There has always been a problem with using the word “Reformer” to describe those who wanted to impose privatization on public education and strangle the public schools with high-stakes testing and mandates up the kazoo while deregulating the privately managed schools.
Now there is a small but growing number of former reformers who say they are not “reformers.” Robin Lake was one (she ran the Center for Reinventing Public Education for many years). Then along comes Chris Cerf.
Peter Greene analyzes Cerf’s discomfort with the language, mainly because for some reason, the word “reform” now is in bad repute. Whose fault was that? Maybe too many people began to understand that “reform” meant closing public schools and replacing them with unaccountable privately managed charter schools.
Cerf continues to believe all the reformer ideas were swell–charter schools, high-stakes testing, etc.–but misunderstood.
Greene writes:
Look, lots of ed reform figures have taken a moment to examine their choices and programs. Some, like Rick Hess, have pressed for uncomfortable truths all along, and some are just showing up at the party. But if reformsters like Perf think the solution is to insist that their ideas were awesome and they were just thwarted by a vast conspiracy of naughty public ed fans, they are going to stay stuck right where they are, the reformy equivalent of that fifty-year-old paunchy guy on the porch who is still telling anyone who will listen how he should have won that big football game in high school.
You guys screwed up. In some big ways, and some small ways. In avoidable ways, and in ways that are baked into your ideas. In lots of ways related to your amateur status coupled with your unwillingness to listen to trained professionals. You can face all of that, or you can just keep stamping your feet.
I recommend the former. Look, in public ed we confront our failures all the time, often in real time as we watch a lesson plan crash and burn right in front of us. Being able to face failure is a basic survival technique in the classroom. I recommend that Cerf and those like him try it out, because this kind of whiny self-justification with a touch of moral one-upmanship is not abroad look on anyone. I offer this advice in the spirit of the season because, really, if they ignore it, they will only disappear from view that much faster, which would not be the worst thing for those of us who support public ed.

Diane The idea that the term reformer is the problem, and not the substantial reality of what they are up to, gives away the fact that, as Greene suggests, they are “stuck” in the cold tar of an unbending ideology–an ideology that has no ground in what education in a democracy is really about–that is, IF it’s a vibrant democracy that they want to maintain.
Until they start reflecting seriously about that ideology, about WHY they support it with such zeal, and about what truth they might find in the opposing arguments, that ideological tar will not even begin to soften.
These “reformers” are not open to self-reflection, and are not looking to change education for the better, but are merely looking for another TERM to fool the public with, to freshen up their false sense of self-respect. Their picture belongs in the Dictionary of Orwellian Realities just under the term “double-speak.” CBK
LikeLiked by 1 person
So well said: “Until they start reflecting seriously about that ideology, about WHY they support it with such zeal, and about what truth they might find in the opposing arguments, that ideological tar will not even begin to soften.”
LikeLike
“One would think that seeking to “reform” a system that yields these outcomes would be considered a good thing.”
This is how they’ve shut down dissent and debate. Any questions about their actions are immediately dismissed as invalid.
The only acceptable discussion is around the specifics of privatization- how to govern the contractors, how to fund the contractors, how to market the contractors.
They summarily announced that anything else was off limits.
How many charters should there be (40? 75% 95%?) , how should vouchers be structured, how quickly can existing systems be wound down. That’s acceptable.
They make the big picture decisions and they’ll allow the public to squabble over the details, in order to feel “empowered”. But any decisions must be inside the parameters.
LikeLike
Privatizer is a good term or even “education vandals or pirates.” They plunder public schools so it is a fitting description of the “rob Peter to pay Paul” imposed cycle of privatization.
LikeLike
Deformer = Robbin the Hood
LikeLike
“(like standards, accountability, empowering parents with more options, and acknowledging differences in teacher efficacy)”
What this means in the real world is public school students get testing and their schools get rankings. We also get to waste a boatload of money, time and good will ranking teachers.
That’s the sum total benefit to students in existing public schools. That reformers still can’t figure out why people aren’t rushing to embrace their “movement” that offers absolutely nothing of positive value to any student in any existing public school is a measure of what an echo chamber it is.
Add real value to a public school- any public school, anywhere. Try that. That’s what you sold when this started.
LikeLike
Reform overpromised and underdelivered.
-Rick Hess
Not bad in 4 words.
LikeLike
Reform: fraud
–SomeDAM Poet
Not bad in two words, if I do say so myself.
LikeLike
A feature more words for reform
“Reform Foundation”
Cherry-picking, extrapolation
“Correlation means causation”
Sciency-sounding mathturbation
Undergirds “reform” foundation
“Reform by Fire”
Filling an urn
Kindling a flame
Teachers to burn
Reform’s the name
“Reform School”
Their product is disruption
Their pitch is “failing schools”
With lots of rank corruption
And loads of testing tools
Their goal is liquidation
And everything must go
The essence of the Nation
The public schools we know
LikeLike
Read: DREAD NATION.
LikeLike
These bad-boy or bad-girl reformers think just like Trump. That means in their thinking they never fail and are never wrong and are always the best looking and smartest ones around. The rest of us are stupid losers to them — victims to legally rob.
LikeLike