Sarah Garland: How a Reagan-Era Report Provides the Basis for Obama’s Education Policies

46 Comments Post your own or leave a trackback: Trackback URL

1. Gordon Wilder says:

   August 24, 2014 at 11:21 am

   Yes indeed. The “Nation at Risk” started it all. It is remembered well. Then Gerald Bracey a Psychologist wrote the “Bracey Reports” showing the fallacy of what A nation at Risk purported. It received virtually no attention and things have deteriorated since that time. Such is the power of money in high places.

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • Chris in Florida says:

     August 24, 2014 at 1:01 pm

     I miss Gerry every single day. What he would say about the extremes the reforms have degenerated into would be of great solace to my ears.

     LikeLike

     Reply
   • K Quinn says:

     August 24, 2014 at 3:16 pm

     Thank you for mentioning him. And to think so many people pooh-poohed much of what he wrote as being on the lunatic fringe at times. “Conspiracy theorist” I heard a professor label him. Yet the bulk of his research and writings have been spot on. I, too, miss him greatly, particularly his ability to cut through the BS and call it as it is/was. I was happy he had moved to Washington as I hoped he would turn the spotlight on some of the drivel coming out of OSPI. Alas, it was a short stay. 😦

     LikeLike

     Reply
2. Lloyd Lofthouse says:

   August 24, 2014 at 12:10 pm

   I found this on Wiki:

   In 1990, Admiral James Watkins, the Secretary of Energy, commissioned the Sandia Laboratories in New Mexico to document the decline in the Nation at Risk report with actual data.[8]

   When the systems scientists broke down the SAT test scores into subgroups they discovered contradictory data. While the overall average scores declined, the subgroups of students increased. In statistics this is known as Simpson’s paradox. The three authors presented their report.[9]

   David Kearns, Deputy Secretary of Education allegedly told the authors of the report,”You bury this or I’ll bury you”,[10] though Diane Ravitch disputes this quote.[11]

   Education Week published an article on the Sandia report in 1991.[12]

   Unlike the Nation at Risk report, the Sandia Report critique received almost no attention.

   ——————————————-

   NOTE: Why don’t we resurrect the Sandia Report and spread it far and wide and link it to Obama and his Race to the Top and Machiavellian CCSS agenda.

   Is Obama a Reagan Clone—a Manchurian candidate in the Democratic Party? Has anyone discovered any links from Obama to the Koch brothers and the Walton family or are all the links only leading to Bill Gates?

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • FLERP! says:

     August 24, 2014 at 12:15 pm

     Several years ago there was a rather spicy exchange on Salon (i think) between Gerald Bracey and Diane about the alleged “suppression” of the Sandia report.

     LikeLike

     Reply
   • Mark Twainfive says:

     August 24, 2014 at 1:40 pm

     I shared the report with staff at both USC and CSULB in the early 90’s, but they did not want to see it. This is when I dropped out of the Repubkican Party. I found out that Bush wanted this study done because of his hope it would have data to support his Zillion points of light initiative. The data demonstrated that all subgroups were showing growth but it was not at a rate that seemed to be media noteworthy. Big money sided with Bush because they could increase profits if they could convince people that we needed a New Direction.

     LikeLike

     Reply
     • MathVale says:

       August 24, 2014 at 2:32 pm

       I got stuck by a point of light and that area is still sore.

       I just watched an episode of Columbus on the Record debating Common Core. It was clear the 4 panelists had no idea what they were talking about. One super conservative even praised Finland not knowing they are about as anti-tea party,anti rank and yank as you can get with a strong union to boot. That’s how junk science like “A Nation at Risk” gets turned into policy – a Tyranny of Ignorance.

       LikeLike

   • K Quinn says:

     August 24, 2014 at 3:21 pm

     It has been brought up numerous times. Gerald Bracey wrote about it extensively. More recently Christopher Tienken (sp?) and his co-author referred to it in their book on school reform. (Which was a good read, might I add – gave me some additional historical perspective on public ed and lots of good references).

     LikeLike

     Reply
   • democracy says:

     August 25, 2014 at 5:17 am

     Lloyd, there was far more to the Sandia report than just SAT scores. SAT scores are a poor measure for much of anything. The Sandia researchers investigated those scores because public education critics use them to bash public schools.

     LikeLike

     Reply
     • Lloyd Lofthouse says:

       August 25, 2014 at 12:05 pm

       democracy,

       You triggered my curiosity so I went to YouTube and found this video about the Sandia Report.

       https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsRHgQ3iTxs

       Quote from the Weekend Wonk’s YouTube page video: “Back around 1989, Gentle Readers, when public education was the topic du jour, a research team under the auspices of the Sandia Corporation, here in Albuquerque, was charged with taking an honest look at our public schools in order to see if they were really as bad as everyone seemed to think. A preliminary report… said, to some peoples relief and to others outrage, that the public school system was doing a pretty darned good job, all things considered… The Sandia Report… sank like a stone. I was moved, however, to write this fantasy. Hope you enjoy it—From the original blog at MacInstruct.com, Dec. 8, 2007.”

       The Weekend Wonk is a podcast blog by Jerry Shea, University of New Mexico professor emeritus of English.

       Isn’t it time that we resurrect the Sandia report and spread it far and wide?

       LikeLike

   • wgersen says:

     August 25, 2014 at 5:43 am

     I was Superintendent in MD in the early 90s and one of my colleagues put us onto the Sandia report and most of us were Gerald Bracey fans… but by then it was too late. After 8 years of reading about “failing schools” and having miracle school reports out of PG where a combination of high expectations and a focus on tests had narrowed the gap between white and black students and the trend of partnering with private businesses was afoot. In retrospect the mainstream media ignored the report or marginalized it in large measure because it did not fit the “failing schools” narrative at the time.

     LikeLike

     Reply
     • democracy says:

       August 25, 2014 at 7:07 am

       @ wgersen.

       The mainstream media did indeed ignore the Sandia Report. But way too many public school administrators jumped on the bandwagon, and also that of No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top.

       As I’ve noted here repeatedly, the AFT and NEA and national PTA and ASCD have done the same with Common Core.

       It is disgraceful.

       LikeLike

     • Lloyd Lofthouse says:

       August 25, 2014 at 12:12 pm

       I think it’s time to resurrect the Sandia Report.

       And this week, I plan to write a post about it for my Crazy Normal Blog.

       And once that’s done, I’ll Tweet it far and wide, because I belong to a cooperative group of Tweeters that ReTweet (RT) each others Tweets reaching a potential audience in the hundreds of thousands+.

       Anyone who reads this and has a blog, a Facebook page, Google+ or who uses Twitter, has a choice—-join in to resurrect the Sandia Report and help spread the story of this report’s suppression far and wide.

       LikeLike

3. Chiara says:

   August 24, 2014 at 12:24 pm

   The Democrats abandoned it because public schools are unfashionable. If you believe public schools should be owned and run by the public rather than contract service providers they label you a “traditionalist” which is a way to completely dismiss and ignore the oblvious privatization of what were publicly-owned, publicly-run schools.

   K-12 public schools were the only truly public system in the US. Once we lose them, we won’t ever get them back. Democrats will have played a huge role in privatizing the one and only truly public system in the US. That’s huge.

   I think it’s an epic blunder. Privatized education systems haven’t benefited low income and middle income people anywhere else they’ve been tried, and they won’t benefit us here, either. Former President Bush and President Obama should be held directly responsible when public schools are completely privatized. They’re responsible for it.

   What an incredibly reckless and arrogant experiment to conduct on the tens of millions of people who count on public schools remaining public. Now that they’ve deregulated and fragmented they have no earthly idea how this will end up for the vast majority of us, and they not only don’t seem to care, they dismiss, ignore or demonize anyone who DOES care.

   Come look at what’s happening in my state and tell me they aren’t privatizing public schools. They are. Anyone who lives here and cares to look can see it happening right in front of us, and the same is true in MI and PA and FL. To continue to insist this isn’t happening is delusional.

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • Ponderosa says:

     August 24, 2014 at 2:52 pm

     “Unfashionable” is the right word. I was talking to a TV and movie producer yesterday about my job as a teacher. He asked me if I had considered working for a charter school, with the clear insinuation that this is where the good teachers naturally gravitate. To the educated elite in America, “charter” connotes smart, conscientious, hip, elite educated young teachers. “Public” connotes dim, mediocre, lazy, poorly dressed, badly educated old teachers. We have a branding problem. To his credit, this guy listened very well and seemed convinced that the reformers are performing a snow job on the general public.

     LikeLike

     Reply
     • Joe Nathan says:

       August 24, 2014 at 3:20 pm

       Ponderosa, there are thousands of charters around the US. Are you making the assertion about what charters represent on the basis of the conversation you described, on several conversations, or some research?
       The new Gallup Poll has interesting things to say about charters, but nothing about how people assume people who work there are “hip.”

       LikeLike

     • Chiara says:

       August 24, 2014 at 3:50 pm

       The least Democrats could have done was RUN ON privatizing public schools. That at least would have been honest.

       By 2016 they’ll be promoting “backpack vouchers” and the two parties will be identical on public education. Democrats will insist backpack vouchers are wildly progressive and they came up with it themselves.

       The US House just passed a huge federal subsidy to build new charter schools. Democrats got absolutely nothing for public schools in return for their votes, although under ed reform leadership at the federal and state level 32 states have cut funding for public schools.

       They’re simply not interested in existing public schools. Who wants to talk to some middle class, assistant principal plugging away in Des Moines when they can meet with Bill Gates and Tom Friedman? When’s the last time you saw a public school principal or teacher promoted on Morning Joe? I have no earthly idea why I’m paying this huge contingent of DC people to use public schools as political punching bags to promote their political and personal agendas.

       http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/05/legislation_encouraging_charte.html

       LikeLike

     • Ponderosa says:

       August 24, 2014 at 5:21 pm

       Chiara,

       TFA and charters have opened a space in the education sector in which upper caste Americans can feel they are not debasing themselves. By creating this separate zone, they avoid contamination by the lower castes. It is important to keep the zones separate. TFA/charter marks you as “one of us” (i.e. sharp Wesleyan/Yale types); “public school teacher” marks you as a loser. The sociology of this is very interesting.

       LikeLike

4. Chiara says:

   August 24, 2014 at 12:39 pm

   This is very progressive and innovative, I must say:

   “Riot police in Santiago on Wednesday used tear gas and water cannons against student protesters during a march in which tens of thousands rallied against what they declare are inadequate education reform proposals.
   The unrest in the Chilean capital marked the latest in a string of protests over the last several years championing free public education and specifically denounced a new round of education policies which students say do not go far enough in fulfilling the government’s promises to meet student demands.
   The protest, which began Tuesday, was organized by a number of Chilean student organizations in response to a proposal for education reform put forth to the national congress by President Michelle Bachelet. Students say that the legislation was drafted without student input and will not lead to any significant changes in the country’s education model.”

   They want a public education system back. Think they’ll get it? I don’t. We won’t get it back either once it’s gone. Privatization was a disaster for low income and middle income people there. Is there some reason it won’t be a disaster for us here, too? Or are we just rolling the dice and giving up something WE OWN for some “market theory” they’re trying? What a lousy deal our lawmakers have made on our behalf. We got the short end of that negotiation! It’s almost like there wasn’t anyone at the table representing the public interest.

   http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/08/21/chilean-police-employ-tear-gas-water-cannons-at-student-protest-interrupted-by/

   LikeLike

   Reply
5. Susan Lee Schwartz says:

   August 24, 2014 at 12:46 pm

   There you go, Diane, Now THAT is the question.
   Now ask ‘what happened to Clinton’s 2000, his education plan for research based policy, for which he convinced Pew to spend millions on studying the NECESSARY conditions in which LEARNING OCCURS. Harvard took Lauren Resnik’s thesis, (see links in an earlier comment) and crunched the data. The LRDC at the university of Pittsburgh, now under the leader ship of Stephanie McConachie, (since Lauren left) sent in the ‘tools’ people front he is ph’d center, to observe and run the workshops… which I attended when I was the nYC cohort.

   Hey, I have all the hype put out by Alvarado when Pew chose our district as the 12th in the study. I have all the letters from Vicki Bill, who was assigned to NYC and to my cohorthortship…pissing off Denise Levine, the then Director of Curricula, who had been pitching the district to attract the standards research. She had a real grudge against Vicki, which I discovered years later, when she became the PRINCIPAL OF MY SCHOOL, and was the oNE who hounded me out, and charged me with corporal punishment and incompetence. Talk about BULLIES AND BLOWHARDS, Lorna Stremcha’s book on how this malicious process affected her.https://plus.google.com/116048758495222290944/posts/8UW8cnTXhND?cfem=1

   But my point here is HERE WAS THE RESEARCH, part of the dems and CLINTON’S PLAN…NOT REGAN’S, AND IT DISAPPEARED…totally with Bush.

   YOU were there.
   Here is the hidden story, what the real indicators for learning look dlike in the thousands of classrooms visited, and what the research showed must be present…and Diane…THERE WERE 4 PRINCIPLES FOR ADMINISTRATION, in order to support the professional in the classroom.

   We need some real investigative journalism. I have provided all the names, The time was 1995-7. I have all the letters and documents. For goodness sakes, the LRDC paid for postage for 2 years, so I could mail all my curricula materials and the kids work. Theyinterviewed the students. They paid me to purchase my Yearling unit. which they used int their seminars where they taught the nation’s staff developers what learning looked like in different classrooms… with teachers who had unique curricula.

   Sometimes, I think I imagined it all, and the prestigious NYS English Council’s Educator of Excellence award in 1998, and the book offer from Phillipa Stratton at Stenhouse… and the charges of incompetence and corporal punishment.

   WHO WILL FIND THE TRUTH…contact Pew, or the LRDC, or Resnick, or Stephanie or Vicki?

   LikeLike

   Reply
6. Mark Twainfive says:

   August 24, 2014 at 1:27 pm

   A Nation at Risk recommended teachers pay increase to a “professionally competitive level”! How have we done compared to inflation since this document was released?

   LikeLike

   Reply
7. Joe Nathan says:

   August 24, 2014 at 2:17 pm

   Sadly, some Heckinger Reports are not honoring the legacy of the very careful writer, Fred Heckinger, former NY Times education editor, that they are supposed to honor.

   This report says that the role of the federal government was “mostly minimal” before A Nation at Risk. The Heckinger author ignores the hundreds of millions of dollars being distributed via Title One, from the federal government. The Heckinger author also ignores millions of federal dollars going to Head Start programs around the country.

   Al Quie, a member of the group that produced A Nation at Risk, has noted that many more recent reforms such as public school choice and chartering, are the opposite of what this report he helped produce recommended. A Nation at Risk rejected options in public education. It rejected the idea of more flexibility in exchange for more responsibility for results. While Quie was interested in these ideas, he was not able to convince members of the committee to endorse them.

   Those ideas were first found at a national level in the National Governors Association report, Time for Results., 1985. This report, which I helped write, also strongly endorses more targeted funding for high quality early childhood programs, along with other things.

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • Chris in Florida says:

     August 24, 2014 at 3:36 pm

     And yet Joe, despite your direct role in the movement to utterly destroy US public schools, the terror you’ve rained down upon career teaching professionals, and the untold harm you’ve caused our families and our health, you still seem able to sleep at night and appear in public to make your stealth “not all charters do it!” arguments. That takes real . . . something.

     I honestly don’t know how you do it. How do you ignore all the misery, hurt, pain, suffering, and damage you’ve done to so many teachers and so many children, all in the service of your ideology? It boggles my mind.

     LikeLike

     Reply
     • Chiara says:

       August 24, 2014 at 4:19 pm

       I can’t wait to hear Hillary Clinton’s public education plan. She’ll be debating Rand Paul on the how she’ll regulate the K-12 voucher state exchanges better and we’ll be told that’s the new “progressive” position.

       Leave it to Democrats to take a universal, free public education system and turn it into the fragmented, privatized, wildly expensive US health care system.

       LikeLike

     • Joe Nathan says:

       August 24, 2014 at 8:10 pm

       Chris, our Center and I have worked extensively with a vast array of “career” district as well as charter public school educators. Here’s a link to a column for Mn’s largest daily newspaper that I wrote, praising Cincinnati district educators and the local teacher’s union:
       http://www.startribune.com/opinion/commentaries/11150746.html

       We have a variety of partnerships with both district & charter educators, and constantly cite their great work in the weekly newspaper column I write.

       Moving on from personal attacks, do you see any difference with a report that urges putting more requirements on schools, with less flexibility (Nation at Risk), and a report that urges more support for early childhood education and more opportunities for public school educators that create new options? (Time for Results)?

       LikeLike

     • Chris in Florida says:

       August 24, 2014 at 8:59 pm

       Joe, as you should know by now I don’t agree with you that telling the truth is a ‘personal attack’.

       I also don’t agree that, because you occasionally throw a bone to public schools that the work you do and have done to promote charter schools as an alternative to public schools is anything but what it is: a way to destroy public schools so they can be replaced by privately-run, profit-seeking individuals and businesses that cherry pick their students and treat their teachers and students abominably.

       You are certainly skilled at spin and obfuscation but I am not dazzled by your sales pitch. What you do has harmed me greatly and a good many others like me. How do you live with that?

       LikeLike

     • Joe Nathan says:

       August 24, 2014 at 9:07 pm

       Have we ever met?

       We’ve brought millions of dollars to district public schools (a fact, not hyperbole). We’ve brought honor and recognition to district educators.

       LikeLike

     • Chris in Florida says:

       August 25, 2014 at 6:41 am

       “Have we met?”

       LOL

       No, but your national advocacy, books, legislative testimony, etc. etc. have had a real impact on my career and my life, and it has all been extremely negative.

       You can pretend you are a benevolent supporter of all that is good in education but all anyone here has to do to get to know you is read one of your columns or books and see how you glorify VAM, Michelle Rhee, and other unqualified and destructive reformist policies. You occasionally sigh and admit that a very few charter operators may not be of the highest caliber but you do not call them out and expose them as you advocate. You throw out “but look over here — this charter is good!” distractions instead.

       I do not salute or honor you Joe Nathan. You have done incalculable harm to this nation’s schools, students, and teachers.

       Own it. Move away from the hagiography of your website and see the truth.

       LikeLike

8. Chiara says:

   August 24, 2014 at 4:05 pm

   Why WOULD one support the Democrat over the Republican on public schools? Does anyone know? Democrats will possibly fund the privatized contractor payment system at slightly higher levels? We’re sort of looking for fine-print contractual differences at this point, don’t you think?

   While I’m thrilled that DC has reached bipartisan consensus on replacing public schools, I’m not sure the country as a whole has yet. They might want to let the electorate in on this at some point.

   LikeLike

   Reply
9. Andrew Rinko says:

   August 24, 2014 at 5:58 pm

   The Sandia Report dispelled Nation at Risk but Reagan never released it for political reasons.

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • democracy says:

     August 25, 2014 at 5:31 am

     It WAS released.

     LikeLike

     Reply
10. Cosmic Tinker says:

    August 25, 2014 at 12:53 am

    The Sandia Report was also revealed and the myths perpetuated in “A Nation at Risk” were contested in the seminal mid 90s book by Berliner and Biddle, “The Manufactured Crisis: Myths, Fraud, And The Attack On America’s Public Schools”

    LikeLike

    Reply
11. democracy says:

    August 25, 2014 at 5:31 am

    In writing about A Nation at Risk, Sarah Garland says nary a word about the Sandia Report, which was a very careful parsing of the data. And that report undermined virtually everything contained in A Nation at At Risk.

    Published in the Journal of Educational Research, May/June, 1993, – in the wake of the wake of A Nation at Risk – the Report concluded that:

    * “..on nearly every measure we found steady or slightly improving trends.”

    * “youth today [the 1980s] are choosing natural science and engineering degrees at a higher rate than their peers of the 1960s.”

    * “business leaders surveyed are generally satisfied with the skill levels of their employees, and the problems that do exist do not appear to point to the k-12 education system as a root cause.”

    * “The student performance data clearly indicate that today’s youth are achieving levels of education at least as high as any previous generation.”

    The George H.W. Bush administration tried to suppress the Sandia Report (And yes, Bracey asserted that Ravitch played a role in that).

    But even after it’s release, no one paid much attention to its findings. Not many “reformers” pay much attention now to the research data either. Instead, they tout “remedies” (charters, more testing, merit pay) that research fails to support. They embrace phony “shortages” in STEM (science, technology, engineering, math), and they adore tests like the ACT and SAT that are mostly worthless. Big money underwrites it all.

    The irony is that the Reagan administration launched nearly thirty years of supply-side economic policy which caused large budget and trade deficits and ballooned the national debt. Under George W. Bush, such policy nearly broke the economy.

    That’s the real cause of our nation being “at risk.”

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • dianeravitch says:

      August 25, 2014 at 8:40 am

      Democracy,

      The George HW Bush administration did not “suppress” the Sandia report. It was not a federal government report. It was published. How can something be suppressed if it was published? The GHWB administration did not agree with the Sandia report because the administration view was taken straight from ” Nation at Risk,” with its alarmist rhetoric. The entire Establishment, including Governor Clinton in Arkansas and all the other governors, bought the line that our nation was at risk because of failing schools. At that time, I agreed. My last two books are a refutation of that era.

      LikeLike

      Reply
      • democracy says:

        August 25, 2014 at 8:49 am

        Diane, I did NOT say the report was suppressed.

        I said quite specifically that the first Bush administration TRIED to suppress it. And even one of the original Sandia researchers said that was the case.

        But too many drafts of the report had already circulated, and there was a clamor for the report’s release.

        As I noted, after the report’s release, not many paid attention to it (including former Arkansas Governor Clinton and the “Establishment.”)

        And as I pointed out, the “Establishment” is now on board with STEM (and the Common Core). The STEM “crisis” has about as much credibility as A Nation at Risk.

        LikeLike

      • dianeravitch says:

        August 25, 2014 at 8:58 am

        Democracy,

        If the government does not agree to publish your report, it is not “suppressed.” The Sandia report went to the Department of Energy, which decided not to publish it as a US Government document. In this society, then and now, there are other outlets for publication.

        LikeLike

      • FLERP! says:

        August 25, 2014 at 9:45 am

        Diane — why was the Department of Energy commissioning a study of US education?

        LikeLike

      • democracy says:

        August 25, 2014 at 11:00 am

        Diane,

        Sigh.

        I noted that the Bush1 administration TRIED to suppress the Sandia report. The efforts were unsuccessful, and as I noted in my original comment, the Report was published in the Journal of Educational Research.

        As Jerry Bracey reported, when the Sandia researchers presented their findings to a joint meeting of staff from the departments of energy and education “David Kearns, former CEO of Xerox and then Deputy Secretary of Education” – who rarely had anything positive to say about American public education – told the researchers this:

        “You bury [report] this or I’ll bury you.”

        You’ve denied that happened. One of the original researchers, Bob Huelskamp, “has affirmed it.” And another, Lee Bray, said “Yes, it was definitely suppressed.”

        I find it odd that you call the decision of a private university not to have a certain person speak at graduation censorship, but when a government agency that utilizes public funds seeks to suppress a government-produced report on public education, you say nothing went amiss. That doesn’t wash.

        As you probably recall, at that time (1991) you wrote a piece published in The Post that argued all the “bad news” about public education was “right.”

        You were wrong about that, and you are dead wrong about the efforts to suppress the Sandia Report.

        @ Laura Chapman: It’s still difficult to find a copy of the Sandia Report unless you want to pay for it. Here’s a nice overview:

        http://www.edutopia.org/landmark-education-report-nation-risk

        LikeLike

      • dianeravitch says:

        August 25, 2014 at 11:31 am

        Democracy, the Bush 1 administration, like the Bush 2 administration, like the Clinton administration, like the Obama administration, believed “A Nation at Risk.” All believed that the schools were failing. I don’t know who, if anyone, commissioned the Sandia report. Sandia was part of the Department of Energy, not the Department of Education. The fact that the Energy Department did not publish the Sandia paper is not tantamount to “suppressing” it as there are other ways to publish a paper than having the federal government issue it. I worked in the Department of Education. We received many papers and reports that were not published and not suppressed. I attended the famous meeting with David Kearns. He was a great gentleman. I never heard him raise his voice or threaten anyone. I haven’t read the Sandia report in 20 + years. I probably would agree with it today. But I don’t agree that it was suppressed.

        LikeLike

      • Cosmic Tinker says:

        August 25, 2014 at 11:17 am

        Flerp!

        Huelskamp summarized the Sandia Report in Phi Delta Kappan in May, 1993, Vol. 74 No. 9,.and here is his summary of the purpose:

        “When the governors and President George Bush set forth national education goals in the wake of the September 1989 education summit in Charlottesville, Virginia, we at Sandia National Laboratories took note. We also listened to a challenge from the then-secretary of energy, Adm. James Watkins, who charged the national laboratories to become more involved in education.

        Because Sandia conducts scientific research for the U.S. government, we have a keen interest in the education system that develops future scientists, engineers, and mathematicians. Therefore, we initiated several new programs. Much of our past effort was directed toward education at the postsecondary level, but a significant portion of the new emphasis is directed toward elementary and secondary education.

        In support of these new efforts, we in the New Initiatives Department of Sandia’s Strategic Studies Center were asked to conduct a wide-ranging analysis of local, state, and national education systems to determine where Sandia could make its most effective contribution. The study that Charles Carson, Thomas Woodall, and I conducted produced some interesting results. It greatly changed our initial perceptions in several areas and reinforced our perceptions in others. Overall, it sought to provide an objective, “outsider’s” look at the status of education in the U.S.”

        LikeLike

      • Cosmic Tinker says:

        August 25, 2014 at 12:02 pm

        Diane, I would email you a personal copy of the Sandia Report but I don’t see your email address anywhere!

        LikeLike

12. Laura H. Chapman says:

    August 25, 2014 at 9:14 am

    I tried to find the Sandia Report. I was unable to access it. If you find a link without a paywall please let me know.

    LikeLike

    Reply
    • democracy says:

      August 25, 2014 at 11:00 am

      see above comment…

      LikeLike

      Reply
    • Cosmic Tinker says:

      August 25, 2014 at 11:01 am

      Laura, If you have access to a university library, the Sandia Report is in EBSCO and it’s called “Perspectives on Education in America: An Annotated Briefing”. It was published in the Journal of Educational Research, May/Jun 1993, Vol. 86 Issue 5, 329-311.

      I downloaded it from my university library and EBSCO only has it parsed into 9 separate pdf files, not just one file or one html page! So, I merged it all into one pdf file.

      I can’t share multiple copies due to copyright infringement, but I can send you one copy for individual use, if you want to let me know your email address.

      LikeLike

      Reply
      • Laura H. Chapman says:

        August 26, 2014 at 5:16 pm

        Thanks, I found the reference citation but have no university affiliation. Have requested a follow-up comment via email that should enable this

        LikeLike

13. m4potw says:

    August 25, 2014 at 12:46 pm

    Hi Lloyd

    Thank you to bring this up:

    “David Kearns, Deputy Secretary of Education allegedly told the authors of the report, ”You bury this or I’ll bury you”,[10] though Diane Ravitch disputes this quote.[11]”

    I hope that Dr. Ravitch does not have any obligation to answer to certain “challenging” (=hostile and dull) people regarding Sandia Report.

    When I was very young, and “challenging” (=hostile and dull), my parents kept telling me that honesty and compassion will not yield us freedom and safety. We must flow like water and tolerate like ocean so that we can preserve humanity (=survival with safety) and maintain civilization (=freedom in cultural cultivation).

    Here is my favorite quote from Mahatma Gandhi about the truth:

    “Truth alone will endure, all the rest will be swept away before the tide of time. I must continue to bear testimony to truth even if I am forsaken by all. Mine may today be a voice in the wilderness, but it will be heard when all other voices are silenced, if it is the voice of Truth.”

    In conclusion, I hope that all conscientious teachers in this platform will unconditionally support Dr. Ravitch’s pledge about the welfare of American Public Education, and Dr. Berger’s tenets of education.

    To all “challenging” people, we are conscientious teachers who will always tolerate your commitment of few of deadly sins (#4 & #7) according to Bible, such as:

    In the Book of Proverbs 6:16-19, among the verses traditionally associated with King Solomon, it states that the Lord specifically regards “six things the Lord hateth, and seven that are an abomination unto Him”, namely:[4]
    1. A proud look (Campbell)
    2. A lying tongue (Rhee-Johnson)
    3. Hands that shed innocent blood (brainwash innocent mind, Gates and his followers)
    4. A heart that devises wicked plots (Pearson and his subordinates)
    5. Feet that are swift to run into mischief (Chetty and Bribe from Harvard University)
    6. A deceitful witness that uttereth lies (Duncan, Cuomo)
    7. Him that soweth discord among brethren (challenging people in this thread)

    May God and seen and unseen Angels bless all conscientious politicians and educators (teachers and professors) with strength to accomplish your given mission on Earth. Most of all, please God bless all wicked mind people with some reminders, such as mild heart attack, mild stroke, recoverable flesh eating disease on their legs in order for them to re-learn and re-evaluate their God-given appreciative lessons about compassion (heart), intelligence (brain) and labor (limbs). Back2basic

    LikeLike

    Reply