Comments on Into My Own: Kozol on Privatization of Schools

Glad more people are talking about this. I believ...

2007-08-17T23:30:00.000-04:00

Glad more people are talking about this. I believe Grover Norquist actually admitted that NCLB was intended to deconstruct public education. Neal Boortz calls it "gov't education". You know how those Libertarians hate gov't. Doesn't NCLB mandate all schools achieve 100% by 2014? Isn't it true that (nationally) education can pretty much be determined by wealth? Example--urban districts struggle vs. suburban districts. Thus education inequality boils down to poverty issues. If you're the type that feels equality is OK, then fine. But don't whine that public education is broken. And here in Toledo, we have a double whammy in that our urban school district (Toledo Public Schools) scored poorly vs it's suburban counterparts-----and that's allowed the local cons to attack the teachers' union. Thus they can criticize public education and unions in a two-for-one package deal.

No, not "planned" destruction. Just destruction. T...

2007-08-17T01:12:00.000-04:00

No, not "planned" destruction. Just destruction. The reality of life is that entities that do not suceed end up dying. This is why 97% of all small business fail. Not because the owners "planned" on them failing, just because they couldn't suceed. The government is the only arena in which that doesn't happen because bureaucrats have no incentive to suceed. There is no feedback loop. Their jobs and funding remain regardless of the previous years' results; many times they have incentive NOT to provide solutions to further their control of the problem.

Sound like a description of the U.S. military debacle in regards to Iraq? But no, Dave can't question the U.S. war machine because it actually serves corporate hegemony, which is the secret intention behind his ideas.

Let's get back to bashing public schools!!!! It's much easier and less controversial. You go, Dave.

On the testing issue. Of course testing is about ...

2007-08-16T17:53:00.000-04:00

On the testing issue.

Of course testing is about corporatizing schools. Quite literally. The money flowing to corporations is in the hundreds of millions of dollars!!!!

Apparently some people consider that a good thing. I don't.

And you are right on top of the real issue which is this: why is there no transparency around the tests?

Think about it: if a school decided to administer a single test to decide graduation, and then announced that nothing about the test items, the scoring rubric or the actual results on individual questions would be publicly available--do you think they could get away with it?

Of course not.

Why are we allowing state bureaucrats, together with corporate testing companies, to get away with what amounts to educational malpractice?

What is on those tests? How are they scored? Which items are the difference between graduation and not graduation?

Once the public breaks open the "black box" of testing secrecy and has a look at the ridiculous and arbitrary questions that are given a total free pass right now because they are publicly unavailable, there will be such a hue and cry that testing's reign will be over.

The battle cry has to be: open the tests, the scoring rubrics and the indvidual results for all to see how stupid this game really is.

I read the Kozol essay a couple weeks back.I am f...

2007-08-16T17:44:00.000-04:00

I read the Kozol essay a couple weeks back.

I am from Minnesota, where Charters were invented. Here's the key issue: the focus of those who care about education needs to be put on "chartering", not "charters."

Why?

Chartering has everything to do with who gets to create charters, what the rules are and how that process is approved at an administrative level. Essentially, chartering is about monitoring the gates of who gets through.

There is no doubt that charters have potential to innovate and meet the needs of learners by bypassing the bureaucracy of school districts. IMHO, one of the least talked about, but most pervasive barriers to educational innovation and excellence is the mammoth, immovable bureaucracy of large, inner-city districts. By bypassing that, charters can be nimble, innovative, progressive forces in areas of real need.

Now, there are problems with charters. The largest is the way they are "resegregating" schools. In Minneapolis, a immigrant Muslim oriented charter has like 97% kids of color who are Muslim. Is that going to ultimately benefit our society? I question it.

Another problem is that parents/groups create charters around their favored idea, and again the community aspect of public education is threatened.

Then there is the problem with the founder of a charter moving on and leaving the mission of the school to languish. Or, financial mismanagement, which happens more than you would think. And, of course, the real problem of teacher effectiveness and attrition.

Minnesota has tried to put its energies into more effective policies governing "chartering" and thus hoping to reduce the above problems through administrative quality control. They have gotten better, but the segregation issue is the one monkey that has yet to be removed.

But, in general, the huge, undeniable appeal of charters is to be cut loose from a school district's bureaucracy and to be free to innovate and create. Combined with families "choosing" a charter school that is right for them, this makes charters very desirable. But only if "chartering" is done thoughtfully and skillfully.

No, not "planned" destruction. Just destruction. ...

2007-08-16T17:38:00.000-04:00

No, not "planned" destruction. Just destruction. The reality of life is that entities that do not suceed end up dying. This is why 97% of all small business fail. Not because the owners "planned" on them failing, just because they couldn't suceed. The government is the only arena in which that doesn't happen because bureaucrats have no incentive to suceed. There is no feedback loop. Their jobs and funding remain regardless of the previous years' results; many times they have incentive NOT to provide solutions to further their control of the problem

The education system has been a poster child for this for the past half-century. There is no reason to "plan" the destruction of the education system. If it can succeed through the brilliance of the marketplace (people using it because it works and they want to) then great! If not then it should be allowed to die and be replaced by something better.

What you're suggesting, David, seems destructive a...

2007-08-16T16:46:00.000-04:00

What you're suggesting, David, seems destructive and pointless to me. And I don't mean to be insulting, because I sincerely appreciate your readership and contribution. But planned failure is something we've had a bit too much of in this country lately, and I'm not up for more of it in my world.

The discipline issue is something else entirely, not addressed by NCLB, and deserves some discussion, but I hate to see what kneejerk reactionary mess our current politicians would make of it.

Finally I dispute the implication that NCLB has represented a funding boost: it hasn't. I would argue that any new money going into education in the last ten years has been eaten by health care costs. In Ohio I have to believe that in real dollars funding has gone down. But I'm not smart enough to figure that out.

That is a good point, and I concur to some extent....

2007-08-16T16:33:00.000-04:00

That is a good point, and I concur to some extent. The problem for me is that there IS no way to save them all. If a good chunk of inner-city parents pulled their children from the system, the system would completely fail. The schools would implode from even less financing (or perhaps none at all). But is that a bad thing? If the feedback loop (No Child Left Behind) is telling us that adding money doesn't work, why fight for something that refuses to suceed. If teachers cannot (for whatever reason) inject displine and ambition into classrooms, producing higher grades, why should the process continue? Let the education system collapse, and the consumers that care will put their children with a product that works. The rest will fall by the wayside, but that is a tragedy that will happen anyway.

David, let me clarify a little if I can. I am not ...

2007-08-16T15:43:00.000-04:00

David, let me clarify a little if I can.

I am not suggesting that students in low income schools cannot pass. Of course they can. And many do. But students don't pass in the same numbers that students in upper income schools do. If a standard passage rate is, let's say 50%, the reality is that in many high poverty schools, fewer students are going to get 50% right and be considered passing. That's just the reality of the situation.

Now, why was the rate set at 50%, rather than say, 65%? My point is that when you set the rate at 50%, maybe the vast majority of kids in wealthy suburban districts will pass. In my school, I like to say we have 100% passing rates because no one has failed to graduate due to failure on the OGT. But what if large numbers of suburban kids were unable to graduate? That might make some state legislators uncomfortable when they go back to their districts and it might affect the way people vote or think about public schools. As long as it's the poor schools where "failure" occurs, it's pretty easy to talk about putting the schools out of business via vouchers, etc.

If you think the scenario I've described above is absurd, well I can take it. I just want to be clear on what you're calling absurd.

And by the way, your implied promise that vouchers will deliver poor kids into the hands of good private schools where everyone succeeds is a sick joke. It'll deliver a few of them to private schools, and the rest will continue in the same schools written off as "failures". Unless you are suggesting that private schools will accept anyone who comes to their doors. Ready to impose that requirement on private schools? How will that work?

It's always best to be accurate. Do conservatives...

2007-08-16T15:19:00.000-04:00

It's always best to be accurate. Do conservatives support standardized testing? Most centrists don't either.

David, it is difficult to take your comments serio...

2007-08-16T15:13:00.000-04:00

David, it is difficult to take your comments seriously because you use "liberals" and "whining" to besmirch the opposite point of view.

"...this testing mechanism, which ensures that poo...

2007-08-16T14:48:00.000-04:00

"...this testing mechanism, which ensures that poor and urban schools will have high rates of failure..."

This is flatly absurd. Standardized tests do not "ensure" any student will have or low failure rates. And if you care about urban students escaping the failures of their schools, why not support vouchers?

To the extent testing cannot measure critical thinking, nothing can. The only alternatives liberals suggest (to replace standardized testing) lead to enormous variabilities in grading standards. "Functioning in a community" happens best through hard work and discipline. Neither one of those are learned when tests are removed so kids can make easy, "feel good" grades.

Now ideologues want to remove testing in the workforce as well, and why not? If we're graduating kids who can't pass tests in high school, they'll just fail at business. Not wanting that (and not wanting to force the issue in primary/secondary education) liberals simply set up new policies to limit the workforce too. Scragged.com discusses this further.

Additionally, there is no way to "fix the inequality issue". Life is unfair and unequal. Teaching children to compensate for that and work around that is much more valuable in the long run then teaching them to whine about it.

Your analysis is on point! Glad to know you are ou...

2007-08-16T12:01:00.000-04:00

Your analysis is on point! Glad to know you are out there writing. Someone sent me a link to your site this morning.

Please consider crossposting at www.educatorroundtable.net. We have over 100 registered users focused on education more suitable to life, liberty, and happiness...

Dave, I mentioned this commentary at educatorround...

2007-08-16T11:59:00.000-04:00

Dave, I mentioned this commentary at educatorroundtable, a very good site by a very active educator. Hope you get some interest from it. -- Linda

http://www.educatorroundtable.net/frontPage.do