Nancy Bailey is a retired teacher with long experience in the classroom. She has a talent for picking out charlatans from the pundits who make a living telling teachers what to do, despite their lack of experience. She gets irritated by purveyors of doom and gloom, especially when it is not warranted. Arne Duncan and Margaret Spellings inflicted irreparable harm on America’s public schools by their imposition of the failed No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top programs; these federal mandates continue to erode what’s left of the joy of learning by their emphasis on standardized testing and pressure to close public schools and open privatized charter schools.
Nancy and I collaborated on a book published by Teachers College Press called Edspeak and Doublespeak: A Glossary to Decipher Hypocrisy and Save Public Schooling. It names names and calls out the privatizers who call themselves “reformers.”
Arne Duncan (Obama) and Margaret Spellings (G. W. Bush), noneducators and former education secretaries, recently appeared on PBS News Hour, “Study shows parents overestimate their student’s academic progress” to dash any hope parents might have that their children are doing well in school. Who’s behind such gloomy reporting?
Here’s how PBS begins, and here’s the survey:
A survey conducted in March of 2023 for the group Learning Heroes found 90 percent of parents think their kids are doing fine, but standardized test scores show otherwise. Among eighth graders, for example, just 29 percent were proficient in reading either at or above their grade level. In math, just 26 percent were considered proficient. This sheds light on what’s being called the parent perception gap.
Learning Heroes? They’re a group called a campaign, seemingly to create divisiveness, sowing distrust in teachers and public schools, to tell parents about so-called gaps in student learning. They call parents learning heroes. They appear to be critical of grades and a teacher’s evaluation of the student, and they focus on standardized test scores.
Gaps have been the focus for 22 years since No Child Left Behind, and Duncan and Spellings had their chance to reduce the learning and opportunity gaps they speak about. They never discuss or seem to reflect on their accountability for public school problems, especially their emphasis on high-stakes standardized testing.
Learning gaps are the difference or disparities between what students learn and grade-level expectations. Adults create expectations with standardized tests. Few raise questions about whether such expectations could be developmentally inappropriate, and even when they do, they’re ignored.
Opportunity gaps are life factors children struggle with surrounding ethnicity, race, gender, disability, and income. Many children facing opportunity gaps attend poor schools without resources or quality curricula.
Learning Heroes receives support from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Charles and Lynn Shusterman Foundation, Bloomberg Philanthropies, and the Carnegie Corporation of New York.
None of the above champion public schools. Most promote school privatization and, for years, have praised charter schools, which continue to do poorly in many places.
Looking closer at the learning heroes team, many come from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
The PBS report also references Go Beyond the Grades, connected to the Chamber of Commerce, which has never been optimistic about public education either. Remember their state-by-state report called Leaders and Laggards?
What’s ironic is that these same individuals helped put high-stakes standardized testing and Common Core State Standards in place years ago, along with other bad reforms, and they still complain that public schools are failing. They’re criticizing their own failed ideology in the name of school privatization!
This is a wonderful post. Please open the link and read it all!
Inspired by Nancy’s post, I wrote a letter to PBS Newshour. I hope you will too. Write to: viewermail@newshour.org
Dear Newshour Staff,
I was disappointed to see that you invited the overseers of the past two decades to discuss the situation of American education.
No Child Left Behind (Spellings) and Race to the Top (Duncan) were both disasters. Both inflicted and intensified the overuse and abuse of standardized testing in America’s public schools. Hundreds, perhaps thousands, of schools were closed based on these invalid and unreliable measures.
Spellings and Duncan spent years promoting failed policies and are now called upon by PBS to comment on the outcomes of their punitive and ineffective ideas. They are in no position to say where we went wrong, because they were the architects of the disaster.
You really should invite dispassionate experts to review their record, rather than invite those who imposed bad ideas.
Can anyone honestly say that “no child was left behind” after more than a dozen years of NCLB? Can anyone say that the $500 billion spent on Race to the Top was successful in any respect? The answer to both questions is no.
NCLB and RTTT have demoralized a generation of teachers; destroyed the joy of learning; and produced no improvement. Worse, they created a canard about “failing schools” that completely ignores the root causes of poor student performance.
What if those billions had been spent on reducing class sizes; raising teachers’ salaries; upgrading obsolete facilities; ensuring that every child had access to nutrition and medical check-ups?
It boggles my mind that the Newshour would buy into the myths of the past 20 years instead of digging deeper to understand the underlying issues.
Diane Ravitch
Author and Historian
If Race to the Top or other federal efforts had considered that teachers were not prepared to teach reading in their college prep programs, perhaps things could have been different.
Please cite studies or evidence showing teachers were not prepared to teach reading in their college programs. All college programs, or just some college programs? Is this something that has always been the case in English speaking parts of the world, or did college programs suddenly decide to stop preparing teachers to teach reading? If so, why? Please, show us the science to back up your claim.
PBS Newshour has been in a long steady decline since Robert McNeil left.The current pablum dispenser hosts learned well from Judy
Agree. Gave up on this decades ago when they started treating David Brooks like he actually had something constructive to say.
Absolutely correct, in my view. Now that she’s retiring/ed? perhaps journalists will do a better job of getting the facts first? One can hope.
While data may be used to inform education, it must not be the driver of it. The current standardized tests are not objective tests. When states set their so-called cut scores or their tests, there is nothing absolute about the process. Cut scores can vary from year to year and from state to state. They are subject to a variety of political and special interest whims and inclinations. These tests, unlike the tests of years ago, are not norm referenced tests that have gone through a rigorous process of actually standardizing the test. These current state tests may have a hidden agenda that the public is not privy to, unlike the old, less biased norm referenced tests that came with a technical manual that showed in great statistical detail how the scores were derived. As far as I can see, Learning Heroes, are no heroes. They are simply another astroturf group funded by those that want to undermine public schools.
Nancy Bailey’s blog is always a pleasure to read. It is full of great information and lots of suggestions from a career educator.
Actually, the real explanation of “Why?” is relatively simple to explain. We live in a world where people who call themselves journalists value the simplicity access over the hard work of actual reporting. For them, anyone with a title, former or otherwise, the higher, the better, will do for today’s “in-depth” reporting.
The answer to the question why is right here: “Learning Heroes receives support from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Charles and Lynn Shusterman Foundation, Bloomberg Philanthropies, and the Carnegie Corporation of New York.” With right wing politicians constantly threatening to defund PBS, PBS turned to right wing billionaires for funding. Do the billionaires influence programming to the point of total control? Do bears defecate in the woods? (Some, like Betsy DeVos, might say no, billionaires are altruistic philanthropists, and grizzlies defecate in schools, hence the need to arm teachers!)
I think they just sit around at Davos every year and think that is how the world is…
then the New York Times published this…https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/16/us/science-of-reading-literacy-parents.html
Ignorance about the circumstances that hinder student learning is pervasive among the national media. They report again and again on failed “one size fits all” remedies without understanding that these fail because they do not address the root cause of public school challenges: Poverty. Advocacy for “The science of reading”, Lucy Caulkins, or whole language all miss the point. Until we are willing to change the instructional delivery system that allows for K-12 class sizes of 20-30+ students per class, a teaching professional day that does not allow meaningful classroom preparation except beyond the school day, equal high quality resources and facilities for all students, and an understanding that this hyper focus on reading fluency actually demonstrates low expectations for our students. Perhaps the greatest inaccuracy on the NYTimes report is that somehow schools have not been engaged in this “Science of reading” rabbit hole. The two large districts I served in were all in with massive resources given to administrative and teacher professional development for the purpose of institutionalizing the practice. Yet, scores never moved despite efforts to show improvement through numerous changes in the standardized tests being implemented. The confirmation bias so prevalent in this ongoing reporting has been troubling since the Clinton Administration introduced the “Standards Movement.” Any challenges to such bias continue to be ignored and often attacked. The fact that Emily Hanford, Arne Duncan, Bill Gates, Margaret Spellings continue to act as “go to” interviews when their profession experience as practicing educators is woeful at best, demonstrates the little regard reporters have for the professionalism required to teach and administer instructional outcomes. It is in fact these arbiters of “data” who use anecdotal reporting to misinform politicians and institutions such as the NAACP to continue this malpractice. Perhaps the one method we have been reticent to use should be support teaching, adequately resource shool facilities everywhere, and get the hell out of the way for the educators who actually know their craft.
The corporate media follow the “experts” designated by the oligarchs and considered “experts.” They help perpetuate the big lie that public schools are failing and we are in a continuous state of crisis.
In the case of PBS, they follow their corporate sponsors.
Agree, typically lazy reporting, per usual, by the NYT.
(I wrote a long comment about that article when someone who seemed to have an anti-public school agenda posted a link to it here, in an earlier post.)
But you are absolutely right – schools will now spend tons of money on new “phonics” curriculum instead of doing the obvious things that help struggling learners like reducing class sizes.
All of that. In addition, until all families are provided the resources to ensure basic human needs are met and the luxury of finding time to enjoy a few story books every night, the scores aren’t going up, not matter what the teachers do.
Damn. Well said. And thanks for saying it. Spoken like someone who knows.
Paul– I did hate the overall message of that article. But I learned something from it. Went straight to NAEP link, thinking this was a lie: “About one in three children in the United States cannot read at a basic level of comprehension, according to a key national exam.” I’d studied those scores countless times, but never went to the sort for achievement level at the natl ave section.
Here’s what I was missing. Annual results are often summarized as “33% proficient, 66% at or above basic.” The 66% includes the 33%! When you click on that last button for achievement sort, turns out there’s another 30% scoring below basic…
Bethree,
NAEP’s achievement levels have been temporary since 1992. They are based on human judgment. They are not objective.
Yes, and my point is that we haven’t moved the dial with the magic bullet strategies mentioned in the article, Calkins or “Science of Reading.”. Most data, when read accurately, tells us one thing: As long as our society tolerates 20% poverty and 58% living pay check to pay check, we will not develop a more literate country. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is spot on in this regard. No self actualization without knowing food, safety, and rent are covered.
Thanks, Diane. I guess I knew that, but obviously I still have a lot to learn. Do you think NAEP is at least a better indicator on the proportion of kids struggling to read than the tests in these states that use them to hold kids back in 3rd grade?
Ginny,
I think we should ditch state tests and rely on NAEP for estimations of the proportions of struggling readers. The category to worry about is “below basic.” They need help.
Agreed, Paul, and you made a lot of other good points in this post, too. This one particularly resonates with me: “The confirmation bias so prevalent in this ongoing reporting has been troubling since the Clinton Administration introduced the ‘Standards Movement.’”
Which, of course, flowed from “A Nation at Risk”, and the ’89 Education Summit [prez + 49 govrs], and into Ed Summit #2 in ’96 [41 govrs, 49 CEO’s, 30 “education experts” [mostly state ed supts; subsequent summits had bigger ed footprint with local ed officials, ed assocs like natl assoc of elemsch principals, NEA, ASCD (supv & curric devp)].
Achieve, “corporate America’s direct connection to national education policy,” was founded at the ’96 ed summit. Gates Foundation became key member by 2005. Politicians and CEO’s gradually dropped out, & Achieve became purely a Common Core Initiative advocate. [I’m enjoying reading Richard Phelp’s 8/29/18 paper “The Organization Named Achieve: Cradle of Common Core Cronyism.”]
“because they do not address the root cause of public school challenges: Poverty.”
The root cause of public school challenges are the invalid and harmful to every student educational malpractice that is the standards and testing malpractice regime. Until we rid ourselves of that noxious regime we will continue to kill students desires to learn.
Poverty as an excuse is just more of the Calvinistic type thinking that societal problems are actually individualistic problems of “bad” behaviors. . . unless of course you are referring to the capitalist system that breeds poverty as a feature and not a problem.
I’m not presenting poverty as an excuse, but a reality. It doesn’t impede intelligence but opportunity. I agree that the testing regime needs to go. I am not saying that it is the schools responsibility to address poverty. It’s society’s obligation to provide conditions that motivate inquiry toward meaning. If we don’t address poverty, then we keep about a third of our kids from learned adulthood.
Remember, PBS threw the Newshour and John Merrow under the bus when he diverted from what their funders liked regarding education.
Diane, I wonder if you should write directly to Sara Just, Executive Producer of Newshour Productions, because email that goes to the general viewer mail address may not all be read by her.
I think she might be interested in hearing from respected education historians like you, to help her understand that her program is amplifying the voices of people with no credibility in education – except with big funders – like Arne Duncan and has neglected to do real in-depth reporting.
If she continues on that path, then that speaks very poorly of her judgement and her own willingness to stand up for journalism over what funders want. I hope she has more integrity than that.
Can you find her email?
I’m sorry, I could not find an email for her, although I will keep trying. I did see that she has an active twitter feed, if that is helpful:
John Merrow may feel differently, but I thought that Sara Just did a reasonable job defending his reporting about Success Academy (back in 2015) when the former PBS Ombudsman, the late Michael Getler, went overboard trying to placate pro-charter billionaires who object to anything critical of their pet charters being reported. Getler held John Merrow’s reporting to an impossible and non-existent standard that was never invoked when PBS ran endless stories praising ed reformers and presenting charters as having miraculous results. Only negative stories about charters have to meet this impossible standard, which definitely is a guarantee that almost no reporters will attempt to write any stories that don’t please billionaire funders and their lackeys.
I have no idea whether Sara Just is still willing to stand up for truthful journalism that won’t please PBS’ funders, but it is worth a try.
I just tweeted a link to the post here.
^^^https://www.pbs.org/publiceditor/blogs/ombudsman/a-high-stakes-schoolyard-fight/
Sorry, the above is a continuation of a comment that is in moderation that answers your question about her email.
That’s great that you did that. I hope she reads it.
Your email to the Newshour was excellent and succinctly summarized everything that was wrong with that education story. If Sara Just just ignores it and Newshour continues to use two architects of failed reform as experts in what schools should do, that speaks very poorly of their journalism. I hope she does not.
For tge same reason the people who produced the banking crisis of 2008 were hired to. (supposedly ) clean up the mess.s
I say supposedly because all they really did was sweep things under tge rug.
If your are a member of “The Club “, it’s doesn’t matter how wrong you were or how many times you were wrong.
Once a member of the club, always a member of the club.
Forgive the word use errors and misspellings. AI rules.
SDP, you have been hitting the “g” instead of the”h” for a couple of days now, or at least that is when I noticed it. I was having trouble reading some of your comments (I must have been really out of it) before I figured out what the issue was. Have pity on my aging mind and use your right hand to hit that “h.” 🙂
Lots of “tge” s.
The only silver bullet is owning up to the fact that there is no silver bullet.
Even the NYT article and ‘research’ falls into that trap.
Start in the ’80s with insightful innovation and action-research (some better than others) in all areas AND the educational leaders and their respective programs of whom many followed with respect and intrigue).
But we move to the late ’90s when that evolved to more researchers with their respective acronyms. Two outcomes: Teacher A: “Are you ‘using’ _____?” Teacher B: “We were, but you know, we start something and then ‘they’ change it.”
Then the governors got wind of it, the late ’90s and ’00s rolled out and as Dr. Ravitch can speak from the trenches, new words emerged:
High Stakes Testing
Failing Schools (and their silver bullet solutions).
Federal Standards (vs. National Professional Standards).
Ranking schools.
Accountability.
Politicians seeking to be the “Education President” the “Education Governor” “The Education Mayor” and Savior Superintendents (Three home run attempts and then you’re out)
Salivating hedge funders, corporate “following the problems” to make money.
AND not dealing with poverty, segregation, inequitable resource allocation, and other root causes.
So parents? Both helicopter parents and parents working three jobs didn’t care about the jargon and the acronyms. No news was good news and the complicated scores meant nothing – A, B, or C is all that mattered. And, like it or not, that was most kids.
So sure, parent perceptions were better. And, if the student wasn’t doing well compared to that, it was the school’s fault. Privatizers and non-innovative charters jumped on it. Politicians salivated.
In ALL of this mess – three things rarely come up: School and District thinking systemically, Let Professionals be Professionals, and EDUCATIONAL leadership.
Everything is connected (and no program is going to fix anything)
Leave it to the professionals and stick with it. Implement some things, any things, but do them with proverbial fidelity and time needed. Teachers will adapt it as needed, but stick with something WITH the adaptions (eg. Lucy Caulkins AND a little sentence diagramming).
Leadership that understands all of the above, genuinely supervises (not evaluates), insures development (not dictates or illusory) of professionals, and knows enough and how to communicate to parents.
All your insightful anecdotes reveal the intention of turning public education into a commodity where the rich get richer and everyone else gets ignored. This vision is the antithesis of what is needed in a democracy that requires an informed electorate in order to function.
Decent education for all requires investment, not schemes, privatization, political whims or unvetted fads. It requires collective investment is what we know works such as smaller classes, professional instruction, safe, healthy buildings and diversified, comprehensive human delivered service.
cx: in what we know works
Love both of these comments, WW & rt
Thing1 and Thing2
The Cat in the Hat
Messed up with Things?
Imagine that
The pigs have wings!
Good for you. I wrote a similar letter when I heard about the show. Much as I liked President Obama, his education policy was just as bad as Bush2’s. “Holding teachers accountable” as if we were shoplifters! No one held Margaret or Arne accountable for wasting billion$.
Exactly right.
Duncan shows contempt for teachers.
This is just a rehash of Arne Duncan’s infamous claim
‘s fascinating to me that some of the pushback is coming from, sort of, white suburban moms who — all of a sudden — their child isn’t as brilliant as they thought they were and their school isn’t quite as good as they thought they were, and that’s pretty scary,. You’ve bet your house and where you live and everything on, ‘My child’s going to be prepared.’ That can be a punch in the gut.””
Only someone who is completely brain dead would think that Arne “I play Duncan has anything intelligent to say about education.
I once thought of running a contest for the stupidest thing Arne ever said. My favorite, when visiting an elementary school in NYC: “I want to look into a second grader’s eyes and see that they are planning for college.”
Giggle.
Ha! I hadn’t heard that gem.
I did use to tell my teachers during tense parent conferences, that included dad, was that the one thing this dad was thinking seeing his son’s lack of progress was: “Will this child ever get a job or will he be living in my basement the rest of my life?”
“Beneath such gloomy reporting, parents and teachers know their students and recognize their educational growth, and teacher, parent, and student connection is what matters most.”
As an elementary school educator, currently teaching with a clear view from the trenches, I can state with certainty that this Pollyanna perspective is more pernicious and detrimental to student progress than anything else featured in Bailey’s piece.
Could you elaborate, Harriett? I’ve always believed this to be the most important connection.
There’s no doubt about the importance of teacher, parent, and student connection, but it’s a foundation upon which we need to construct solid, evidence-informed instructional practices. Here’s more on the complexity of what we are up against every day. Pamela Snow kindly posted on her blog this piece I wrote: Getting Reading Right: On Truths, Truce, and Trust.
https://pamelasnow.blogspot.com/2023/01/guest-post-getting-reading-right-on.html
Interesting information, but I’ve always believed the teacher should be professional, knowledgeable about the student, and capable of administering assessments and collecting information about the student from various sources, including parents, school psychologists, counselors, etc. This was always our process with IEPs. The teacher’s evaluation of student progress is critical as well. That’s why it’s imperative to have well-prepared teachers for reading. So I’m not sure of your point.
Harriet,
I was there in the late 90s when Reid Lyon selected the members of the National Reading Panel. He picked a stacked panel. I was thrilled because I have long been pro-phonics. But now, 25 years later, I realize the report of the panel was biased, as it was meant to be. There is more to reading than phonics. Some children learn differently, and the experienced teacher knows which methodology is best for each child. One size does not fit all.
The Reading First program was riddled with fraud and self-dealing.
If phonics was the be-all, if it really was the “Science of Reading,” Texas would be the most literate state in the nation. Texas has been committed to phonics for 30 years. It’s not. I wonder why.
Thank you Diane. That was a perfectly worded succinct response to the Newshour Report. Shame on them. What has happened to good journalism?
If we think about what Spellings and Duncan really did while in office. Interviewing either one is a pretty EVIL act. There is no ignorance or laziness involved. Just down-right deliberate complicity. Like some kind of cartel boss clean-up crew. Sanitizing the Crime Scene by pretending to do journalism with two AGENT PROVOCATEURS. Who engaged with many others in their takedown of Democracy.
Here’s a related comment from a smaller stage in Albany NY— On this morning’s WAMC-FM’s “Roundtable” forum, panelist John Faso said, twice: “NY public charter schools have better results or go out of business.” [My paraphrase]
He did not specify what results he was referring or how they were assessed.
So what John Faso just did is to tell charters that they MUST dump all the kids who don’t have good scores or he wants them to go out of business.
This is exactly the problem. Charters are incentivized to act in ways that are harmful to many of the students whose parents jumped through hoops to enroll them, by people like John Faso, by lazy or co-opted education reporters like those at the NYT, the NY Post, and the PBS Newshour. Dumping kids gives a charter school “better results”, which is why the “best” charters will have much higher attrition rates than mediocre charters.
It’s obvious to anyone who pays attention. One reporter, who posts here, wrote a story about how one charter notorious for having lots of MIA students “crushes” state tests (stellar results!) while she attacks a public school for non-existent “boasting” and pronounces their stellar test scores are not valid because there were too many students who opted out.
The false propaganda that education reporters embrace is that “results” means high passing rates even if only a fraction of the original students remain. To support that false propaganda, these reporters embrace the lie that attrition is irrelevant, but their studious avoidance of looking at attrition rates– and their rejection of anyone who does – speaks volumes.
Nancy, my point is that many of our teachers are not being prepared to teach reading. Diane, you can keep trotting out the strawman argument about phonics, or you can read my piece and see the complexity of the issues we face.
https://pamelasnow.blogspot.com/2023/01/guest-post-getting-reading-right-on.html
Isn’t Pamela Snow from Australia? I’m not sure you understand the history surrounding reading in the U.S. I think Diane just covered much of it well.
Don’t Australian’s speak English? This is about how best to train teachers in reading instruction. Not about the history of the reading wars. That history is only important insofar as it explains the mess we’re in.
Don’t cite the National Reading Panel. Don’t cite Reading First, which was all about phonics. It cost $6 billion. Produced no results. Cite a district, any district, that is doing reading right.
Those who don’t know history are doomed to repeat it.
So, colleges deciding to purposefully not train teachers to teach reading(English) correctly IS an international phenomenon? When and why did this start?
Where did you get the idea that teachers are not learning how to teach reading? Please cite your sources.
I read your piece. I lived through the last reading war. Read Jeanne Chall’s excellent 1967 book “Learning to Read: The Great Debate,” which settled these issues over half a century ago.
Long COVID and Standardized test have a few things in common. They are both toxic and painful.
Asking Arne Duncan about education is like asking Phyllis Schlafly about the ERA.
The only thing Arne Duncan knows about is basketball, which is why Obama hired him: to shoot hoops with him at lunchtime.
Perhaps the answer to the original question “why” is because PBS is government TV?
Actually PBS and NPR are about 95% private sponsorship, much of that corporate, because it gives the illusion that these corporations are altruistic.
Do you also call public schools government schools? If yes, you too might be in the cult.
I am BEYOND sick of the term “proficient” because they always equate that with “grade level.” Which, of course, it’s not.
TOW: “Proficient” =A
So why doesn’t NAEP make an effort to clarify this?
NAEP (NAGB) has made statements clarifying that proficiency is NOT grade level but who notices it?
“NAEP Proficient represents solid academic performance for each grade assessed. Students reaching this level “have demonstrated competency over challenging subject matter, including subject-matter knowledge, application of such knowledge to real- world situations, and analytical skills appropriate to the subject.”
Please read my definitive response at 9 am Wednesday to the absurd claim that NAEP proficient is grade level. It was repeated by Secretary Cardona at a hearing on Tuesday. He is over his head.
WOW! Great letter!!!
Thank you so much for writing PBS and continuing the fight. I too, wrote them immediately after watching the report. My email to them:
Dear News Hour,
I am a fan of Amna Nawaz and usually feel well informed after viewing her reports — but not this time!
The April 6 news story reporting standardized testing results vs. what parents believe, gave viewers the idea that the tests are completely reliable and that our students are failing. Neither is accurate. And worse, Arne Duncan, who has a vested interest in making us believe these tests are worthwhile, indicated that schools are being “dishonest” in informing parents. Not true! I suggest a follow up report on how best to meet the needs of students, their teachers and their families. Start by calling in former Assistant Secretary of Education Diane Ravitch, who has studied education in much greater depth than has Arne Duncan. I also recommend the following two articles: “Test Scores Don’t Stack Up to GPAs in Predicting College Success” — which introduces a study explaining how teacher-given grades are much more accurate than standardized tests; and Diane Ravitch’s information on who wrote the Common Core Standards and how that information relates to the tests themselves. I do wish to thank Ms. Nawaz for addressing the topic of our children’s mental health. However, please note Mr. Duncan did not really answer the question.
Thank-you for your time and attention!
Sincerely,
Janice Strauss, a retired Spanish & ESL teacher and college adjunct.
https://news.uchicago.edu/story/test-scores-dont-stack-gpas-predicting-college-success
https://dianeravitch.net/2014/04/23/who-wrote-the-common-core-standards-here-is-a-list/
Please continue to speed this gospel.
Thank you, Janice!
This is what I emailed immediately after the interview:
Andrea alancer4@gmail.com
Fri, Apr 7, 12:51 AM (12 days ago)
to viewermail@newshour.org
I am a long-time NewsHour viewer and I was giving the new anchors time to show that they have the same incisive interview style as Judy Woodruff. Today’s interview with Margaret Spellings and Arne Duncan was a depressing example of what has been lost with Ms. Woodruff’s departure.
First, the selection of these particular guests to speak on education matters shows a willful disregard for their reputations among educators, as they were responsible for two of the most destructive policies in American education, namely, “No Child Left Behind” and “Race to the Top”, which, for all the destructive effects of high stakes testing for 20 years, never had a meaningfully positive effect on test scores as measured by NAEP.
But, then, not to question the guests as to the actual validity of test scores as the only measure of student proficiency, which is perhaps why parents might have a different definition of ‘doing well’, is, to put it charitably, shallow. With only a minimal effort, a search for interpreting NAEP scores would give you:
The Network for Public Education’s Peter Greene “NAEP’s ‘proficient’ is set considerably higher than grade level,” and cites research concluding, while “NAEP considers ‘basic’ students not college ready, 50% of those basic students had gone on to earn a degree.” So, while no education category is perfect, using the term “basic” would be better, on a scientific level, and it would not encourage destructive and misleading attacks on educators.
Even if the judgment was made to have these particular guests to comment on the subject, a more neutral position could have been obtained by inviting another guest with a more expert view on education, like Diane Ravitch.
This was not a good night for The News Hour. It will have to get better or it will lose its identity . It certainly will lose me.
Sincerely,
Andrea Lancer