I didn’t cite it above, I’ve read “Reign of Error” too.
Dear Joe Nashville,
You should not be confused. I am not a supporter of Common Core. When teachers tell me they like it–and some do–I say go right ahead and use it. I am not a censor.
But I add, as I did in this post, have your teachers get together and fix them. I never heard of standards that lacked any process of revision or apeal.
And I also urged states and districts not to use the federal online tests. They will cost billions of dollars that nelong in the classroom, not the coffers of the testing industry.
I haven’t changed my views about CCSS. Read my speech to the Modern Language Association from last January. https://dianeravitch.net/2014/01/18/my-speech-about-common-core-to-mla/
I expressed my doubts about CCSS and made the same recommendations.
I was talking to friends at a dinner party about this, last night. Let’s make the CCSS voluntary with the ability to tweak them to meet the needs of individual schools/districts. Why should a school that’s doing well have to adopt anything new? Why not have the option of using your existing state standards?
But that’s being naive. The CCSS is part of a package that was built and meant to be delivered to every public school in the nation. It’s really outrageous how this has been rammed down our throats.
Here’s a Brian Lehrer interview with Commissioner King, telling us how important the CCSS is for the purpose of integrating our schools. Drives me crazy. It’s what brought on the discussion at the party in the first place and I was being criticized for standing in the way of this lofty goal with my criticism of the standards. That’s how effective the line is.
http://www.wnyc.org/story/commissioner-john-king-common-core-and-equality/
Gitapik, you are absolutely right. John King and Arne Duncan declare lofty goals for which there is no evidence, and that’s supposed to make their argument. How will Common Core promote integration? It won’t. How will it reduce the achievement gap? We will see but we haven’t seen so far. In fact, the first NY tests were a disaster for English learners (3% passed); for students with disabilities (5% passed); black and Hispanic students (less than 20% passed).
The standards won’t change anything. We’ve had really good state standards, here in New York, for quite a while. It’s more a question of whether schools put the effort into or are able to implement them than anything else.
I say “are able to” because I’ve worked in many schools where it’s extremely difficult to come even close to “meeting the standards”. It’s no exaggeration: many classrooms where children and teens are continually verbally sparring with each other during the lesson, often resulting in physical fights. Kids walking freely around the room, inviting the teacher to try to stop them. And much more.
And this is where we get to the question of whether (given the high rate of poverty in this country and the contempt for authority and the hopelessness that it breeds) a supposed “raising” of the standards is really going to do anything. The problem is so much bigger than education.
There are things we, as teachers can do, but I think the reform movement, with it’s regimented approach, is coming at it from the wrong direction. I say this based on my own personal experience. Anyone who wants to contradict me can do so and I’ll be happy to discuss it.
I’ve had success working with difficult kids when I’ve been allowed to develop my own curriculum, using a combination of remedial and standard ELA and Math programs, determined by the makeup of the class that I’m teaching in conjunction with the rest of the classes in the school. The curriculum I/we as a school would develop was based on NY State Standards, but we were allowed to tweak them so that the kids could be working on their functional rather than grade level without fear of ridicule, punishment, or retention. We didn’t have timetables and deadlines to meet that could lead to my termination, should we “fail”. Because of this I was able to develop successful Contract/Reward systems and breaks between periods with discussion and creative time built into them. A period at the beginning of every day to talk about things and give the kids an idea of what was going to be taught through the day and why. Social and academic skills with fun added in. It worked.
Then all that was taken away by the reformers. NCLB was the beginning. And it’s just gotten worse. CCSS is the new kid on the block and he’s a bully.
Please excuse the changes in singular and plural when referring to myself and my colleagues. I realized, after my first writing, that the most effective years I’ve had took place in schools that allowed for physical movement between classes for ELA and math periods. My editing was incomplete after making the changes.
Curriculum and it’s method of delivery can change from year to year. For instance: one year my school was able to have students go to and from their homerooms to leveled classes without a hitch. Peer tutoring was utilized during the grade level classes of SS, Science, and Technology. It was very effective. But the next year, with new students/issues, the movement from room to room in the halls became problematic due to some serious incidences of violence and “running” (out of the building). So we had to shelve it and group the students in the homeroom during those periods, which was still effective, but had inherent difficulties with the kids who felt inferior to those with stronger developed skill sets.
I just wanted to thank you for your response to my question. Also, thanks for sharing the link to your speech.
I have an objection to common core that I have not seen argued before. The problem with setting standards for education is that it forces all children onto the same academic path. By definition, Common Core seeks common outcomes. But our society thrives on diversity. We need variation in our society in order that the diversity necessary for evolution occurs. A standardized education outcome will thus lead to intellectual and cultural stagnation. Our education system needs to serve the needs of both our children and society. Children thrive when education is individualized — tailored to each child’s particular needs and abilities. Society thrives when its citizens are allowed to discover their intellectual excellence, which is necessarily diverse. It is only industry that seeks a uniform product. Standardized education — standards — serve the needs that industry feels it has.
Thus, at the cost of that which our children and our culture need to grow, we create a product that is desired by industry.
Many people adopt the view that Ravitch does in her article: that Common Core is relatively benign, and that it is only the manner in which the standards are used that creates problems. I assert that standards themselves are in opposition to society’s interests.
Well said.
This is such an important and articulate criticism of CCSS. Excellent.
Well said, Paul!
This has been my slant for more than a decade of watching school reform. The strength of our nation has always been our creativity, innovation, and independent spirit. What I’m seeing with CCSS and the “reform” movement, in general, is counter to those qualities. It’s about conformity.
How can we shine a beacon of light on Shanghai because they do well on the PISA? We’re talking about a totalitarian state, here.
You are right, and for anyone to put their heads in the sand and refuse to acknowledge is a serious error. Critical thinking at its highest is needed to study and understand Common Core in the context of history, the progression of education reform in this country, how transformational learning theory (look it up) and indoctrination are woven deep into Common Core, and to move past literal translation into truly analyzing the use of language in everything written that is pro-Common Core. Glenn Beck meticulously researches and documents everything he does, and to publicly trash “Conform” demonstrates an unwillingness or inability to grasp the truth. I have read both books, and while “Reign of Error” has a lot of truth in it, it does not address the deeper issues that Glenn Beck is not afraid to expose.
Rational discussion based on information, and with respect for others’ rights to a different point of view, is what passes as “sophisticated” to me, not your judgment of a book based on a review by a partisan organization.
I searched the word “gay” in the book and found nothing vaguely related to your assertion that Beck, or conservatives in general, believe that Common Core will turn students gay. It seems that dissent is only patriotic when Republicans are in charge.
Opining on something you haven’t read in unworthy of a person with your stature.
Glenn Beck’s book is an attack on both Common Core and public education. I support public education as a foundation stone of our democracy. Having been a historian of education for nearly 50 years, I am not interested in getting a lecture from Glenn Beck.
I did not write that Beck made claims about Common Core and homosexuality. A Republican legislator in Florida did.
He used the “g” word?!? Really, he missed his Hallmark sweater moment to use the “f” word – “fun”.
So you repeat claims that you haven’t verified to be accurate? How is this responsible?
Here’s the “gay” references from the book:
“Then there’s the case of gym and health teacher Willie Laraque, who was accused of bending a male student over a desk, leaning in to him, and saying, “I’ll show you what is gay.” The Daily News reported that Laraque is back in the classroom after paying a $ 10,000 fine.”
“Jay McDowell, a teacher and local union president in Howell, Michigan, is a perfect example of the thin line between teaching and imposing. In the fall of 2010, McDowell took part in a school observance of “anti-bullying day” by wearing a purple T- shirt to symbolize his support for gay teens. At some point during the day, a female student entered his classroom wearing a belt buckle featuring the old Confederate flag. McDowell told her she couldn’t wear such an item because it symbolized racism and offended people.”
That’s it. Might have been useful to read the book before making your claims?
As an historian you should be all over that book! Children need not suffer a personal pique because he did not reference your book. There is damage being done to kids with materials in the classrooms and that can not be seen from an historic perspective until after the damage is done. I suggest that you start visiting the classrooms for qualitative analysis. Many are looking to you as a leader and not an author.
Good practice. I do that with every book that I’m considering reading.
Rick Rangel: “Here’s[sic] the ‘gay’ references from the book.” Great, now look for the reference to “gay” in the blog entry. It has nothing to do with the book. It has to do with the linked video. Looking up “gay” there is the following pull-quote: “VAN ZANT: These people, that will now receive $220 million from the state of Florida unless this is stopped, will promote double-mindedness in state education and attract every one of your children to become as homosexual as they possibly can. “
Diane
As we are traveling cross country, we’re listening to NPR on the road. Wonderful discussion of college commencement speakers who have been “disinvited” or who dropped out on their own after protests on the campuses. I found the several callers who expressed that we should “listen” to all sides. How else can we fight against the enemy if we don’t hear their arguments? It causes heartburn and indigestion, but I feel we need to do it.
Please read Glen Beck’s book. Just don’t do it before meals and bedtime.
Diane Ravitch,
I am completely blown away at how obviously biased and prejudiced you are against someone whom you do not even know. The fact that you will not read the book, because of someone else’s review and smears about it, is very telling about what type of person you are.
Glenn Becks book does not do what your other person in Florida is doing along that same “Vein”! If you actually read the book before slamming it or coming out to “distance” yourself from it, you would see for yourself that everything is based on facts!!!! It is completely sourced with credible footnotes and shows you exactly who’s involved and the how it came to be and where it is headed. You yourself might learn a thing or two! Like for instance setting aside your left vs right differences and coming together and uniting against something that is wrong for the sake of it being the right thing to do!! I belong to a group of 19,000 parents and educators we are all different races, religions, Ages, Sexes, homeschoolers, public Schoolers and private schoolers, we belong to and have differing political opinions but we are all uniting and supporting one another for our purpose is one! The soooo “in your face” tone of what you wrote and why you wrote it and how you wrote it. Wreaks of sheer close minded-ness! The (I won’t read Glenn Becks book or promote it because he’s a crazy right-winger nut job and I don’t want to be associated with him!) tone in your writting is again so telling!!! How about expanding your horizons! Read the book for the sake of reading it and THEN tell us what and why you don’t like what you read and where he’s got it wrong and why! I would and could respect that honest opinion from you. But what you just posted is so immature and undeserving of any credential of being able to actually take you seriously!!! Posting someone else’s write up opinion and treating it as if it were the gospel truth with out your own personal homework is severely disappointing !!! Shame on You!!!
Colleen Huston
Colleen Huston, I have read too many screeds against public education in my fifty years as a historian of education. Please forgive me if I have no interest in reading an attack on public education by Glenn Beck. I am free to choose how I spend my time and what I read. Thank you for your advice.
Glen Beck has produced so many ridiculous statements, commentaries, and “lessons” that make no sense and simply mislead and spread hate. He has stated, himself, multiple times, that he is an entertainer, not in the business of truth. He is all about making money. He is a free market libertarian. It is no surprise that he would scrape up as many myths and false leads to rally up the use group that thinks we need to return America to pre-Civil Rights Days in order yo maintain the kind of America that really was the stuff of fantasy. America has always been more “Peyton Place” than “Ozzie and Harriet”. But he plays to that kind of sensibility. He has led the followers to blinded lunacy. And he laughs all the way to the bank.
No one needs to read his book. No one.
Deb, you make a lot of attacks with no data to back up what you’re saying. How do you know if he’s publishing myths or not if you’ve not read what he’s saying? Are you that opposed to reading anything that you don’t already agree with?
Sorry. I am merelybsaying this. I have watched enough and read enough of Glen Beck’s absurd commentaries and even previous opinions he has stated about privatization of public schools . I have ZERO respect for his snake oil salesman style of “communication” and lecturing. ZERO. I do not need to read this book because his opinion is irrelevant.
Oh, he is quite slick. He can be convincing. He can almost seem plausible at times. But his motives aren’t pure. His methods are devious.
If you wish yo learn about him and to verify his thoughts, go right ahead. I no more wish to read his garbage than to read L Ron Hubbard’s. It is fiction.
When Beck calls John Dewey an “evil dude” it reveals his ignorant agenda. Why would I want to waste my dime on his ghost written book?
So clearly the follow up question needs to be: what did Beck say is WHY Dewey is an “evil dude”? Might there be something Dewey said or did which you don’t know about which would actually show him to be evil?
Here it is in Beck’s own ignorant rant..
“The system for schools was mostly private until the late 1800s, and I’d like to introduce you to one evil dude, John Dewey. He was a professor at the University of Chicago and then Columbia University. He was a leading champion of progressive education. And it’s one thing to say well, I’m a progressive. Okay, that doesn’t necessarily make you a bad dude. This guy was brilliant. What made him a progressive and so evil was he was a social engineer.
He insisted that among a school’s primary goals should be creating social change and reform. He said, and I quote, “I believe, therefore, that the true center of correlation on the school subjects is not science, nor literature, nor history, nor geography, but the child’s own social activities.” Look at your kid’s curriculum at school. Does it make any sense at all? Are they focusing on science or literature or history or math? Are they? No, it social engineering.
It’s let’s focus on making, let’s make the children into the people we want them to be. And when I say we, I mean the, you know, government progressives but also the corporations. We are really, look at what happens in China. What happens with China? In China, they grab your kid at six years old because they’ve identified that they’re going to be good at this. They take the child away from the parent and make them into whatever it is because the child, listen carefully, belongs to society and the state, not to the parents. Does that sound familiar?
He said, John Dewey, that we should use techniques that were “previously ignored as trivial, futile, or even condemned us positively evil.” Any surprise 100 years later our schools are teaching things that are positively evil, they’re questioning the existence of the Holocaust or equating the founders to terrorists?”
So schools are teaching evil??
Seems as though Beck may be the evil one here. The one who truly abhors an open mind, the one who uses his network to indoctrinate his followers.
Oddly enough, you left out virtually all the detail about what Dewey actually believed and advocated for. Care to fill in those details?
Interesting. What has he said about privatization of public schools? Source, please.
Research it yourself.
Ah, so you’re also making claims about something you cannot source? Got it.
I did. Good night. Happy reading, researching, googling. I posted 2. That is enough.
If you believe that guy, enjoy.
Actually, you posted nothing which says anything about privatization of schools, and you only posted a couple links which didn’t really tie to anything you’ve said here about him. You haven’t even explained what he said that was incorrect.
I believe the truth, regardless of who says it.
I don’t have Dewey’s famous book in front of me, so I’ll just have to go by what we learned when studying him for my masters degree.
I don’t believe that Dewey was saying we should forego academic skills so much as use them as part of a whole that will benefit the community.
My personal take on John Dewey was that of a man who wanted strong ties between the school, community, and family so that instruction would not only be academically oriented, but also meaningful in the context of the academic work’s application to every day life in the immediate area. He wanted family and community involvement so that the children/teens would see how their education was benefiting (or not benefiting) the community.
This is social in structure, but whether it’s an “evil” construct is, in my mind, debatable. School boards are a natural extension of this. Larger cities have made community input more difficult…but we can still see it at work, here in NYC. It still works and is a good thing, to my way of thinking.
A little more context on Dewey: “I believe that education is the fundamental method of social progress and reform,” Dewey wrote in 1897. His organization’s magazine, Revolt, claimed that “we have to frame the issues of socialism and democracy and fight the battles of socialism and democracy in the stockholders’ meetings of industrial corporations , in our medical associations and bar associations and our teachers associations, in labor unions, in student councils, in producers and consumers cooperatives— in every social institution in which we can find a foothold.”
So he was a socialist and saw public schools as a tool to indoctrinate kids. That’s not evil?
And here’s Dewey advocating for using war to enact a world government through which he advocates would enact his socialist views.
That’s not evil?
http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/the-social-possibilities-of-war-2/
So now that we know those things about Dewey and his beliefs, are you ok with the indoctrination and using war to exact social change? Or do you agree that you didn’t know that’s what he advocated, and those things are evil?
While I see your point about the dimensions of Dewey that aren’t widespread (I had no idea, actually…thanks for the links), “evil” is still not a word that I would, personally, associate with socialism. I have some very, very close friends in Finland, Norway, Sweden, and Canada. They’re enjoying life to the fullest and would never term the system of government that they’re living with as “evil”. They like it, in fact. And they’re wonderful people.
Whether that system of governance would be beneficial to the USA is another matter and, obviously, one of the cruxes of Mr. Beck’s argument against Dewey.
Regarding his stance on war in order to advance social causes: I’m not for it, personally…so, again, thanks for the link.
I feel like Dewey’s philosophies are one cornerstone of our educational system. For someone to say, “Hey! Look what he said! I told you the system is terrible!” is too simplistic to allow for what I would see as a meaningful dialogue for debate. I can find fault in some of one person’s ideas and actions and still find great meaning and knowledge in other ideas and actions of the same individual. This debate about Dewey is a perfect example. I don’t agree in advancing socialism as a general system of governance in the USA, but I’m a huge adherent to the concept of the school being an integral part of a functioning community.
Thanks for the thoughtful response, I appreciate the conversation.
For people who believe in freedom and liberty, indoctrination through the schools is an evil thing. Pushing war to advance and force your views on the rest of the world is an evil thing. You now seem to understand the basis of Beck’s comments about Dewey’s beliefs.
It is impossible to look at just one aspect of a person and not the whole big picture to say someone’s a good person or not. I mean, Fred Phelps went to church and was a God fearing man. But I know of no one who wouldn’t say he was an evil man.
Having school as an integral part of a functioning community isn’t in question. The issue is who gets to decide what is best for that school in that community.
Comparing Dewey to Phelps is pushing it, Rick. Anyone can sit and write ideas. It’s a whole ‘nuther ball game to actually go out there and act on those ideas.
Just as I respect your right to express your views and ideas, so do I respect Dewey’s. His viewpoints may be further left than yours and mine, but that doesn’t mean he can’t express them, all the same. And we, as a nation, haven’t followed his views to the letter, either, having chosen, instead, to focus on his concept of school/family/community, instead. We take to teachings and use them as we see fit, as a nation.
All that said, I’m in agreement with Bob: we must ally ourselves against the CCSS. It’s against the best interests of many of us from many different walks of life.
Beck is pretty accurate about Dewey, some of these educational leaders have been overplayed, even Horace Mann. they were all behavioralists into social engineering. Dewey thought you could judge intelligence by the bumps on the head. They created the military model of schooling with the corporation$. John Taylor Gatto’s Underground History of American Education speaks of these things, which could be a source for Beck. Might be worth spending time with this.
Well said!
My dear Dianne,
Of course you are free to read what you want with your time. No one says you have to read his book. But don’t go writting blogs about it and saying you have read too many “screeds” in your fifty years as a historian in public education to “Know” what his book says! THAT my dear is what I have a problem with! Know what you are talking about before you talk about it! Assuming makes an ASS out of you and me and in my opinion you did just that by promoting someone else’s smear and by beiing AFRAID God forbid, that someone my associate YOU with Glenn Becks book. If you haven’t read it, Then you don’t have the right to bash it !! Just sayin… !
Is this the same Dan Rather who was taken in by forged documents purporting to prove George Bush had skipped a year of service in the Air National Guard, and put it on the air, and still defends it as true, but for his untruthfulness was disciplined by CBS, which eventually did not renew his contract? Some journalist. And don’t even get me started on Cronkite. Under an avuncular persona hides a hatred of American based on progressive ideology.
Generally speaking, it is the left which TRULY hates America, mainly because it is capitalist and as such successful. The right just hates the leftist ideology which now permeates the government and media of the country. I can’t say I’m surprised at the depth and unthinking pervasiveness of your bias, but I never had such clear and straightforward evidence of it beforehand.
I can’t stand Glen Beck either, but I suspect he’s more truthful than is President Obama. Will you admit now that you voted for Obama BOTH times? Are you ready yet to repent and admit you made a serious error of judgement in doing so? Could Romney REALLY have been as bad for education as Obama cum Duncan? Romney’s a crypto liberal but at least he’s honest and competent.
In the VA scandal we are seeing yet another manifestation of the President’s attitude. He HATES the military. He doesn’t care about veterans any more than he cares about poor black kids in the inner cities. He claims to care for the little people, but as far as I can see all he really cares about is himself and his family. He’s got his, and let the rest of the country go to hell. If I were his children, I’d be embarrassed by him. He doesn’t act any differently than a country club Republican, and that’s the second worst insult I have in my quiver.
Concerned about Diane Ravitch’s new ideas about Common Core being “unionized”
I have attached my commentary to each point:
Ms. R. says, “My advice to states that want to use it, who think it is better than what they do now, is this:
1. Convene your best classroom teachers and review CCSS. Fix whatever needs fixing. Recognize that not all students learn at the same pace. Leave time for play in K-3.
My comments: If it takes five years to create standards, we can not afford to waste five years to fix them, and who are the best classroom teachers?
Time for play should be available to all grades.
They need to be scrapped.
2. Do not use the federally funded tests. Do not spend billions on hardware and software for testing. Let teachers write their own tests. Use standardized tests sparingly, like a state-level NAEP, to establish trends, not to label or rank children and teachers.
My comments: Do not do any testing on computers, they are less reliable than other tests.
3. Do not use results of CC to produce ratings to “measure” teacher quality. Study after study, report after report warns that this is a very bad idea that will harm the quality of education by focusing too much on standardized tests, narrowing the curriculum, and forcing teachers to teach to the tests.
My comments: We have no information that these tests are even valid or reliable. This does not address the issue of transparency and data collection.
4. Do not let your judgment be clouded by people who make hysterical claims about the standards or those who wrote them.
Comments: We have no way of knowing about the level of truth or hysteria since the methodology and the materials in use are faulty and abusive. Teachers did not write them.
Joseph, it didn’t take five years to write Common Core.
I am opposed to computerized testing.
I believe in human judgment
Diane,
Any “good” curriculum will take years to write, if done properly. With the materials in the classroom, which I am seeing “on the ground”, we could lose a generation with bureaucratic delays, assuming that common core is worth saving. NY State had a wonderful curriculum, problem was, it was not designed for Gates’ computerized teaching and testing, which is what CC is all about. I am still perplexed about Middle States Education supporting various progressive organizations.
Hoping you share my curiosities.. They go back to the foundations that developed schools, which Beck talks about. Never liked Beck, and he may represent Adam Smith’s “hidden hand” by publishers that are threatened by Common Core by being pushed out of the market.. Capitalism may stop Common Core. Houghton Mifflin has an anti common core video now.
regards,
Joseph, you say that Houghton Mifflin has an anti-Common Core video now. Can you link to that? Thank you.
Hi Diane, I very much appreciate this post. To me, it addresses the elephant in the room. I often post links to your blog posts on Facebook, along with my comments, on my page and or in several groups. (E.g., I’m a BAT). Today I posted this:
“This is crazy stuff, and it makes it difficult if not impossible to have a reasonable discussion about the pros and cons of the Common Core. The Common Core is not wicked, evil, or dangerous, nor are those who wrote it.”
Diane Ravitch has 4 reasonable suggestions for states that want to use CCSS. To those, I would add another: If we must use “standards,” they should not be age specific or even grade specific. They may be subject specific; perhaps, these are the things a person needs to know in math. Perhaps even, these are the things a person should be able to do in math at the primary level. (That’s what the Finnish standards look like. They are not grade level specific.) A common understanding of expectations is a good thing. But, they should work for us. We shouldn’t work for them. “Standards” should help us, not box us in. They shouldn’t be allowed to tell us that someone is “above or below” acceptable at a certain point in time, determined by someone’s judgment. They should guide us to next steps, whether we are older or younger or at the predetermined age at which someone has set the standard.
I’m 61 and will likely remain in the classroom (I teach 4th grade) for 4-5 more years. I’m also a BAT activist. I can’t tell you how much you’ve inspired me the last few years,me specially when I’m beyond exhausted!
Linda Myrick, Bellevue, Washington
Hurrah! Hang in there if you can do it. You have the correct perspective. And they won’t run over you!
Ohio had benchmarks and ranges or bands of knowledge that were considered overlapping and not grade specific. Since I retired, I haven’t looked at the continued modifications in the state standards to align with the CCSS. However, our district was constantly seeking to second guess the types of questions and to develop a curriculum that would meet district, state, and CC standards.
I agree that all children can learn, but at their own pace, not like a trainload of kids at some destination, hopping off the train at precisely the same moment.
Linda M,
Perhaps you would take some comfort from the way the common core state math standards are being implemented in Kentucky. Here is a quote from the document:
What students can learn at any particular grade level depends upon what they have learned before. Ideally then, each standard in this document might have been phrased in the form, “Students who already know … should next come to learn ….” But at present this approach is unrealistic—not least because existing education research cannot specify all such learning pathways. Of necessity therefore, grade placements for specific topics have been made on the basis of state and international comparisons and the collective experience and collective professional judgment of educators, researchers and mathematicians. One promise of common state standards is that over time they will allow research on learning progressions to inform and improve the design of standards to a much greater extent than is possible today. Learning opportunities will continue to vary across schools and school systems, and educators should make every effort to meet the needs of individual students based on their current understanding.
Do you generally take state PR releases as gospel, TE?
Kentucky has some impressive journalists if they can wade through 300 page long press releases. Here is the link to the PDF: http://education.ky.gov/curriculum/docs/documents/kentucky%20common%20core%20mathematics.pdf
By the way, when I have been reading your posts on the CCSS I mentally insert the phrase English language arts in front of every mention of the common core state standards. Am I doing you an injustice or is that a more accurate way to understand your posts?
It is, TE. Thank you for asking that.
I don’t address the math standards very often. I have issues with those, too. I don’t believe in invariant standards for all. I agree with some critics that they fall woefully short in the upper grades of proper preparation for students who are going into STEM fields. I think that their approach to math education in the early grades is a BIG mistake and no real departure from what we have done in the past, which hasn’t worked for most people who have been subject to the standard K-12 math curriculum. I believe that they are a curriculum outline and that our federal government is forbidden by law from promulgating curriculum outlines. I think that in general they are a slight improvement on the state math standards that preceded them, primarily because they emphasize, more, connections among mathematical ideas. But you are correct, when I attack the standards, I am generally referring to the puerile “standards” in ELA.
Rick Langel,
Exactly!!!!
Diane, I didn’t read this entire blog, but I’ve read others’ ‘reviews’ of it. I did see your insertion and judgement of the ‘far right’ though, and I’m quite disappointed that you’ve expressed such a judgement. You stand in your shoes, left or right, and I don’t care really. But I’m a mother of two, and I will continue to keep public education about the children. Those who slander either side of the isle while leaving children in the middle are not fighting the same fight I am.
Deb,
What a cheap cowardly response to Rick, back up your Smack with facts please.
Hardly cowardly. I cannot stand Glen Beck. I am not making up “smack”. If he is interested in the wordsxofvthat charlatan, he can easily google his commentary. I have no time for that guy.
And I don’t think you are the moderator for the discussion, particularly when you were attacking Diane.
Good day.
To me it sounds like you’ve got a closed mind about anything he says because you disagree politically with him, and refuse to even consider the possibility that he may have a point.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/04/08/glenn-beck-if-you-have-ears-to-hear-and-eyes-to-see-look-into-transformational-education/
He is a charlatan, a monkey, an opportunist.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kUefUFiF-XE
OK, you did a quick search for “public schools” and “Glenn Beck”. Can you explain what he has wrong?
The first link was him telling people to do their own research into the topic and decide for themselves. Yup, that’s a charlatan alright.
Can you explain what you disagree with for what was presented in the video?
Glenn Beck solidly backs up everything he presents with research and evidence…take the time to verify. Not liking someone who speaks the truth or expresses his conclusions that you simply don’t want to explore further is one of the reasons why we are where we are with ed reform and in this country as a whole. Wake up! Putting your head in the sand does not make the monster go away.
Elephant Tree, public education is not a monster.
It is a bedrock feature of a democratic society.
Beck’s argument isn’t against public education. It’s about what public education is being turned into. Which you’d know if you read the book that you refuse to read.
Fascinating:
http://therightscoop.com/glenn-beck-jeb-bush-and-chris-christie-support-common-core-because-they-are-in-bed-with-big-business/
I actually found myself agreeing with much of what was said in this.
Left, right, or center, we should all be able to agree that the LAST THING that the United States need is a centralized Common Core Curriculum Commissariat and Ministry of Truth making these decisions for everyone else.
Today, the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation ran a new article by Chester Finn and Mike Petrilli in which they announced that “a group of foundations” is creating a new startup to review textbooks for conformity to the Common Core.
So, it’s not enough that we have an unelected group making decisions about what outcomes we are going to measure, what we are going to teach, what we are going to test, what learning progressions we are going to implement, etc., but now, in addition, we are going to have a centralized Censor Librorum telling people what textbooks are acceptable.
My objections to the Common Core are MOSTLY pedagogical. I think that pedagogically the CCSS in ELA are incredibly backward.
But this centralization and regimentation and standardization of U.S. education is a VERY SLIPPERY SLOPE, and whatever your political views, if you care about freedom, at all, you will oppose the Common Coring of the United States.
I would LOVE to see a coalition of people from all parts of the political spectrum bring this totalitarianism to a swift and ignoble end.
Ecologies are healthier than are monocultures.
End the Common Core.
But then, I probably know less about Glenn Beck than just about anyone else in the country does. I saw his program once. He was dressed in a sweater and at a blackboard and looking very professorial and drawing figures on the board to make some sort of point about Russia trying to control the world’s oil supplies, I think. I don’t remember it well. He was an able showman. The stuff about Russian dependence on oil wasn’t exactly news. Perhaps it was to some of his audience.
Deb,
I was not attacking Diane Ravitch. I happen to admire her for her dedication and passion for saving Public Education from the Grips of Common Core. I love her for taking the stance that she has and for giving a voice and also inspiration to many involved with public Education. Reaching many through her platform. She has been a great advocate for many good and decent causes against corruption in the education system. I believe with all my heart that she has good true and pure intentions.
But… I have been truly disappointed in this posting and another one regarding the position for CA State Superintendant for Public Instruction. My reason for my disappointment is that Ms. Ravitch has twice now dissed two very good people who like her… Care very deeply about what happens to the children in this rising generation. When the dissing was not deserved!!! Both times it was obvious that there was a biased reason behind it that had to do with leaning left.
I myself happen to not agree with Ms. Ravitch on some of her left leaning positions. But I admire and respect her for all the good she IS doing and I am open minded enough to read her blogs and make my own informed decisions and appreciate who she is and what she has been able to accomplish. I like to give her credit when credit is due.
How much would I miss, if I refused to read her blogs just because I might have a personal biased opinion about her beliefs and the way she delivers her messages? I don’t think calling her out on this and letting her know how disappointed I am is ” Attacking” her. I am sorry you feel that way. That is not the case at all. Should I only converse with people I agree with all the time and likewise? To me that is close minded and immature. I like hearing a lot of Diane’s messages. I agree with a lot if them too. How would I know this unless I was open to reading them.
Diane, your first sentence about the dumbing down of American culture is just the same “painting of our country in negative tones” that you criticize the far right of doing just two paragraphs later. You’re like the doping athlete who finally gets caught but has a history of criticizing those who were caught before him/her.
The overwhelming majority of Americans attend public schools. If the culture has been dumbed down, then more than likely the American public schools have had a role in this dumbing down. At least it would be disingenuous, even absurd, to argue they haven’t.
No one with a firm understanding of child development and pedagogy should support CC (or any standards for that matter). No two students require the exact same education. No two students need to study the exact same things. No two students need to learn the exact same things at the exact same point in time. No two students need to read the exact same books. The problem with schools today is that there is little, if any, individualization. And students have almost no choice with regard to what they study, when they study it, and for how long they study it. This is a problem with the system as a whole. (In fact, the entire public schooling system should be dismantled and built back up from scratch.) But it’s also a problem with the teachers. Most teachers I’ve come across are very slow to work with parents to individualize the curriculum for each of their students. (And I mean individualize, not tweak.) Most teachers still feel that all kids should do the same homework whether or not a student really needs to complete what are, at least in elementary school, for the most part simple, mundane, and uninteresting (and even unnecessary) activities. Most teachers still believe wrongly that their grades are some objective measure of a child’s talents and abilities. And I’ve heard enough conversations among teachers to know that many have a firm conviction that they know better than a child’s parents what a child needs. The arrogance in some of these teachers is sickening.
You say that CC isn’t “wicked” or “evil,” nor do you think that the people who wrote it and support it are that way, yet you’ve stated clearly in a previous interview that you believe that America’s children are “merely pawns” in a government/business partnership. This comment was made with regard to Race to the Top, but it is fitting for CC too. By having a predictable educational system, those who write curriculum and develop tests will have a dependable, predictable market that will allow them to make a lot of money. That is why we see so much support for CC from the business community and government officials. Unfortunately, if those who had written these standards and those who support these standards had taken the time to understand what children need, CC would have never been developed. Are those who support CC “wicked”? Maybe not. But many are ignorant and many are guided more by profit than a concern for education. So maybe we should call them unsavory.
You’re a wonderful historian, Diane, but your somewhat support of CC in this piece and your undying support for the public schools and its teachers causes me to question your understanding of child development and pedagogy and of how children best develop. Public schools need to change dramatically and those who support the system as it is are part of the problem. It’s time to stop treating our children like widgets in a factory.
Rick Langel,
I love you! I have never met or spoken with you. I am however, very impressed with the facts and truth that you have backed up with straight to the source evidence. Following up with the obvious question in hand. Brilliant! Thank you for shining light in Darkness and Yes on EVIL!
Thanks, Colleen! It’s easy to follow up like that when you’ve actually read the subject at hand, and not taking someone else’s word for what others believe and have said.
Rick,
That is exactly my point that I was trying to make. You may not like Glenn Beck or agree with him on certain issues. But don’t go and bash him for writing a book that is completely backed up with truth and evidence of that truth , until you have done your own homework and research. When you have discovered where said person has got it wrong. State why he is wrong and then back that up with the source / evidence. To just go by someone else’s hearsay is completely irresponsible and a total disservice to those who are looking for truth. For someone who wants to expose so many things that are wrong with CCSS… I don’t understand why she would let her personal opinion and beliefs about someone, interfere with exposing the truth. I also don’t understand how she can post someone else’s opinion piece about a subject she’s suppose to be a leading authority on… With out researching it for her own self first! Totally blows my mind!
Well said.
Colleen and Rick, I agree with both of you.
Anyone who doubts the wisdom of turning the direction of our educational system over to a centralized committee is on my side of this issue, whatever his or her other political opinions.
Those who oppose tyranny–whether they be from the left, the right, or the center–will oppose to imposition of the will of a Common Core Curriculum Commissariat and Ministry of Truth. On opposition to the Common Core I will take, with him or her, common cause.
Well said, Bob. I stand with you against common core.
cx: Those who oppose tyranny–whether they be from the left, the right, or the center–will oppose imposition of the will of a Common Core Curriculum Commissariat and Ministry of Truth. On opposition to the Common Core I will take, with him or her, common cause.
I have spent my entire adult life thinking about and studying to inform myself about curricula and pedagogy in the English language arts.
I read substantive books and research on these matters all the time.
My studies have taken me deep into areas as diverse as child language acquisition, phonetics, syntax, morphology, semantics, phonics, pragmatics, stylistics, and the development of writing systems; the cognitive science of learning; neurology; statistics; the history and development of rhetoric; artificial intelligence; machine learning; literary criticism; hermeneutics; propositional, predicate, modal and non-classical logics; archetypes of the folktale; formulaic oral epic literature; various languages; the history of orature and of literature; discourse theory; the theory and practice of assessment and evaluation; pedagogical and curricular design theory and practice; the history of education; genre studies; cultural studies; historiography; epistemology; mythology; the anthropology of cultural transmission; child development; heuristics; statistical quality control; colonial literature; young adult literature; hi-lo literature; British, American, South American, and European poetry, drama, and prose; theatre; speech; textual studies; exigesis; philosophy of language; aesthetics; the history of the textbook; the history of educational approaches; adolescent psychology; various computer-based learning and assessment technologies; web design; and many, many other fields.
And always, always, I have studied to inform my practice as a teacher of English–to learn more about how to people learn and how better to teach reading, writing, speaking, listening, thinking, and research.
I have taken very, very seriously, and, at the same time, with great joy, all my life, learning how to do my job. I believe that the job of the English teacher is one of the highest possible callings.
But with all that work behind me–decades of serious research and thought about ELA curricula and pedagogy–I WOULD NOT DREAM OF TELLING EVERYONE ELSE HOW THE JOB OF THE ENGLISH TEACHER MUST BE DONE.
Why wouldn’t I?
Because ecologies are healthier than are monocultures;
because I do not have all the knowledge or expertise or all the answers;
because we are all profoundly ignorant, and I include myself there;
because the most important things that a teacher can bring to a classroom, after caring and compassion and mindfulness, arehis or her attention to the UNIQUE attributes of the child and his or her UNIQUE passions, his or her UNIQUE learning that make it possible for the teacher to be a model for students what a wonderful and UNIQUE thing real learning is, so that kids say, “I want some of that. That looks like a lot of fun.”
I have suggestions for teachers. They are often deeply informed suggestions.
But others have invariant mandates and bullet lists.
The IGNORANT are the first to want to foist their ideas on everyone else. Ignorance and arrogance are a single sick package.
The Common Core State Standards in ELA were prepared by the ignorant and the arrogant. They are backward and uninformed. Making them into an invariant mandate for all students, all teachers, all schools, is a recipe for unmitigated disaster, for mediocrity and decline.
And, it’s a very, very slippery slope to start mandating what IDEAS are acceptable.
THAT simply is not acceptable in a free land.
cx: because I do not have all the knowledge nor all the expertise nor all the answers;
cx:
because the most important things that a teacher can bring to a classroom, after caring and compassion and mindfulness, are
his or her attention to the UNIQUE attributes of the child and
the teacher’s UNIQUE passions, his or her UNIQUE learning that make it possible for the teacher to be a model for students of what a wonderful and UNIQUE thing real learning is, so that kids will say, “I want some of that. That looks like a lot of fun.”
Well said, Bob!
I was really blown away with your opinion on Glenn Beck’s book, having not read it. I’ve been a fan of yours for about 6 months, following and agreeing on everything because you seemed to have an unbiased political view. I found that reassuring and fair. I am not a fan of Beck’s, but it made me unsure of your testimony against him when you were plainly defending Common Core. I’m a very concerned parent of a kindergartener that grew up surrounded by public teachers/educators, so I value public education and am fighting tooth and nail to preserve our schools. However, this particular blog of yours I cannot agree with. I truly thought your blog had been hacked upon reading how inarticulate and sloppy this excerpt is! I’m in the midst of reading YOUR book, Reign of Error, and have found it very informative! I’m just very disappointed with your attack on Beck, Diane.
Apparently Diane has been a supporter of Common Core all along, with something to gain, as in dollars, like the rest of them. She has played both sides of the fence for a long time; however, again relying on research and not emotion, I see that her true colors are clear.
This is not fair. Diane has been quite clear about her position on the Common Core. She has said, “You like the CC? Fine. Then teach it. But don’t tell others what they have to teach.” She doesn’t like the idea of setting up a Thought Police. She has always been consistent about this.
Oh, s***. Now I’m going to have to go buy Beck’s book and read it. Otherwise I won’t be able to maintain my reputation on this blog for being a right wing wing nut. (Have I got that right?) Someday when CCSS crashes and burns, we all ought to have a picnic together, all of us, those who see the tea party movement as astroturf, and those of us who see Democrats as commie, pinko, Deweyite, socialist progressive peddlers of tyranny to the ignorant masses.
Wow.. knew I should have worn my tin foil hat today.
Beck cries that public education is indoctrinating our children and those he has indoctrinated with his clever ruse are quick to parrot his doctrine.
You say he cites sources? Sure.. like he hears about 1 teacher’s really poor idea of a lesson on the holocaust and he spins that source into preaching the whole public education system denies the holocaust.
He calls Dewey an evil dude, based upon his preconceived notion of how a child should be educated.
Ever watch his ‘Morning meeting” on the web? He makes Dewey proud. soliciting ideas and comments from his staff as he guides their analysis and thoughts.
He calls it a hostile takeover when a school board ejects a parent for speaking out of turn. It was a poor choice by that Board , but hostile takeover? really?
Folks, Beck is playing you. I”m waiting for him to tell you all to open your windows and shout, I’m not taking it anymore. Then just like the lemmings who follow their leader over the cliff, you’ll come to your senses.
I am against the Common Core and education reform, purely for pedagogical reasons. It’s not some grand conspiracy to take over the world. It’s merely attempt to drive corporate profits and privatize our nation’s most precious asset, our public education system.
Didn’t the folks on this blog hear about one teachers assignment about the holocaust and blame the CCSS?
You have an interesting memory of this, TE. Here are some examples of what people said about that:
Please page through the CCSS appendices and find me one sample performance task or one text that supports this kind of assignment.
Please page through the CCSS appendices and find me one sample performance task or one text that supports this kind of assignment.
It is no secret that I have had issues with the Common Core State Standards. But I do not think that any argument can be made that this obscene assignment is a consequence of the Common Core.
Bob,
Perhaps you have forgotten the title of the post: A Common Core Disaster: Did the Holocaust Actually Happen? (Link: https://dianeravitch.net/2014/05/07/a-common-core-disaster-did-the-holocaust-actually-happen/)
My reading is that the title ties together the common core and questioning the existance of the holocaust. You read the title as saying the assignment and the CCSS are unrelated?
I would also like to point out that I just posted an article that makes it clear that Ravitch supports Agenda 21…education is completely enmeshed in Agenda 21. One cannot pull education out of it…
Here’s what I think that title means, TE:
All around this country, Gates Foundation money is being spent on projects to create scripted lessons based on the Common Core. These are Common Core projects. This district project was one of those projects. Clearly, it was.
So, I don’t think that the title meant that this lesson is something that the CCSSO or NGA would approve. But you would have to take that up with Diane. I cannot speak for her.
“I am against the Common Core and education reform, purely for pedagogical reasons. It’s not some grand conspiracy to take over the world. It’s merely attempt to drive corporate profits and privatize our nation’s most precious asset, our public education system.”
Exactly.
So let me get this straight. You’re trying to dismiss sources you haven’t seen from a book you won’t read?
And you call me a conspiracy theorist. Good one!
http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2014/05/22/a-scathing-interview-with-a-5th-grade-teacher-who-was-in-the-room-when-common-core-was-being-created/
Elephant Tree Features
Great points, well spoken. 🙂
If I may share…http://elephanttreefeatures.org/common-core-standardized-testing-ate-my-daughters-education/
http://schoolsofthought.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/24/my-view-why-i-will-vote-for-president-obama/
We’ve become so polarized here in the United States that people often cannot imagine that someone perceived to be on the “other side” could be right about something.
Diane is a defender of public education. As a historian, she knows that public education in the United States has been one of the greatest institutions in the history of of our species–that it has meant upward mobility for many, many millions; that it has given us citizens who are educated enough about their fundamental rights to stand up against tyranny.
That doesn’t mean that she thinks that public education is perfect. She understands that perfection is not something to look for in politics, that democracy and republican government are messy, noisy affairs. I have read an enormous amount of her work over the years. She has been a sharp critic of the edutocracy within public education at the same time that she has been a defender of public education itself.
I am not knowledgeable about Mr. Beck’s positions on this issue. I am intrigued, now, and I want to learn more. I hope he did not write a book bashing teachers and public education. I am pleased to hear that he opposes setting up a centralized committee to tell educators what they have to think.
Public education does not and should not mean centralized, regimented, standardized education. It means that we believe that education is, as Diane says, a bedrock of democracy.
Again, one can have public education without having authoritarian, centralized command and control of that education.
I posted this, here, because Barbara Madeloni addresses here, eloquently, I think, the issue of standardization of U.S. education under a centralized command and control authority. Again, all of us who care about freedom, whatever our other political views, should oppose this.
This is no time to worry about polishing the bright work. There is a hole in the hull.
So, Dr. Madeloni comes at this from a VERY DIFFERENT part of the political spectrum than does Mr. Beck, but listen to what she says at the end of this talk. They seem both to be absolutely opposed to the creation of a surveillance state that has centralized command and control over what people can think, teach, and learn.
Here’s the money quote from Dr. Madeloni’s talk:
“It’s something to think about as people who live in this country—that we are always subject to gaze, now. Just walk down the street. But as a teacher educator, that I am supposed to—am being told to—encourage my students to submit to the gaze of a centralized authority is really disturbing to me.”
Elephant Tree Features
I agree! It seems the one who truly is ANGRY and IGNORANT of her own volition is Ms. Ravitch! It is totally unprofessional of her to make such a claim and write a blog about Glenn Beck’s book (Conform) when she herself has never read it. I still can’t get over the “nerve” she had to post it and yet not see her own hypocrisy!
Please bear in mind, Ms. Huston, that Diane Ravitch has allowed these posts to appear on HER blog. I have always known her to be a ready to the defense of freedom of speech and thought and of open debate. She is fighting, from a hospital bed, very, very powerful forces that are attempting to destroy public education–a federal government and very wealthy plutocrats who have dedicated themselves to that end. It is not at all surprising to me that she would rush to the defense of public education against a perceived attack on it. If the book does not attack public education per se, then explain how that is so. Dr. Ravitch is an extraordinarily thoughtful and compassionate person and someone with enormous integrity who in her mid seventies has risen to the defense of kids and their teachers. Try to be civil in your comments here in her living room.
rratto,
I happen to believe that our most precious asset in this nation is our Children, not our public education system. It seems a terrible disease has taken hold of the system and it needs to be wiped out and made whole again. Again the children are our most precious asset. The system needs to be fixed. I am all for public education but not the road that it is currently headed down.
local schools under local control, but operating under a requirement that all students receive free, unfettered, equal, nondiscriminatory access
Bob Shepherd,
I love most of what you have written. If you did not read my previous post stating my position on all the good things that I do admire about Diane Ravitch then I invite you to go back and look. I believe I have been civil. She invited me into her living room by accepting me on the blog . I have enjoyed many things that she has brought up in the past posts. I also have shared many things that I have learned from her and I think she is brilliant and courageous! Please do not misunderstand me. Just because I happen to think she is very wrong for attacking someone else who she claims is attacking public education without knowing all the facts herself to make such claims, doesn’t mean I hate her. Yes. You are right, this is HER blog. Her title Glenn Becks ANGRY and IGNORANT book on Common Core is what she opened her post with and the Irony of it pertaining to her hypocrisy on the issue is something that I can not let go by unchallenged. If she only wants to talk to people who ONLY agree with HER and will only allow said people to comment then I would never step foot in her living room. I think she does have a lot to contribute. But are you saying I have no right to call her out on such a blatant double standard ?
As I said, I have always found Diane Ravitch to be an FIERCE supporter of freedom of thought and expression and an opponent of the Thought Police on both the left and the right. This is something I greatly admire in her.
Bob, I beg to differ that this blog is like inviting someone into your living room. This is a worldwide, public forum, so unless her living room is in the middle of the town square where anyone and everyone can listen and respond, to equate this to a living room simply doesn’t make sense.
You defend Dr Ravitch as being “ready to the defense of freedom of speech and thought and of open debate.” Yet this very blog post is an example of where she doesn’t want that to happen. She attacks someone and their ideas without any direct knowledge of what was said, and tells people to ignore what this person is saying. That is exactly the opposite of open debate.
Rick Langel, I said that this blog is my virtual living room. I make the rules. This is not CNN or Huffington Post. If you can’t abide by the rules of the blog, don’t read it.
What rule am I not following?
Colleen,
Assets are something that we own and control. Unlike Beck, I want my children to be free to have an open mind, to explore, to question the status quo, to be able to solve problems with their fellow citizens, to care for one another, to be stewards of the future, to learn from the past, to be willing to fail asthey try new things, to respect, to appreciate the diversity that makes our nation great, to grow in ways we can not fathom. I do not want them to be i doctrinated by the Left or the Right. I want them to determine right from wrong..I want them to be able to see through the hucksters selling”gold” and fear.
I don’t see my children as assets, that went out with having boys to work the farm.
rratto,
Ok, you got me there. I should have said I believe our children are the most precious and important part of this nation. Sorry for using asset in the wrong way.
I would like to point out to you that all those wonderful things that you wrote about what you want for our children, to be free thinkers and not indoctrinated and so on… Is everything Glenn Beck wants for all children too. As do I. Which is what my whole point of this whole conversation is. That if you actually read the book you would see just how much we all really do want the same things that are good and true for the children in this nation. That they might have liberty and freedom to be creative free thinkers etc.. It just goes to show that you really don’t know just how much you do have in common with someone who you are not giving the benifit of a doubt too. If you really listened to and knew what Glenn Beck was about you would KNOW that he is for all that too! Exactly the very things you wrote. Ok I’m done
So Beck doesn’t want kids to have an open mind? He doesn’t want them to question the status quo? Do you have any evidence whatsoever to back up your claims?
Remember, he’s the one talking about fighting back against the status quo, who says that we need to educate ourselves and make up out own minds. So I’m extremely curious to find out what exactly he said that led you to make those claims. Because I know you wouldn’t make claims like that without having something to back it up.
I question that, I have listened to Beck, he is a very dangerous man.
We both seemingly may believe the same things, but that is as far as the comparison goes. Our words may be the same when we opine what we want for children, but the what we believe in are very different.
Beck has a knack for sensationalism, that sells his books. Not interested in contributing to that poisoned well of misinformation.
So you don’t read his books, you don’t explain exactly what he says that you have a problem with, you make claims you don’t back up, but you accuse him of misinformation?
Good one!
Rick is this you?
” My name is Rick Langel, and I am the parent of a junior and a 6th grader. I stand here today on behalf of many Ankeny parents who oppose Standards Based Grading. One of my many concerns about Standards Based Grading is the life lessons it teaches kids. Training kids that doing the detail work of homework is optional and they can get more than one chance to complete their work without consequence is not something that I see as a positive. That is not how things work in the real world. Would a civil engineer get to redo a bridge that failed without any consequences? Would the IRS let an accountant get a do-over if they did your taxes wrong? Of course not. People face consequences for their work every day. I do a lot of interviewing and hiring for my department, and if I have the choice between two people, one who is intelligent but with a poor work ethic and one who is average but works their tail off, I will go with work ethic every time. I know you’re looking at modifications to those issues, but I don’t see them as something we want at all. We are doing our kids a disservice if we don’t reinforce with them that doing all the work is beneficial and that there are consequences for not doing things well enough the first time. I don’t want someone packing my parachute who needs more than one chance at getting it right.
It seems to me this methodology is being pushed on the district when there is no evidence to show that it actually improves learning and work habits. Traditional grading as we are using it in Ankeny most certainly needs some updates, but Ankeny has been producing quality young adults for a century using traditional grading, and it doesn’t seem to make sense to replace that system with unproven research when the current system has worked well for many of you on the school board, as well as your kids and grandkids. I respectfully request that the school board require the administration to stop implementing SBG and on improve our current teaching methods to meet the standards required by Iowa Core. Thank you.”
Yes it is. Are you going to attack me now instead of backing up your own claims?
I like to know who I am debating…
I’m simply asking you to back up your claims.
I have, more than once… It appears you believe that children should not be allowed to make mistakes or develop their own way of looking at things. Much like Beck. Standards are not some evil tool. Even engineers have standards.. you believe in them?
The problem we are having, is that those on the extreme edges of this debate cloud the pedagogical debate about these standards with conspiratorial tin foil hat arguments. In the long run, people like you and Beck actually have agendas that you are driving using the Common Core issue as a talking point. That hurts kids.
You have not backed up your claims, you only keep throwing out claims that aren’t true and not providing any evidence to support them.
And now you’re attacking me for pointing that out with no evidence to back up your claims, either. This seems to be a pattern for you, making up claims against people you disagree with.
Oh, BTW, I want kids to have the opportunity to tail and then learn from their mistakes. I understand it’s part of maturing into an adult. So you are clearly just making up claims based upon your personal agenda without any facts to back up your claims, which is exactly what you accuse me of.
That should be “…opportunity to fail…”
fail tail. typing on an I pad …
Rick,
once again, I have answered your questions. I am just pointing out the problems with your educational philosophy. Not attacking you personally. I read your words, posted them and commented on them. You seem to leave no room for children being children and making mistakes.
If this is your schema then so be it.. now we know why you worship Beck and his teachings.
BTW your anti-teacher side is showing.
Which is kinda my point. You posted one snippet, derived from that my “educational philosophy”, and got even that wrong. And then you use that incorrect assessment to attack me, all while failing to back up what you’ve previously claimed. I’ve simply asked you to back up your claims (because I know there is nothing to back up the claims you’re making), and you try to change the topic to attack me instead. That tells me a lot about you.
rratto,
Now your just being rediculous !
Why won’t you back up your statements with evidence of your claims, instead of just throwing out your own conclusions and opinions which are totally off? Your hatred for Beck is so obvious as to why you won’t even listen to reason. I’ll say it again. I bet if you really listened to and got to know who Glenn Beck is with putting aside all the typical names and stereotypical ways that the media has described him. You would see that it is NOT seemingly so that he wants all those same things for the rising generation that you listed. Which I loved btw and completely agree with! Anyway, you would see and know for yourself that it doesn’t just SEEM that way, but that it is so sincerely true!
But your not willing to give someone because of your own prejudice the benifit of a doubt. Which I believe is completely contradicting in that all those wonderful things you listed that you want for the children, you are purposefully not applying to yourself. So that you can feed your stubborn and relentless position on what you believe is (that no matter what Glenn Beck writes or puts out, it must not be true! Because I can’t stand him). Which is so closed minded. When what if in fact he wrote things and actually does sincerely believe in and live by those things ? You would see that for yourself if you were only willing to take off those dark glasses of unjust judgments. For in my humble opinion you have made false claims about Mr. Beck and have Judged your brother falsely! If I am wrong, show me with your evidence that he doesn’t want those same things too. Because I have seen with my own eyes and ears him talking about all those things that he wants for his kids and the rising generation that you listed. I want you to show me where this is NOT the case. I do believe that you and Ms. Ravitch want good things for our children. But it is also very clear that you both are unwilling to admit that making false claims and statements about people that are NOT true is WRONG!
Anyone who opposes turning U.S. education over to a centralized Common Core Curriculum Commissariat is on my side of this issue. That’s a terrible mistake pedagogically AND, politically, a VERY SLIPPERY SLOPE.
Bob Shepherd,
I very much agree!
I happen to agree 100% with the Berliner chapter quoted elsewhere in this blog and must point out that unless we do something about inequalities in our schools (re: poverty) then no amount of Common Core is going to work. My doctoral thesis studying results of High Stakes testing outcomes on the Texas TAKS test illustrated that there is very little relationship (slightly positive but statistically moot) between educational outcomes for AP students, Gifted and Talented students, and students taking multiple years of the arts. The results begs the question of whether all of those students would have done well no matter the curricular design. The common factor in achievement appears to be poverty, as Berliner so effectively illustrated. The Common Core is just another one size bandage that will NOT work.
Your thesis sounds fascinating. Is it available online? Can you provide a link to it? I would love to read it.
What were your measures of educational outcomes?
Common Core is certainly dangerous, more than many realize.
Pedagogically, the national standards in ELA are simply indefensible. They are extraordinarily backward. They can most charitably be described as prescientific.
But the very idea that the state has the right to promulgate regulations mandating what IDEAS people must and must not teach and learn should be abhorrent to all who care about liberty. As I said, this is a VERY slippery slope.
Back during the first Bush administration, George Senior floated the idea of having a single set of mandatory national standards and national tests and this idea was UNIVERSALLY hooted down by folks left, right, and center, almost all of whom recognized this as a violation of our most cherished, most fundamental principles. What a difference a few decades makes! There’s a boiled frog phenomenon occurring here. NCLB got people used to this notion, which you rightly describe as DANGEROUS. The last thing that a diverse, complex, pluralistic society needs is the state mandating treating students as widgets to be identically milled. Totalitarian states do that. We cannot allow that to happen here.
Yes Rick Langel,
That is what I am so not ok with.
Thank you for articulating that so well!
I’m sorry for the fighting within this thread, and yet I view it as a very telling sign about the CCSS.
In WW2, Russia and the USA became allies. Not because we believed in each other’s method(s) of governance but because we had a very powerful common enemy. The war could have turned out very differently without that union.
Anytime forces with conflicting interests unite to fight a common foe, you know that there’s something powerful that needs to be stopped or at least contained for further examination. That’s what we’re seeing, here.
If CCSS was just about politics, the pushback wouldn’t be as severe.CCSS is about money and some very powerful people who, even if well intentioned, are using that money to make sweeping changes to a public institution without the CONSENT of the public. These people have great influence over the media, and so have been able to use it, very effectively, to push their agenda. This is wrong and worthy of even the most unlikely of alliances.
Ravitch: I miss Walter Cronkite, Dan Rather, and dozens of other smart journalists who brought more than their opinions to their journalism. Bill Moyers is one of that breed. We need more.
All products (like you, Diane) of public education in Texas.
🙂
So you like journalists who don’t do journalism, but instead infuse their opinion? Wouldn’t that mean they think they know better than you what we should think?
What kind of journalist would you hold up as a model to follow?
Dan Rather was a poor reporter in the lead up to the Iraq War, while good reporters like Phil Donahue were fired.
Beck believes teacher’s unions exploits public school classrooms to enrich their unions and spread poisonous social justice propaganda… why should I spend even 1 penny on this garbage?
Because there is evidence to back up the claims. But you have a closed mind about any of that evidence.
Remember the claims you made about what Beck said about John Dewey being evil? Once I posted the evidence to back it up, even someone who had researched Dewey for his masters said he didn’t know that info. But you’re not even interested to know if there is any actual evidence to support the claims. You don’t see that as a problem?
Whoa, there, Hoss. I didn’t say I researched him for my Masters. I said that I’d read one of his major books during my Masters study. It was “The School and Society”. Here are a couple of quotes:
” When the school introduces and trains each child of society into membership within such a little community, saturating him with the spirit of service, and providing him with the instruments of effective self-direction, we shall have the deepest and best guaranty of a larger society which is worthy, lovely, and harmonious.”
“All studies arise from aspects of the one earth and the one life lived upon it. We do not have a series of stratified earths, one of which is mathematical, another physical, another historical and so on. We should not live very long in any one taken by itself. We live in a world where all sides are bound together. All studies grow out of relations in the one great common world. When the child lives in varied but concrete and active relationship to this common world, his studies are naturally unified….”
These are good concepts, to my view. They are typical of what Dewey has represented to me, until yesterday. If I had researched Dewey as part of my Masters, I probably would have seen the info about his socialist and militaristic views. Regardless, however, I believe that what’s “stuck” with our system are quotes such as what I copied and pasted, above.
My mistake, sorry. Thanks for the correction.
BTW, just because someone says something positive in one part of their lives doesn’t mean overall they cannot be evil.
BTW…this is indoctrination:
”When the school introduces and trains each child of society into membership within such a little community, saturating him with the spirit of service, and providing him with the instruments of effective self-direction, we shall have the deepest and best guaranty of a larger society which is worthy, lovely, and harmonious.”
Training children to take their part in the collective. You can see his socialist underpinnings in that paragraph.
And so we’ve found an area in which you and I disagree, Rick. So be it. I see that as being a fine quote worthy of emulation and you see it as an evil seed.
Honestly: I don’t want to debate the definition of socialism and it’s benefits or detriments on this forum. Especially in this thread where I want to focus on the CCSS and ways in which we can stop them. So why don’t we just figure we’re going to disagree on that one and, possibly, talk about it another time? Sound good? I respect your opinion. Please return the favor and let’s drop it there.
The evidence shows that states with teacher’s unions outperform those without..plenty of documentation out there to prove that
Even if that was true, can you prove a causal connection?
why don’t you share Becks source that back up his claim?
I’d hate to tell you what to think, I’d rather you’d do the research yourself. If you don’t want to buy the book, get it from your local library.
Will you share your sources which back up your claims?
I guess we are done, once I cite a Beck belief and ask for his source ( which you claim are in his book) you can not produce.. I am done feeding the trolls for today. Enjoy the Memorial Day weekend, remember those who made the ultimate sacrifice so that we may enjoy academic freedom.
I can produce it, I simply want to see you do your own research instead of having a closed mind and only accepting sources you already agree with.
When I cited a belief of Dewey’s, for example, I provided my own source to back that up. Why won’t you do the same?
Why are you so fiercely opposed to listening to those you disagree with?
I really wish we could push past these simple-minded rehashings of old political categories.
There’s a very serious challenge right now, in this nation, to fundamental liberties. We have seen the creation of a national Curriculum and Pedagogy Thought Police accountable to no citizen. Yesterday, the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation announced that the same folks who brought you the Common Coring of the United States are creating an organization to review textbooks to determine whether they are appropriate.
We have institutions that have traditionally been on the left–teachers’ unions–serving as propaganda ministries for the Common Coring of our country. We have institutions that have traditionally been on the right–the Heritage Foundation, the Chamber of Commerce, the Business Roundtable, ALEC–doing the same.
Those of us who oppose the centralization, regimentation, standardization, and totalitarian control of U.S. education cannot afford, at this time, to be squabbling with one another. We must make Common Cause against the Common Core.
For the sake of liberty.
For the sake of our children.
And those institutions on the left and the right receive their funding to support this centralization of command and control over US education, primarily, from two sources.
And by the way, the creation of a national Censor Librorum for textbooks is precisely what the Brookings Institution called for in an op-ed just a couple months ago.
The fix is very far in on this. We had better get serious about our opposition and stop squabbling among ourselves.
This is why it is dangerous for Diane to say that some teachers can come in to “fix” it, and that it is really ok. There is no discussion of the published material that are on the ground hurting children and a description of them on this site. If Diane went into the classrooms to witness this situation, commentary would be more real, Being in a tiff that Beck did not read her book, and now she won’t read his book does not serve the children. There is so much that is undocumented about this process that we need to return to the original State curricula.
Diane often posts about particularly ridiculous Common Core materials. I agree, emphatically, that the last thing that we need are mandatory national standards, at their best ossify and at their worst indoctrinate. My understanding is that Diane supports voluntary standards, created by transparent processes involving actual classroom teachers that local teachers and schools and adopt and adapt as they see fit and that she favors assessments made by teachers covering what they teach and appropriate to their particular students and classes. And most of this blog has dealt with the lack of transparency of the Common Core and its related undertakings–assessments, school and teacher evaluation systems. On the matter of Mr. Beck’s book, I will probably read it now and probably would not have read it had I not happened to see this post.
Bob Shepherd: you are right. I support voluntary national standards, created by classroom teachers and scholars, regularly revised based on experience, used not as a goal that all children must meet but as aspirations that must be supported , with opportunity and resources for learning. I do not believe that all children should reach the finish line at the same time but that all children should have equal opportunity to do do.
I hope that many are reading what Dr. Ravitch just said here. Wise words.
Yes Bob,
I just did. These are the things I do LOVE about Dianne. I really do think she’s great at times. I’m just not happy about this particular Beck Bashing, when it is undeserved.
I don’t agree that these words are so wise. I don’t see how Diane’s ideas are going to improve an educational system in dire need of systematic change. (And the system needed these changes before NCLB, Race to the Top, or Common Core, so even if today’s reformists went away, we’d still have problems.) The system works for few and harms many. As a historian, Diane, you should note that the problems John Holt noted so many years ago are still problems today. The problems John Taylor Gatto noted during his time in public schools are still problems today. The problems Alfie Kohn has noted over and over are valid, serious problems. And there is a reason that John Medina has said that if we take everything we know about how the brain works and created a place of learning that is the antithesis of everything we know about how the brain functions, we would create today’s schools. I would argue, Diane, that your undying devotion to an institution causes you to miss the fact that no institution is more important than an individual. And right now individuals are being harmed by the institution of public education. If the institution must be dismantled to protect the individual, then so be it.
Richard, I am very much in Kohn’s camp on many, many issues, and I make these arguments about the prescientific backwardness of our educational approaches ALL THE TIME on this blog. And John Holt is on my short list of the greatest thinkers in education of all time.
What I have seen from Dr. Ravitch is defense of the idea that liberty in these matters matters. She has consistently defended the right of independent teachers, scholars, and researchers to put forward their ideas to a free people who can choose to adopt them or not and the importance of ongoing, continuing, free discussion and debate. She has consistently argued AGAINST setting this stuff in stone, AGAINST a single invariant, ossified, MANDATE for all.
And she showed what I think of as truly breathtaking courage and integrity by reversing her position on Ed Deform and alienating very, very powerful former allies and friends because she had to do what she came to believe was right for kids.
And for those reasons, she’s someone for whom I have boundless admiration.
I attended a talk by Holt many years ago, and he said something that has stuck with me all my working life:
He said, “People who teach should, from time to time, take upon themselves a project to learn something that is, for them, new and difficult. Holt said that because he was a teacher of compassion. He was saying, “Rule 1 for being a teacher: don’t be a jerk.”
Bob Shepard,
I completely agree!
Bob Shepard,
You are so right!
Every fascist state has these things in common: there’s an unelected central committee that promulgates invariant “standards” and that vets textbooks and other instructional materials for acceptability.
We now have the former in the Land of the Free^TM. And very, very soon, the same “group of foundations” that brought us the former is going to give us the latter.
It has been shocking to me that organizations that can usually be counted on to oppose the creation of centralized, top-down regulatory authorities–organizations like the Brookings Institution, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Business Roundtable, the Heritage Foundation, and ALEC–have been so supportive of this sort of regulatory centralization. To their credit, CATO and the Koch Brothers have been consistent about this. They oppose centralized regulation, and they oppose it here, too.
The fact is that the folks whose personal financial interests are served by creating a single set of national standards have bought off and/or successfully propagandized organizations on both the left and the right to make this happen. Merecedes Schneider has written extensively about who is on the Common Core payroll and why.
Bob,
Diane has a great resource of knowledge to impart and many trusting friends in various quarters. Some say that we can differ on things and I agree, but parents are throwing themselves on the line with their kids against Common core and testing. I have respected her not coming out against Randi due to her friendship, but solidarity with parents has to have some core idea. I have inquired about her interest in progressive groups linked to a conservative NGO and have not received an innocuous explanation. Now, with her recent support of Common Core just needing “fixing”, I am becoming concerned. Diane is an historian in education, but Beck is bringing us the facts about the bigger picture. I know the role of foundations like Ford and others to hijack the debate and turn protesters into “pets” as Arundhati Roy points out, and I am not getting a message of bold revolt, but book promotion. Despite Beck’s scary past, there may be market forces behind him that can help us and he has more PR now than Diane. Damage is being done in classrooms in real time with real commercial staff development and materials and not on book tours.
Joseph,
I have no connection to any NGO. Please stop writing the same garbage day after day. My patience wears thin. Stop it or go away. if you keep spewing nonsense, I will block you from the blog.
Diane
Joseph, one thing I am certain of: Diane Ravitch represents no special interests. She speaks her mind freely based on her considerably knowledge and experience and based on what she believe to be the right thing to do. Here integrity in unimpeachable. I would bet my life on that.
Yikes. Typos in that. Here, corrected:
Joseph, one thing I am certain of: Diane Ravitch represents no special interests. She speaks her mind freely based on her considerable knowledge and experience and based on what she believe to be the right thing to do. Her integrity is unimpeachable. I would bet my life on that.
cx: believes
Yikes. Writing too hastily here.
A refresher: http://www.naturalchild.org/guest/john_gatto.html
The CCSS and the testing-based accountability movement misunderstands, fundamentally, human nature. People do not like to be controlled. They want to be the origins of their own behavior, to have autonomy. That’s what liberty means. That’s why Education Deform is AT ITS MOST FUNDAMENTAL LEVEL tyrannical, in opposition to individual autonomy and liberty.
cx: misunderstand, singular, of course
And that’s why the test-based accountability movement will have PRECISELY THE OPPOSITE of its intended effects.
Unless, of course, the intention is to create docile, fearful, but obedient low-level workers. (Will you be taking your latte on the veranda, Mr. Gates? And what about the young master? Yes, sir. Immediately, sir.)
See also
My last posting was blocked, but my disenchantment goes back to that with Diane allying with Randi:
“Sure, I discovered that the vapor intrusion system had been turned off, allowing toxic vapors to enter the school. Bill deBlasio and the City Council called for an investigation when I was terminated. I had testified regularly before their Education Committee. New York Lawyers for the Public Interest (NYLPI) worked with me as well as others liker New York Committee for Occupational Safety and Health (NYCOSH). Randi and the union was AWOL They didn’t give a sh*t about any members reporting toxic schools or children in them. I had become the “Serpico” of toxic schools”.
.l On May 21, 2014 7:00 AM, “Diane Ravitch’s blog” wrote: > > dianeravitch posted: “Over the years, we have seen a steady dumbing down of American culture, especially in the mass media. Whether newspapers, radio, or television, we have lost many of our well-educated, cultured, well-informed thinkers. Often they have been replaced by shoc” >