Paul Bonner is a retired teacher and principal. He suggests a way to undermine the complaints about CRT, WOKE, and other scarecrows.
Perhaps the greatest injustice of all of this sound and fury for nothing, is that few of the individuals who are the most outspoken concerning cultural disinformation have set foot in a school in the last decade, much less observed or engaged in classroom instruction. Most of the right wing celebrities who profit from all of this noise send their children to private schools. Well intentioned policy makers and Washington politicians also opt for private schools when they are available. It is my experience that when school officials open their doors the reception from the public is very positive. I was principal of an elementary school where my predecessors actually barred members of the community from the building. There was a metal pull down door at the front of the office that was always closed by 4:00 pm. The neighborhood perception of the school was bad because there were no relationships between the school and community.
When I got there, I stopped using the metal door and invited the real estate developers to come and see what we were doing. The overall outlook toward the school from all constituencies, including the staff, improved dramatically. I took similar steps at my previous school, invited the “difficult” parents in, and increased afternoon activities to accentuate the positive. According to Gallup (August 2022) 76% of parents are satisfied with their child’s public school (Compare that to 22% for Congress), it was 82% before the pandemic.
My experience has taught me that if we are open to parents being in the schools and participating in activities, the dissatisfaction reduces significantly. Yes, it is well documented on this blog and through other media outlets that there are nefarious actors pushing a destructive agenda, but it is important that we fight their lies with the good that takes place in schools. The knee jerk firing and isolation of teachers who teach about diversity is one example of the the defensive posture taken by district and state leaders.
Part of the reason, certainly not all, that the right wing disinformation campaigns take root is because school officials too often take cover and act to separate schools from the greater community. We simply don’t know one another. Our best weapon against false opaque charges of indoctrination is to open our doors, invite the community in, and get the positive out.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
I worked in a school district in which the community was an integral part. When school districts are transparent, the community becomes more positively engaged. This school district also had an active, supportive PTA that worked well with teachers and administrators. When stakeholders are valued, school districts are more likely to pass budgets because the public has greater understanding of the needs, and they have been included in the process.
LikeLike
Paul Bonner Such invitations . . . to see for oneself . . . are a surefire way for people, who are still based in some form of reasonability, to “get it.”
There is a multi-level “however” buried there, however.
First, the disinformation campaign is rooted in anti-intellectualism (anti-wokeness) and so it is fundamentally anti-education. So, from the camp that needs it the most, who is going to show up at a good school (one that is actually educating students) who isn’t already loaded for bear, aka, ready to interpret everything they experience, by definition, as an example of “wokeness.” Some may break through . . . there’s always hope, said the optimist liberal. In other words, watch out for the fox in the chicken house situation.
Second, it’s about the powerful among us keeping people anti-woke ignorant and prone to charismatic totalitarian moral degenerates and idiots (watch today’s news), and then about herding people to their so-called “conservative” extremes, which are more extreme than anything we have experienced before, especially under the banner “conservative.”
Also historically, becoming educated in a democracy (in the broader sense) lends itself NOT to ideology or propaganda but to self-reflection and mastery, inclusiveness, openness, and critical thinking about things like (ahem) history and political philosophy. However, even those general educational goals have the POLITICAL fallout of more liberal movements of mind . . . again, especially by today’s political metrics. (I cannot say “standards” in this context.)
POLITICALLY, then, and at its core, the U.S. Constitution itself, while not MERELY political, is a liberal-leaning document (again, in today’s extreme context) . . . but it is NOT anti-conservative . . . unless one thinks that a document that speaks overtly for justice for ALL of the people, and no one above the law (etc.), cannot claim a conservative field of meaning; but it can, unless you set it down in today’s extreme polemics; so it’s no wonder they want to “rewrite” the Constitution, which is neo-code for “get rid of it.”
Also, a couple of interrelated points about today’s extreme discourse:
As a point of basic logic, from the Republican side, EVERYTHING is understood NOT in terms of the content and the argumentation about it itself (where reasonability, truth and/or falsity can be found), but rather in terms of the argument’s political fallout.
The argument and its political fallout, however, are NOT the same thing, even though ALL arguments have political fallout, e.g., as above with the U.S. Constitution. (This point is partly why Lady Justice wears a blindfold.)
Trump is famous for this tactic aka ploy. Watch him and his powerful followers: They all avoid the reasonability and reality of the argument UNLESS ITS THEIRS . . . and go straight for the arena of political fallout (the libs, wokeness, democrats only want their “liberal agenda”, etc.).
This leaves naive liberals on the defensive trying try to talk themselves out of a logical ploy that they haven’t really understood. (We keep thinking everyone thinks the same way about reasonability, as is also assumed in the Constitution and that is warned about in the Federalist Papers (10.) Then, when the extreme right has a half-truth, they spend all of their heat on the truth-side of it forgetting the other half; and so those same naive liberals, being who they are, have to agree with at least part of the right’s point.
End run: the busy and untrustful public remains confused and in a “just do it” mentality. And the whole thing is exacerbated by the massive media, and the systematics that it brings to the field of communications <–not good for the voting booth. CBK
LikeLike
Trump said that in his first day in office, he would write an executive order abolishing birthright citizenship. Sad that no one told him that birthright citizenship is written in the Constitution. Anyone born here is a citizen.
LikeLike
Hello Diane I don’t think Trump is an “intellectual” but rather an accidental fascist. My thinking is that we are experiencing (what is common to all fascists) his writ-small extremely distorted, thoughtless, vacuous, and loathsome personality . . . but now extended to the writ-large/world political arena. (Contrast this with Goebel’s diaries where he takes up fascism as a reflective/intellectual even theoretical intention.)
One way this “accidental fascism” shows up (and only ONE of the ways) is Trump’s lack of understanding about why those “loser soldiers” go to war only to die. “What’s in it for them?”
Also, early on in his presidency, when that hurricane came up the east coast, remember his episode with the Sharpie and the map? He seemed even then to be unaware that the hurricane wasn’t doing what he thought it would/ should, or even that everyone else could see how screwed up he was. Everyone I knew was head-banging over that one. It was, even back then, an “emperor with no clothes” scenario. He seemed totally unaware that, in fact, Reality trumps all of us, even Trump. CBK
LikeLike
“especially under the banner “conservative.””
It’s a false banner for they are not conservative, they are reactionary xtian fundie theofascists with whom there is no discussion as their god has dictated to them that they are “right”.
Not much different from many neo-liberals on the supposed left who are right of the political center, the ones who have pushed the standards and testing malpractice regime.
LikeLike
I don’t know how extensive it is on the right, but on the “left” few people actually support the neoliberal agenda who aren’t paid to.
When most of us vote for a Democrat we falsely assume we’re getting someone on the FDR to Jimmy Carter continuum not a Clinton/Obama/Biden corporate lobbyist wolf in elected official sheep’s clothes.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Michael,
Most of those who promote the corporate reform agenda of privatization—charters and vouchers—are on a rightwing payroll.
LikeLike
Michael Dixon writes: “I don’t know how extensive it is on the right, but on the “left” few people actually support the neoliberal agenda who aren’t paid to.”
First, (huh?) I don’t know how you would know that . . . And are you referring to the supporters who are rich people and corporations, or to the entire neo-liberal support in the United States . . . even the five-dollar campaign contributors? Who among that group receives payment for support of an agenda on either side?
But second, and to your point (even if it were coherent), I think you may be confusing (to the advantage of your [huh?] over-generalization) (1) the quality of whatever agenda you are referring to (as Diane suggests about privatization), with (2) political support and/or fallout, which WILL occur regardless, including from some on either side who are paid loud-mouth propagandists.
The fundamental point is that ALL positions, right or left, have political fallout; and all positions insofar as they are the platform of a political party, and because politics is. . . well . . . political, . . . are open to support from anyone from any faction or group. I mean no disrespect to you, but rather want to “ring” from a past well-worn phrase: It’s the Agenda, Stupid. . . . regardless of who is paid to shout what. And btw, I know voters who don’t know who LBJ was, much less FDR, or Johnny Carson, for that matter. CBK
LikeLike
Michael Dixon I replied to your note but it went to moderation, again. I must be on some list . . . happens all of the time. But I assume it will show up at some point. CBK
LikeLike
WordPress has a grudge against you.
LikeLike
Diane I am humbled by it . . . all over the place. CBK
LikeLike
Diane It’s REALLY AI. The algorithm thinks, because I bought a blouse from a “fashion” house online, that I must want to buy 40,000 other blouses.
CBK
LikeLike
You make excellent points, but what I am addressing is the benefit of openness. I was hired to be a principal due to my experience with IB. My mandate was to get the school there. We were successful to great degree because we opened our doors and sent our students out. I know these seem like generalizations, but the strategy worked. In my principalship in Charlotte I was told by the Dean of the Education department at Queens University next door that they had always had a partnership with our school but I was far and away the most engaged. What then happened was education majors at the school benefited from the guidance of an excellent teaching staff and all measures, including those dastardly high stakes scores, improved at our school because we had professors and their students engaged with student centered activities. Yes, there are numerous bad actors out there who thrive in environments of misinformation. However, we can’t fight them by merely countering their lies with facts. We have to go on the offensive with the things that are right in the school house. These real estate folks I refer to were far more Republican than not. They were concerned about our school because of the anecdotal vile that came from Great American Schools.org. Whenever members came to visit they were always surprised by the level of instruction and the community. This really helped us get where we wanted to be. Of course the weeds were more complicated as we worked through our challenges, but people liked what we were doing. According to polling, over 70% of parents are satisfied with their child’s public school. We need to empower them to counter the narrative that is paid for by those who profit with their disruption.
LikeLike
Paul I think what you say is wonderful and wouldn’t ever think not.
On the other hand, there is the dialectics of history . . . and though I don’t think our narratives are a case of “apples and oranges,” or so different they are not related at all, I do think we are in a different and much more dangerous time than the time of the scenario you speak of, or even where that scenario analogically still exists NOW, in some places (at least I hope so, and with some evidence).
But since we are thinking in parts and movements; and though any reasonable person would applaud everything in your note, I do think that “our” liberal naivete (both in academia and in just plain American thinking) in part, answers the question: how did we get to this political “here”?
Remember, we are circa three or four overlapping generations since the political air we lived in just after WWII. There also is that idea that democracy has to undergo a new revolution of sorts with each generation. As educators, and as Mr. Swacker relates in his note, I think many have been involved in a grand oversight about just that point of concern . . . having been swept up in and controlled by what is, underneath it all, the capitalist mind set (testing and publishing companies and again, the faux conservative neo-fascist movement?) It’s not either/or. Rather, to fail to understand that, in my view, is to tacitly endorse it, and to be involved in its propagation. Whatever else openness is, to many, it’s “woke.” CBK
LikeLike
Agreed, I can’t help but think, relying on that history, that something cataclysmic is before us. Betwixt our post truth interlude, social media, and the rise of AI, we are going to have to confront the predatory capitalism that is openly attacking what they like to call the administrative state. A bumpy ride ahead.
LikeLike
Paul Just today, I’ve been reading another essay that “cans” what the writer calls “the West.” He refers to all the bad things about it as if those, and only those, are what “the West” is about. “Let’s move on,” he says.
Put that idea (of defining something historically sound by all that is wrong with it) with the White Person’s (not to mention White Male) mourning the passing of our centuries-long assumption of White Privilege, and the threat and promise of AI . . . and you have only three of the deep-seated distortions that ARE distortions because they can flow from the even more deep-seated and inborn wonder about everything, and the also inborn love of freedom . . . to think it through. CBK
LikeLike
Mr. Bonner is so correct. When community members and parents (remember all taxpayers!) are not only allowed but invited into our schools, positive interactions and satisfaction increases!
I remember teaching a special education class, the “learning center “ in a very progressive school in the 90’s. I was assigned only 8 very academic and behavioral challenged middle schoolers. But I had a full time aide, an effective behavior management plan in place, a supportive principal (like Mr. Bonner) and resources I deemed important for our student’s’ success. My students were integrated in the specials: art, music, gym if they were able to contribute and in certain academic classes (like Math or Science) again if they could handle it.
We had a team meeting about a student who was having academic difficulties that brought on behavior issues in her Math class. It was determined by the team (classroom teacher, phycologist, me, counselor, Sp Ed administrator) to have her attend my class during her Math time for specific individualized instruction based on her needs. Her parents however were not on board. The mother shared that she had been in special classes her whole school life and it was awful. She vowed to never put her daughter in one. I personally invited her to our classroom (a beautiful sunny space within the 6th grade wing, not in an “old basement janitor’s closet “ the she had for a classroom.) The principal walked the parents down to my room during school, and they were able to see my classroom, my students, even my on-going instruction . The fear disappeared from their eyes almost immediately. That student stayed with me for Math instruction for 2 years ( she was in the regular Reading and Social Studies classes ) and by 8th grade, was able to continue and be successful with the Math in a regular class . She also made a positive transition to HS, and the parents could not be happier.
CONNECTIONS with students and parents are so important and having parents in and out of schools during the day helps them debunk all negative press.
LikeLike
How to. . . #1 The schools and their supposed leaders need to grow some cojones and refuse to implement the standards and testing malpractice regime. Then take the monies saved and reduce class sizes.
Anything else is tertiary at best.
LikeLike
The more I think about it based on what I’ve seen, I agree with you more than ever. I have a gut feeling because I would bet both you and I have done similar things in our careers. On the other hand, not everyone is ready to make such sacrifices and I wonder, if I could do it all over again and knowing the consequences and seeing how people acted, if I would do it again. Few who stand up win, most lose. So I guess, in the end, I really don’t know what I think.
The adminimals usually have room to maneuver, regular folks usually don’t. Which makes it all more tragic and underscores your original point.
LikeLiked by 1 person
When North Carolina came out with legislations they titled the ABCs, a precursor to NCLB, I naively thought that the education establishment would reject high stakes testing out of hand. Boy was I wrong. Our superintendent, Eric Smith (Later Florida Secretary of Education, I think with Jeb Bush) used his professional ladder climbing instincts to develop a “choice district” pretending parents could chose any school they wanted as incentive for failing schools to improve. He left as soon as he implemented the program that left Charlotte in shambles. When he got to Charlotte we had around 18 Title 1 schools. About a decade later Charlotte had 80 or 90 schools in poverty. Now about a three year gig, the superintendency is about professional climbing or falling. NO time for actually serving schools.
LikeLike
This is very true and good advice to his fellow administrators. The same could be said for higher ed. However, for teachers, many of us face bosses who want to control our interaction with parents through themselves and that is equally harmful as the metal sliding door Bonner describes. This also needs to be fought. All long term progressive change comes from the bottom, where the majority are (teachers, parents and students) not higher up. Unions can help or hinder this depending on their policies, practices and leaderships.
LikeLike
Yes. As the war on public education unfolded–starting in earnest with Reagan’s “A Nation at Risk”–surveys of public opinion regarding schools, as reported by Phi Delta Kappa and others, continued to show strong public support for the schools people knew, but lagging support for public schools in general. The conclusion at the time, not refuted yet, was that parents and others generally liked and trusted the public schools they knew, but increasingly believed somebody else’s schools were failing. Public education supporters need to do a much better job of communicating with the general public. Public education supporters should coalesce, find the money, and use all available means to counter the negative propaganda on Fox and other networks and individuals. I hope it’s not too late.
LikeLike
Murdoch’s media run a constant barrage of calumny against public schools.
LikeLike
I confess I haven’t read all the comments- but I will! My initial reaction as a high school teacher in a large urban school is that I wouldn’t feel safe letting the community in. Isn’t that sad? If we open our doors to the community, who are we at risk of letting in? There was a school shooting in my community (Nashville) in March. I haven’t felt safe teaching for the past 5 years or so as mass shootings have become daily events. After March, I feel even less safe. Plus I live in a state that puts the gun lobby over normal citizens.
LikeLike
Good suggestions, but historically surveys show that most people like the schools in their neighborhood or hometown and think they do a good job or better. But they believe, nationally, our schools are “failing.” Seemingly, that’s because all the propaganda and nonsense in the news accents problems or propaganda against public education. But they know the local schools, kids, etc., and support them.
LikeLike
Michael Dixon writes: “I don’t know how extensive it is on the right, but on the “left” few people actually support the neoliberal agenda who aren’t paid to.”
First, (huh?) I don’t know how you would know that . . . And are you referring to the supporters who are rich people and corporations, or to the entire neo-liberal support in the United States . . . even the five-dollar campaign contributors? Who among that group receives payment for support of an agenda on either side?
But second, and to your point (even if it were coherent), I think you may be confusing (to the advantage of your [huh?] over-generalization) (1) the quality of whatever agenda you are referring to (as Diane suggests about privatization), with (2) political support and/or fallout, which WILL occur regardless, including from some on either side who are paid loud-mouth propagandists.
The fundamental point is that ALL positions, right or left, have political fallout; and all positions insofar as they are the platform of a political party, and because politics is. . . well . . . political, . . . are open to support from anyone from any faction or group. I mean no disrespect to you, but rather want to “ring” from a past well-worn phrase: It’s the Agenda, Stupid. . . . regardless of who is paid to shout what. And btw, I know voters who don’t know who LBJ was, much less FDR, or Johnny Carson, for that matter. CBK
LikeLike