Here is a paradox. Congress wrote a new law called “Every Student Succeeds Act,” late in 2015, loaded with limits on the power of the Secretary of Education. Both parties were fed up with Arne Duncan’s overweening reach into every school in the nation, going far beyond what Congress intended. Perhaps they knew that all the boasting about his great successes was empty, as a recent evaluation proved.
But along comes Betsy DeVos, never having ever attended or worked in a public school, and knowing nothing of federal policy or federal programs, who has decided to impose her personal ideology on the schools of America. She knows nothing of evidence, and when it flatly contradicts her ideology, she ignores it. This is the definition of a closed mind.
DeVos wants vouchers. The research says that vouchers haven’t improved student test scores.
Mercedes Schneider says we will learn the details later, stuff like the cost. DeVos claims that every child will be able to attend the same quality school as the most affluent but she knows that no voucher will be large enough to put every student (any student) into an elite private school, that such schools don’t have empty seats, nor do they want the kids with disabilities and a host of other issues. She is peddling empty promises. Does she know it? Does she believe what she is saying?
What we do know is that DeVos’s personal desire to bust up public schools and use federal funds for vouchers has been tried for 25 years without any evidence of success. Indeed, there is a growing body of research showing that children who use vouchers may actually lose ground compared to students in public schools. If vouchers were the solution, as she insists, we would be looking now to Milwaukee and Cleveland as the lodestars of American education. Sadly, they are not. Milwaukee has had vouchers since 1990, Cleveland since 1995. Researchers pore through data looking for the promised gains. They can’t find them.
Why is Congress allowing Trump and DeVos to foist their failed ideas on public schools? If NASA were run like the U.S. Department of Education, every space mission would explode on launch.
When will they learn? Schools need well-prepared, certified educators who are able to do their work as professionals, unencumbered by the petty whims and interventions of politicians. Students need healthcare, food security, and the basic essentials of life. Students and teachers need reasonable class sizes and adequate resources. What they don’t need is disruption and the demonstrably failed policies of a rightwing religious extremist.
Tim Slekar, the dean at Edgewood College in Wisconsin, summarizes the research consensus about the effect of vouchers: Vouchers suck. http://bustedpencils.com/2017/02/busted-pencils-trending-news-vouchers-suck/
Diane Ravitch's blog 
The reason why Betsy DeVos thinks the way she does was explained by Lord Acton in the 19th century.
“Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority; still more when you superadd the tendency of the certainty of corruption by authority.”
“Despotic power is always accompanied by corruption of morality.”
These quotes also explains who the malignant narcissist and most if not all of his cabinet are.
Diane,
I am serious: what is the purpose of the Dept of Education? If it was eliminated, would education be returned to the states–and is that good or bad?
There is legislation before congress to do exactly that.
See http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/318310-gop-lawmaker-proposes-abolishing-department-of-education
The Education functions of the US Government were under the old Department of Health, Education and Welfare. In the Carter administration, the Education split off from HEW, and the old HEW became the Department of Health and Human Services.
According to the Dept of Education, 92% of education spending originates with the states/municipalities.
Our nation had public education for many decades, before the feds got involved.
I believe that the states/municipalities would run the educational systems of the USA much more efficiently than the feds. The states/municipalities are much closer to the people.
Charles,
The Feds don’t run education. The states have that constitutional authority. The Feds enforce civil rights violations. The Feds provide funding for college students, poor kids, disabled kids.
Which of these functions do you object to?
Charles,
You might want to read this before the malignant narcissist in the White House and/or Betsy DeVos deletes it and replaces it with alternative facts.
Click the link and educate yourself before this information vanishes to be replaced with alternative facts and/or crappy propaganda.
https://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/fed/10facts/index.html?exp
Q Charles,
The Feds don’t run education. The states have that constitutional authority. The Feds enforce civil rights violations. The Feds provide funding for college students, poor kids, disabled kids.
Which of these functions do you object to?
END Q
I never said that the feds run education. As the dollar figures show, on the Dept of Ed website, the huge majority of the money is state/municipal.
I have no objection at all to the feds enforcing civil rights. It was the federal supreme court, which brought in the Brown v. Board of Education case, which compelled the end of segregated schools.
I am delighted that the feds provide Pell Grants and the GI Bill. (I am a recipient of both of these!). Many (not all) states have financial aid programs to assist their citizens in paying college costs, as well.
And I am delighted that the feds have the assistance for the disabled and handicapped. I would like to see more federal spending on the gifted/talented, perhaps through block grants to the states.
I am delighted that many people, from all across the political spectrum, want to see a reduced federal role in education.
April,
I will write a post about that. Too long for a serious reply.
April, I’m actually old enough to have started teaching special education before Public Law 94-142 was passed (now known as the Individuals with Disabilties Education Act).
This mandated public education for, as it said, all handicapped children, and it was enforced by the Department of Education.
Before the law was passed, some states did a reasonably good job of educationing children with special needs, but many states did not- in the latter states, many disabled kids were either warehoused in state institutions (many of them sub-standard), were in nursing homes, or just sat at home. After the law was passed, public schools began to admit the flood of disabled children who did not have this opportunity previously. And the Department of Education periodically audited public schools and school districts to make sure that they were following the law.
If the Department of Education was eliminated, I do not trust every state to provide appropriate public education for all these children. Some would, some wouldn’t.
Is special education “perfect” in every school throughout the country? No, of course not. But it’s a whole hell of a lot better than it used to be- I’ve been there, seen that.
Are you willing to throw these vulnerable children under the bus in those states who will not be willing to mandate or spend the money to provide an education for these children by eliminating the Department of Education because they will never be held to account by the federal government? I’m not.
This is where centrist or even regular mainstream democrats at the state and local levels stand to do A LOT more damage to our side.
Inevitably, states will be forced to accept or reject DeVos’s agenda. Centrist, reform minded dems are likely to give in and take what she is offering here because a) inevitably they agree with her on privatizing education and b) it’s a way to not only get federal $$, it’s a way to look bipartisan. It’s also a perfect foil for these dems who really want nothing more than to privatize schools, get them off the state house’s back, and break up those pesky organized teachers. “We couldn’t say no to this federal money! That would be doing a disservice to the kids of our state!”
I’m thinking of Governors like our Andrew Cuomo here. As far as education goes, perhaps one of our deepest and long standing enemies. He hates teachers, he hates having to deal with schools, he loves privatizing. He has already made serious moves to further enhance and fund charters in our state. Taking DeVos’s agenda is actually closer to his position than ours. Besides, he has accomplished his truly signature and historic goal: proving that a democratic governor in NY can be successful without the support of NYSUT. (Thanks NYSUT leadership for making that an easy one!)
As always, this story will probably end as most do on our side…..with democrats doing the real damage to public education. Republicans always talk big about education and privatizing, but it’s the centrist dems who really make it happen…..especially in states that matter most, like NY.
Prepare for pain.
So much sorrow, so much waste, so much stupidity … this is MY TAKE re: since Reagan and the DEFORMERS. And sorry, but, the Billaries, GW, and Obama ramped up this lunacy even more.
Charter schools and vouchers are plain wrong and divides … so UN-American. This country has become totally screwed up because of big $$$$$ for the NEO-Liberals as well as the RIGHT Wingers and their tawdry, disgusting, selfish agendas. Disgusting.
Reblogged this on David R. Taylor-Thoughts on Education and commented:
I see vouchers going like this, using completely made up numbers.
Private School charges $20K a year for a student. Feds agree to pay the full $20K in tuition. Private School raises tuition to $40K for voucher students so that it can still control who attends and who doesn’t.
That’s the problem. There is no mechanism to stop the bleeding from vouchers. They get to use public money like a personal ATM.
yes. My comment was more of a shot at the privates schools.
I do understand your point and agree there has to be some limitation to the voucher amount. It should not be more than the median expenditure per child in the state, whichever state.
I am completely against vouchers.
Questions I have: What percentage of most states’ education budget comes from the feds? How bad would the pain be if we rejected the funding? Can states sue to stop this strong-arming?
Here’s a piece about Funding for California’s public schools that says federal funds varies from district to district based on needs linked to federal legislation.
The pie chart shows that 14-percent of public school funds in California come from the Feds.
http://www.ppic.org/main/publication_show.asp?i=1001
Another source says federal funds to California’s public school make up only 9-percent.
https://ed100.org/lessons/whopays
The 2014–15 state budget includes more than $45 billion in General Fund resources for kindergarten through grade twelve (K–12) education and child development. Overall spending for California public schools is about $76.6 billion when federal funds and other funding sources are added.
http://www.cde.ca.gov/fg/fr/eb/
Take that $76.6 billion budget and 9-percent is almost $6.9 billion while 14-percent is $10.7 billion. That’s a lot of money to refuse.
From the Dept of Education website:
Q Total U.S. Expenditures for Elementary and Secondary Education.
In the 2004-05 school year, 83 cents out of every dollar spent on education is estimated to come from the state and local levels (45.6 percent from state funds and 37.1 percent from local governments). The federal government’s share is 8.3 percent. END Q
(Keep in mind, that this is for the entire USA. Some states have a higher percentage of their Education spending coming from Uncle Sam, than others)
see https://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/fed/10facts/index.html?exp
also from the Dept of Ed:
Q Even in this current time of the war against terror, taxpayer investment in education exceeds that for national defense END Q
The states could possibly raise their own revenue, and decline some or all of the federal spending on education.
Normally, the federal government cannot be sued by the states (unless the federal government consents in advance) . From Wikipedia:
Q
In the United States, the federal government has sovereign immunity and may not be sued unless it has waived its immunity or consented to suit. The United States as a sovereign is immune from suit unless it unequivocally consents to being sued. … The principle was not mentioned in the original United States Constitution. END Q
see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunity_in_the_United_States
It seems that there are people on the right and the left, who are in favor of abolishing the federal role in education. Good.
Charles,
Do you ever have positive ideas that are good for children? The ED Dept doesn’t hurt children. Cutting money for school lunches or immunizations would hurt children.
The states raise more than 90-percent of funding for k-12 education. Less than 10-percent comes from the federal government. Federal spending on k-12 education is a drop compared to a full swimming pool when compared to federal defense spending.
6-percent of the federal budget goes to education and that includes college.
57-percent of the federal budget goes to the military
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/aug/17/facebook-posts/pie-chart-federal-spending-circulating-internet-mi/
Q Do you ever have positive ideas that are good for children? The ED Dept doesn’t hurt children. Cutting money for school lunches or immunizations would hurt children. END Q
Do I ever have positive ideas. Yes, you bet. None will ever see the light of day.
Here are a few:
-Abolish the department of education. States/municipalities are closer to the citizenry, and thus more attuned to their wishes. Some (not all) of the Dept of Ed’s functions can be folded back to the Dept. of Health and Human Services, like before the Carter administration. Other functions could be handled by the states, with the feds providing block grants.
-Increase funding to serve the needs of the gifted and talented. (This is dead on arrival). Illinois has a three-year residence preparatory academy. See https://www.imsa.edu/ . All states should have a residence prep school for their brightest children. All states should have advanced placement courses, and honors courses available in their high schools. And they can be either “brick and mortar”, on on-line.
-Increase vocational/technical education funding. Not all kids are college material. Germany has a terrific “apprenticeship” program, where the government technical education partners with corporations to provide on-the-job training for technical/vocational students. I am certain that corporation would be delighted to partner with public education, and provide a co-operative learning experience.
-Increase participation by NGO’s in public education. I am convinced that service clubs, and other NGO’s would be delighted to work with public schools (See http://www.masonicangelfund.com ). If only the schools would reach out to NGO’s and make the necessary requests, the support would follow. Public schools are too often hesitant to reach “out of the box”.
-Increase preparatory education for STEM. High Schools, should be preparing students for college-level work, by having introductory courses in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.
-Public high schools should partner with their local universities, and have college-level courses available in the high schools. If professors cannot be hired locally, use distance learning.
-Increase programs to have children arrive at schools “School-ready”. Public schools should reach out to the “whole child”, and ensure that children are receiving proper nutrition at home. Pre-K programs should be expanded, so that children can transition into the learning environment. Parents can be invited to attend seminars, conducted by the local schools, possibly on-line.
-Increase programs for arts education in high school. Children should have basic training in things like: creative dance, theater, literature, video production, calligraphy, fine arts, music appreciation, etc. In Japan, all high school children are given a solid foundation in the arts.
I can go on, but the fact is, all of these ideas are stone dead. None will ever see the light of day.
I never said that the federal Dept. of Education hurts children. I simply believe that the functions performed by the department could best be handled by states/municipalities, possibly with block grants.
And I am certainly not for cutting school lunches of immunizations.
Charles, nowhere on your list do I see addressed your plans for special education children. (Or English Language Learners, for that matter.)
“Q Even in this current time of the war against terror, taxpayer investment in education exceeds that for national defense END Q”
There is no “war against terror”. There are many battles and wars against some people perceived to be “agin us” (Georgie the Least speak). Terror is a type of emotional perception and only exists in the mind/body of a person. The phrase “war on/against terror” is propaganda pure and simple at face value.
Now that does not negate that many may wish this country harm, I know I would if I would have to live through the hell this country has put many human beings through this century and since Viet Nam. Only makes sense to strike back at those who seek to destroy you.
When one considers what is spent on the War Department and the various other government entities involved in “homeland security” the estimates are well over a trillion a year. Be that as it may, in 2016 around 21% of the federal spending went to “defense” and 3% went to education* so I don’t see how it is possible for “taxpayer investment in education exceeds that for national defense”
*http://www.usfederalbudget.us/federal_budget_detail_fy17bs12016n
According to the OECD, in 2012: Q In terms of countries’ education expenditures by education level in 2012, the percentage of GDP the United States spent on elementary/secondary education (3.6 percent) was slightly lower than the OECD average (3.7 percent). END Q.
(This does NOT include expenditures on university level education, vocational/technical education, military technical schools, etc. )
And (2014 data) Q By contrast, Washington’s enormous military expenditure “only” amounts to 3.5 percent of GDP. In China, that falls to 2.1 percent. Israel spent around $23 billion on its armed forces in 2014 and SIPRI estimated that this amounted to 5.2 percent of its GDP. END Q
How many times do you have to be told and corrected that more than 90-percent of spending on k-12 education is funded by the states and local communities through different sources of taxation at the local and state levels?
In most countries, K-12 education is funded by the country and not the provinces or states.
You are mixing and possibly confusing two different funding sources.
K-12 education funding mostly from the states (property tax at the state level is them ost common revenue used) pays for about 4 million teachers and the education of about 50 million students.
The federal government pays for all national defense/military spending.
Less than 4 percent of the federal budget goes to K-12 education in this country.
About half of the federal budget funds the military. in 2015, the US federal government spent almost $600 billion for the country’s military for almost 1.43-million troops.
In the fiscal year 2015, the federal budget was $3.8 trillion. More than $600 billion of that went to the military. Only $102.6 billion of that federal money went to education, but only $37.1 billion was spent on K-12. The rest went to college students and universities.
The rest of the money spend on education was from revenues raised by the states through taxation at the state level: property tax, sales tax, state income tax, and other taxes and/or fees.
A comparison.
The U.S. federal government spent almost $1.4 million to support each military soldier in 2015.
The U.S. federal government spent $587 for each teacher and student in the K-12 system.
“State funding: This funding for elementary and secondary schools is generated primarily through income and sales taxes. However, some states rely heavily on property taxes to fund K-12 schools. Every state legislature determines the raising and eventual distribution of money. The amount each school receives is based on different formulas like number of students and demonstrated need. Schools in poor neighborhoods often receive more attention to make up for limited local sources of funding.
“Local funding: This money comes largely through tax assessments on residential and commercial property within individual school districts. In the wealthier parts of town, schools receive sufficient funds to ensure that their schools are properly equipped for students. In less-affluent neighborhoods, schools are often underfunded and may not get the resources they need.”
http://education.cu-portland.edu/blog/news/10-year-spending-trends-in-u-s-education/
Do you get it yet?
Lloyd, he won’t get it. His mind is made up and set in concrete. Don’t confuse him with the facts.
Q Charles, nowhere on your list do I see addressed your plans for special education children. (Or English Language Learners, for that matter.) END Q.
Fair enough. I did not mention these, and I agree they are fine ideas. I would love for more funding and efforts for special-needs children. This includes, both the learning-disabled AND the gifted/talented. A residence academy for the disabled is a fine idea too.
I would be delighted if ESL children, could get intensive instruction in English. I worked at a vocational/technical school in Saudi Arabia, where all of the students received English instruction.
I would love for public schools, to increase instruction in ESL for adults, as well.
I would also like to see more attention paid to basic adult literacy. When I lived in Columbus, OH (1990), there were an estimated 10,000 adults in the metro area, who were functionally illiterate.
I have even more ideas: Increasing foreign language instruction, beginning in elementary school. All children should have a basic grounding in foreign languages. We live in an international economic environment, and inter-dependence is only going to increase.
And the USA education establishment should be more receptive to adopting ideas from foreign nations. Finland has excellent public schools, some of their ideas can be imported here.
I have even more ideas. BUT- All of them run up against the wall of funding, and bureaucratic inertia. Governments are often loath to adopt new ideas, with the mantra “We never did it that way before”. Also, “This isn’t Japan”.
When I lived in WashDC in 1983, the governor of Maryland tried to establish a residence academy for gifted/talented children. His idea was fought “tooth and nail” by the Maryland teachers unions. They called it “elitism”. They also demanded, that instead of spending money on the academy, that the state just pay all teachers more. The legislature refused to enact the proposal, so it died.
Ideas are just specks of dust in the wind.
I have been cutting and pasting info from the US Dept of Education, and the OECD. I did not make up the numbers. In 2004-2005 Q
Total U.S. Expenditures for Elementary and Secondary Education.
In the 2004-05 school year, 83 cents out of every dollar spent on education is estimated to come from the state and local levels END Q
The percentage of spending by state/municipal governments is increasing. If you say it is approaching 90%, then I do not object.
I agree, that the US Dept of Defense is a federal operation.
The statistics from the OECD relate to percentage of GDP which is spent on education.
That is the problem. You are cutting and pasting. That is called cherry picking.
That means
you are allegedly a fraud who picks only the facts he wants to hear that supports what he thinks even if he is wrong.
you are allegedly ignorant and don’t know what you are doing.
Duane, good fisher friend: If someone attacks us do we have a right to defend ourselves? Perhaps even a duty to defend the innocent?
I feel like it’s good, though.
Ed reform has never offered anything to kids in public schools. DeVos makes that clear.
The BEST public schools can expect from this “movement” is to be permitted to continue to exist.
I can’t think of a thing they’ve done for public school kids in Ohio and they utterly dominate my state legislature. They’re either irrelevant to 90% of kids or an actual detriment. The last time public schools were even mentioned in this state is when they were putting in the last testing scheme. As long as public school kids show up 2 weeks a year and provide data ed reform has absolutely no interest in them.
I would prefer they stay out of my son’s school. They offer him absolutely nothing of value and there are THOUSANDS of them, all paid.
“The Business of Reform”
Reform is a business
Simple and plain
Though some may have missed this
It’s true, just the same
Maybe it could be freeing. If public schools are irrelevant to ed reform and politicians, maybe public schools could stop listening to ed reform and politicians?
Just stop. Stop hiring them. Stop consulting them. Stop inviting them.
Let’s find our OWN talent – the people who already work in our schools.
Rather than”resist” which takes time and energy and is inherently negative, why not “abstain” and go our own way with our own positive plans?
They’re not giving us anything anyway. We literally have nothing to lose 🙂
“US Dept of EducationVerified account@usedgov 1h1 hour ago
More
Career & technical ed equips students with academic, employability, and technical skills to succeed in college and careers #CTEMonth”
I hope ed reform stays out of CTE. None of these people would be caught dead in a career training program.
Who will be designing training for the lower classes? The same collection of ed reform billionaires that design everything else? The self-proclaimed Best and Brightest?
There won’t be an actual welder or plumber or electrician anywhere near ed reform CTE.
I wrote here a year ago that Democratic politicians and liberal ed reformers were misleading on vouchers.
They all support vouchers. Always have. They lied to us.
DeVos will get her voucher program thru and nothing at all will be offered to public schools because this isn’t ABOUT “improving public schools” it’s about REPLACING public schools.
You-all should read on the ed reform side. They are really excited about eradicating public schools. This is like the realization of a dream.
When public schools are finally gone from this earth all racial and income inequality will disappear. This is actually what they believe.
And most of the people here believe that if the public schools were fairly funded “all racial and income inequality will disappear.” Which is more unrealistic?
Why is the Democratic Party complicit in privatizing America’s most important common good? The Walton-funded Center for American Progress got $2.2 mil. from the Gates Foundation 2013-2015.?
Here’s CAP education- a “liberal” ed reform group:
https://twitter.com/EdProgress
Try to find one concrete positive benefit Democratic ed reformers offer kids in public schools. There aren’t any. They don’t think they HAVE to offer anything to kids and parents in public schools. We’re like the “default” – our schools exist only to compare to charter and private schools. That’s the sum total value of our children- data collectors.
If I were a public school advocate I would be less worried about ed reform putting in vouchers and more worried about their plans for existing public schools.
Public schools are a huge market. They want to sell you ed tech.
Stop taking their advice on “personalized learning”. Half of the people selling this stuff benefit financially from selling more and more of it to public schools.
Please, please don’t buy ANYTHING based on recommendations coming from DC ed reform. You will regret it.
I can almost guarantee that in less than 5 years time there will be a reckoning on “personalized learning” and we’ll start totting up the wasted time and money.
DON’T be the school district that gets robbed. Resist.
“The research says that vouchers haven’t improved student test scores.”
As my mom used to say to me “How many times do I have to say it. For the umpteenth time. . . ”
. . . “improved student test scores” means absolutely nothing! Nada! Zilch! Zero! NOTHING! Basing educational decisions on the COMPLETELY INVALID and FALSE RESULTS of standardized testing can only be described as “inanely insane”.
Yes, yes, yes, I know that those “student test scores” are supposed to be the “golden (sic) coin of the realm” of the edudeformers and we supposedly need to hoist them on their own petard. A falsehood is a falsehood is sheer nonsense upon which to rely for debunking the edudeformers’ claims.
Those claims about standardized test scores have already been COMPLETELY DEBUNKED by Noel Wilson in his never refuted nor rebutted 1997 treatise that shows all the foundational conceptual (onto-epistemological) errors and falsehoods and psychometric fudgings involved in the standards and testing regime that render any RESULTS COMPLETELY INVALID. To understand the never refuted nor rebutted most important writing in education in the last fifty years please read “Educational Standards and the Problem of Error” found at: http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/577/700
Brief outline of Wilson’s “Educational Standards and the Problem of Error” and some comments of mine.
A description of a quality can only be partially quantified. Quantity is almost always a very small aspect of quality. It is illogical to judge/assess a whole category only by a part of the whole. The assessment is, by definition, lacking in the sense that “assessments are always of multidimensional qualities. To quantify them as unidimensional quantities (numbers or grades) is to perpetuate a fundamental logical error” (per Wilson). The teaching and learning process falls in the logical realm of aesthetics/qualities of human interactions. In attempting to quantify educational standards and standardized testing the descriptive information about said interactions is inadequate, insufficient and inferior to the point of invalidity and unacceptability.
A major epistemological mistake is that we attach, with great importance, the “score” of the student, not only onto the student but also, by extension, the teacher, school and district. Any description of a testing event is only a description of an interaction, that of the student and the testing device at a given time and place. The only correct logical thing that we can attempt to do is to describe that interaction (how accurately or not is a whole other story). That description cannot, by logical thought, be “assigned/attached” to the student as it cannot be a description of the student but the interaction. And this error is probably one of the most egregious “errors” that occur with standardized testing (and even the “grading” of students by a teacher).
Wilson identifies four “frames of reference” each with distinct assumptions (epistemological basis) about the assessment process from which the “assessor” views the interactions of the teaching and learning process: the Judge (think college professor who “knows” the students capabilities and grades them accordingly), the General Frame-think standardized testing that claims to have a “scientific” basis, the Specific Frame-think of learning by objective like computer based learning, getting a correct answer before moving on to the next screen, and the Responsive Frame-think of an apprenticeship in a trade or a medical residency program where the learner interacts with the “teacher” with constant feedback. Each category has its own sources of error and more error in the process is caused when the assessor confuses and conflates the categories.
Wilson elucidates the notion of “error”: “Error is predicated on a notion of perfection; to allocate error is to imply what is without error; to know error it is necessary to determine what is true. And what is true is determined by what we define as true, theoretically by the assumptions of our epistemology, practically by the events and non-events, the discourses and silences, the world of surfaces and their interactions and interpretations; in short, the practices that permeate the field. . . Error is the uncertainty dimension of the statement; error is the band within which chaos reigns, in which anything can happen. Error comprises all of those eventful circumstances which make the assessment statement less than perfectly precise, the measure less than perfectly accurate, the rank order less than perfectly stable, the standard and its measurement less than absolute, and the communication of its truth less than impeccable.”
In other words all the logical errors involved in the process render any conclusions invalid.
The test makers/psychometricians, through all sorts of mathematical machinations attempt to “prove” that these tests (based on standards) are valid-errorless or supposedly at least with minimal error [they aren’t]. Wilson turns the concept of validity on its head and focuses on just how invalid the machinations and the test and results are. He is an advocate for the test taker not the test maker. In doing so he identifies thirteen sources of “error”, any one of which renders the test making/giving/disseminating of results invalid. And a basic logical premise is that once something is shown to be invalid it is just that, invalid, and no amount of “fudging” by the psychometricians/test makers can alleviate that invalidity.
Having shown the invalidity, and therefore the unreliability, of the whole process Wilson concludes, rightly so, that any result/information gleaned from the process is “vain and illusory”. In other words start with an invalidity, end with an invalidity (except by sheer chance every once in a while, like a blind and anosmic squirrel who finds the occasional acorn, a result may be “true”) or to put in more mundane terms crap in-crap out.
And so what does this all mean? I’ll let Wilson have the second to last word: “So what does a test measure in our world? It measures what the person with the power to pay for the test says it measures. And the person who sets the test will name the test what the person who pays for the test wants the test to be named.”
In other words it attempts to measure “’something’ and we can specify some of the ‘errors’ in that ‘something’ but still don’t know [precisely] what the ‘something’ is.” The whole process harms many students as the social rewards for some are not available to others who “don’t make the grade (sic)” Should American public education have the function of sorting and separating students so that some may receive greater benefits than others, especially considering that the sorting and separating devices, educational standards and standardized testing, are so flawed not only in concept but in execution?
My answer is NO!!!!!
One final note with Wilson channeling Foucault and his concept of subjectivization:
“So the mark [grade/test score] becomes part of the story about yourself and with sufficient repetitions becomes true: true because those who know, those in authority, say it is true; true because the society in which you live legitimates this authority; true because your cultural habitus makes it difficult for you to perceive, conceive and integrate those aspects of your experience that contradict the story; true because in acting out your story, which now includes the mark and its meaning, the social truth that created it is confirmed; true because if your mark is high you are consistently rewarded, so that your voice becomes a voice of authority in the power-knowledge discourses that reproduce the structure that helped to produce you; true because if your mark is low your voice becomes muted and confirms your lower position in the social hierarchy; true finally because that success or failure confirms that mark that implicitly predicted the now self-evident consequences. And so the circle is complete.”
In other words students “internalize” what those “marks” (grades/test scores) mean, and since the vast majority of the students have not developed the mental skills to counteract what the “authorities” say, they accept as “natural and normal” that “story/description” of them. Although paradoxical in a sense, the “I’m an “A” student” is almost as harmful as “I’m an ‘F’ student” in hindering students becoming independent, critical and free thinkers. And having independent, critical and free thinkers is a threat to the current socio-economic structure of society.
Back in October 2015, I wrote an article for the Huffington Post entitled, “Haven’t We Done Enough? Must We Have Winners and Losers Even in Education?” That was at the beginning of the presidential election campaign. Sadly, it has all gotten worse. With DeVos and Trump, inflicting a dystopian competition on US education is now official policy.
See: http://www.arthurcamins.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Havent-We-Done-Enough.pdf
Guess what reformers? Sometimes competition hurts more than it helps. I think about the six nail salons on a two-block stretch of a street in Oakland. Lots of competition. Too much. None of them thrive. Poverty wages for all. Too much overhead costs for the local customer base. No one has enough money to upgrade facilities. Quality of products must be lowest-common denominator. Under the voucher regime, our schools are going to be like these sickly nail salons. Low salaries that won’t attract the best talent. Too much money spent on redundant physical plants. “Product” will be even more no-frills than it is now. I thank KIPP and SA for spreading the lie that they had a scalable secret sauce for working wonders with poor minority kids. Their secret sauce –cherrypicking –is not scalable. An extinct public schools system will be the collateral damage of their lie. Perhaps Mike Feinberg could come out now and fess up that KIPP is not scalable. That might undo some of the damage.
Excellent point, oh Great Pine.
Lloyd “The U.S. federal government spent almost $1.4 million to support each military soldier in 2015.
The U.S. federal government spent $587 for each teacher and student in the K-12 system.”
These are great numbers, Lloyd. Much better than trying to wrestle with the various hundreds of billions. But they seems to need some modifications: If $1.4 million is spent on each of the 1.4 million soldiers that’s 2 trillion, while the whole military budget is $600 billion (I am using your numbers).
I would like to know how much is really spent on each soldier, including their higher education, and how much is spent on military contracts with private companies—and how many people are supported there.
What I’d like to understand is how much of the total military budget supports private individuals, and how many individuals are we talking about.
Maybe I messed up on the decimals. Please do the math.
There are 1.4 million troops in the four branches.
The budget is about $600 billion.
Divide 1.4 million into $600 billion to come up with the per capita spending
1,400,000 divided into $600,000,000,000 =
For the K-12 system
The feds give the system about $38 billion. The states fund about $550 million for the giant’s share.
There are 50-million students and about 4-million teachers and staff.
So then $400K of federal tax is spent on each soldier which is thousand times more than spent on each child’s education.
But I think we get more outrageous numbers if we look at how the $600 billion military budget is actually spent. Because the vast majority of it is not spent on soldiers’ gear and pension but on military contracts. It would be interesting to see how many people live off military contracts and how much they get on average.
Btw, we know that many (perhaps most) of our soldiers join the military so that they can get their college paid for. Is the money for this coming from the military budget or the education budget?
Thanks for doing the math. You also asked some good questions.
I read that the on average, the U.S. spends a bit more than $11,000 annually per child K-12 (some states pay more than others and the lowest is Utah at about $6k per child).
So to educate 50-million children K-12, the US spends about $11,500 annually per child and more than 90-percent of that is funds raised in each state through taxes and fees. The federal government’s share of K-12 education is less than 5-percent of the total.
VS.
$400k to support each soldier in the U.S. military.
The basic pay chart for active duty soldiers shows that an E1 private with less than 2 years of experience earns less than $19k annually. That means the other $381k probably goes to the weapons industry.
Of course, there is free room and board. How much does it cost to provide a space to sleep, medical care, and food when the same building have been used on the same military bases for decades.
An E6 staff sergeant with 6 years of experience is paid a little more than $36k annually leaving about $364k to go to the weapons industry.
http://www.goarmy.com/benefits/money/basic-pay-active-duty-soldiers.html
So these kids risk their lives for $19K?
is their college education paid for from the military budget too?
I’m not sure where the money for college education for military comes from. I know there is more than one program. One while they are still serving and other benefits after they are out.
Here’s a link that explains all the different programs.
http://todaysmilitary.com/living/paying-for-college
financial support for vets who are inactive probably comes through the VA.
Here’s a link that shows these funds come from several sources.
https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/types/grants-scholarships/military
“DeVos claims that every child will be able to attend the same quality school as the most affluent ”
I wonder if there’s a very simple argument to show that DeVious’ claim is bs.
Namely, here in Memphis, every child in public education is worth $8K. So I guess, this would be the amount attached to the child as a voucher if she wanted to go to an affluent school. But an affluent school is about $20K per year here. That means the poor kid’s parents would still have to come up with $12K to pay for the private school. That’s $1,000 every month.
Well, I certainly couldn’t come up with that kind of money (especially for two kids), and I am not poor (yet).
So what is Betsy thinking how poor people will come up with $1,000 a month for each child they have?
Income referenced tax rebates, or even grants?
So what you are saying is that each child using vouchers will cost more (even double) than a non-voucher using child?
“Why is Congress allowing Trump and DeVos to foist their failed ideas on public schools?”
– A really interesting and pressing question as I am going through my final stretch in college as I am to become an educator. What confuses me is the fact that the media has yet to expose me to any positive ideas on education from DeVos. Numerous articles, blog posts, videos of her ‘answers’ to the questions she is asked, do not point anywhere near progress for public schools. What exactly is happening in these discussions about education? I agree that there should be no interventions of politicians, especially ones that have no experience with public education. What is going on behind the scenes of these heavy debates that appear to have an obvious ‘right’ side, but result in the opposite? And why is money becoming a more important aspect of whether or not a child obtains a decent education?!