Greed is good

A commenter on a blogpost here nicely captures the mentality of the corporate, philanthrocapitalist education deform crowd:

The evidence seems to suggest is that our society’s most highly educated people are turned away from teaching because of conditions which the teacher unions continue to support, namely: differentiated pay, differentiated status among teachers, and high stakes accountability tied to evaluation. Think about the professions that our most highly educated citizens prefer (the Ivy League graduates in the U.S.).

Let’s see: Investment Banking, Finance, Law, Entrepreneurs. What is the common denominator here? Making a lot of money, but doing so under differentiated terms and market pressures in which pay is tied to performance as judged by the employees clients. It’s not fair to say on the one hand that our society’s smartest people avoid teaching because of the conditions of that profession, when the very conditions that non teacher reformers want to implement (e.g. pay for performance; more accountability/high risk reward pay) are precisely the conditions the union opposes but that top college graduates want as demonstrated by the careers they currently choose

There is much to quibble with here.  I would not equate having an undergraduate or MBA degree from an Ivy League school as necessarily being "highly educated."  Investment banking, law, finance, and business do not, as far as I can see, require any brains beyond what it takes to become a doctor, scientist, engineer, policy analyst, or liberal arts professor.   The most distinct feature of the people I knew who went to business school was that they wanted to make a lot of money.  They were quite unapologetic about that.  They were not motivated by any particular curiosity to know something or a desire to contribute to a better world.  This is not to say that they weren't smart in a certain reptilean way, but one would be hard-pressed to have an intelligent discussion with them about art or literature or politics.

In this week's New Republic, Anthony Grafton reviews a recent book by Louis Menaud on the plight of graduate students in the humanities, who spend 10 or more poverty-stricken years working on the PhDs only to find slim job prospects awaiting them when they finish.  Grafton asks whether something should be done to deter them from ever attempting such a foolish endeavor.   His answer is that, although the poor souls should be informed from the start about the difficulty of the quest, in some sort of crazy way the system works:

One might say that you need a vocation.   And the vocation of scholarship is hard ... One reason graduate school demands so much time, so much effort, and so much difficulty is that it is designed -- badly and clumsily, but not insanely -- to attract and then to test people who think they have this sort of calling.

The commenter who thinks our "most educated" citizens gravitate towards banking, law, and business -- and others of his ilk who are the powers behind the current deformation of public education -- have never had a taste of this calling.  They no inkling of what it means to be driven to seek truth and beauty for their own sakes, not for the large salaries they will command.  

I once had an English professor who said that the most educated man he ever met was a crane operator who kept a shelf of books in his cab.  He didn't say whether the crane operator had gone to an Ivy League college or not.

Too bad the current crop of education deformers will never understand how or why a highly educated man could end up driving a crane.

The beatings will continue until morale improves

Or as a commenter on a NYT article about how Joel Klein has failed his avowed goal of expediting the teacher-removal process puts it:

There’s an old joke about a man who planned to have a cat pull a piano up four flights of stairs. “How can you make that tiny animal do a job like that?” he was asked. “Easy”, he replied, “I’ll use a whip.”

Because staff at the only high school serving the small, poor community of Central Falls RI did not comply with the superintendant's demand to do more work for no more pay, she fired them all.

Our dimwitted US Secretary of Education commended the board for “showing courage and doing the right thing for kids.”

“This is hard work and these are tough decisions, but students only have one chance for an education,” he is quoted as saying. 

Uh, yeah, that makes sense.  The way to give them a great education is to fire all their teachers.  Brilliant.

Valerie Strauss has the best and most pithy analysis.

Huberman pressured into putting brakes on Duncan's homicidal policies

Correlation is not causation, but youth violence spiked in Chicago in the years following Arne Duncan's reckless school-closing spree -- now going national with big bucks behind it.   Coincidence?  Maybe.  Duncan's heavy community opposition repeatedly warned him that his policy would produce violence.  And when the beating death of honors student Derrion Albert was caught on video, even the mainstream media speculated that there might be a connection with school closings (fancifully named "Renaissance 2010").  Of course, when asked about it, Duncan bristled at the suggestion, calling the notion “absolutely ridiculous".  And we know he is right because everything he does is for the kids, and we did not, after all, see him wielding a club in the video.

Now, in an apparent flash of community concern, Ron Huberman, Duncan's replacement as Chicago school boss, is backing off (a little) on his plan for closing more schools, citing "safety concerns."  In other words, the political powers that rule Chicago have realized that: (a) the suggestion that closing schools may contribute to violence is not -- sorry, Arne -- quite so ridiculous  and (b) youth violence is not good for the image and reputation of the city, and hence it is bad for those who own much of its real estate. 

Huberman spins it as a "the community spoke, we listened" story, which is patent nonsense, since he always turned a deaf ear to the community before.

Huberman said Wednesday his latest plans show he listened to the community. He said he took very seriously concerns about gang conflicts, arguing that it's tough to foresee some potential problems until the shake-ups are announced.

"Tough to foresee potential problems."  Let's transcribe that: "I was being a good boy and going ahead with the plan.  How was I to know that the political winds were going to shift and that Ren10 was suddenly going to become a problem for the rich and powerful who are calling the shots?"

Smarick praises Huberman for pulling down his pants to pee

Andy Smarick, who was Deputy Assistant Something in the Bush ED, and is now a visting fellow at the Fordham Institute (I guess they won't give him a permanent job) must be one of the sillier characters in the education blogosphere.  Case in point:  Thoughful Administration.

When a Chicago study came out last year [showing that Arne Duncan's expensive school closure policy was largely ineffective because most students whose schools were closed ended up going to schools that were no better] there was mega hand-wringing and lots of “I-told-you-sos” from opponents of closures... Rather than throwing away the closure option, Chicago schools CEO Ron Huberman learned from previous efforts and adjusted the strategy. Now, all kids displaced by closures will have access to higher performing options.  Not brain surgery for sure...

I don't know how much Arne Duncan was paid as CEO of Chicago Public Schools, nor how much Huberman makes.  Considering their stunning lack of credentials or experience, it was and is certainly too much.  My guess is probably in the neighborhood of $250,000 plus perks.  So maybe I'm just hardnosed, but when a public servant sucks up that much of my taxes, I kinda expect they should be able to make commonsense decisions like not shutting kids out of a school unless there is a better alternative. 

Being a performance-driven conservative, you'd think Andy would too.  You'd think he'd hold Duncan's feet to the fire a bit for such stupid implementation of a (maybe) decent policy.  You would also think he wouldn't find anything especially laudable in Huberman's (maybe) improved implementation.  You might even think Smarick would be a wee bit sceptical of Huberman when he says he's going to insure that students of closing schools get better options (like asking questions like, "Gee, Ron, how are you going to make sure that happens, since so far you seem like a martinet, a liar, and a nitwit?")  But you'd think wrong.

Teachers are always the most eloquent

A teacher commenting on the Houston's School Board pushing use of test score inflation (aka "valued added) to measure teacher effectiveness:

I'd like to introduce myself to Mr. Grier and the Members of the School Board. I'm one of the good teachers in HISD. I have high test scores, lots of technology, awesome projects hanging on the walls, good evaluations, well behaved students and very high academic standards in my classroom. I've even received an ASPIRE bonus two years running.

And I want you to know that I'm turning in my resignation in May. In fact, it was difficult to come back this Fall, it made me ill, but I decided to tough it out one more year.

I am leaving public education as disillusioned and disgusted with the system as my colleagues who have been dumped on for years. I am tired of listening to students scream obscenities at teachers and then hide behind smirking assistant principals who see nothing wrong with the student's behavior. I am disgusted with the retaliatory tactics, bullying and lies that come from our main office everyday. I have no faith in the Union as it too is corrupt and entangled in the deceit. Sorry, Ms. Fallon, but you know how horrible it is and you've not been able to do any thing about it. I'm powerless and only protected for now by my scores and a childish kind of campus popularity. I can only cringe as I hear my friends and colleagues insulted, targeted and harassed by students and administrators. There's no ASPIRE bonus big enough to make me stay in a poisonous place where talented teachers' lives have been turned into living hells because of misanthropic and dangerously ignorant principals, blatant favouritism, irresponsible parents just as eager as our new superintendent to jump on the blame wagon and ultimately a society that fails to appreciate the value of an education. With all my heart I'll miss my students, but I have too much self respect and too much self worth to continue working in a profession as corrupt and misguided as this one. I guess that makes me no better than all of those "bad" teachers Mr. Grier and board can't wait to fire.

Congratulations HISD, you won.

The power of belief

Profuse declarations of one's confidence in the ability of all children to perform at the highest level are de rigueur for high-level education administrators.  Admission that some children may be bound for careers as plumbers, cosmetologists, or automotive technicians is a major faux pas, met with cries shock and horror -- particularly if one fails to speak with hushed voice and lowered eyes to suggest deep shame in bringing up unmentionable possibilities   To profess mild skepiticism, much less engage in critical thinking, with the wares of the latest educational snake-oil peddlars will banish one forever from the chambers where key decisions are made.

Michelle Rhee's latest bit of nonsense is emblematic of this evangelical bent.  Rhee firmly believes (but, note, does not provide evidence) that the only thing preventing urban schools from overrunning the classrooms of the Ivy League is (drum roll please) ... belief.

Rhee first sounds her theme thus:

I believe we can solve the problems of urban education in our lifetimes and actualize education’s power to reverse generational poverty. But I am learning that it is a radical concept to even suggest this.

Actually, if there is anything radical about this concept, it is that education alone is sufficient to eliminate the intergenerational transmisson of poverty.  Rhee's sweeping suggestion that somehow she alone has glimpsed the light brushes aside the work of hundreds of thousands of dedicated researchers, social workers, teachers, psychologists, and activists who have dedicated their lives to addressing the problem of poverty in the U.S..  But we have seen this attitude from St. Michelle -- returned from the caverns of Baltimore schools grasping the hold grail and cup containing all the answers to our society's most deep-rooted and intractable problems -- many times before.

And the answer according to St. Michelle?  Simply believe:

Examples of extraordinary success also exist here in Washington, DC ... At the successful schools, the primary difference was the team of adults who decided it was possible for lives and outcomes to move in other directions.  What is keeping us from bringing such examples to scale is not a lack of solutions but a frailty of belief.

That's pretty much it.  If kids don't do well, it's because teachers lack courage and don't believe.  The one concrete suggestion she gives is a plug for evaluating teachers based on student's test scores -- despite no evidence whatsoever (which is not required in a faith-based world, of course) that it is a good idea that could work  Then, in a nice bit of irony, she applauds Obama's education policies while decrying adults who play politics in the same breath.

And she concludes with an effort to seem MLK-esque:

There is no doubt that poverty drags multiple obstacles into schools with children, and these obstacles are extremely challenging to overcome. It can feel like climbing a mountain every day, both for children and the adults who are teaching them. But there are successful mountain climbers. As we follow their examples in larger numbers, we will create well-worn paths of success. Mountains will be reduced to hills, and hills to level ground as all children become poised for life choices that can compete with their imaginations

Curious that she doesn't mention who those mountain climbers are, what exactly they doing, by what measure she deems them a success in reaching the pinnacle, or what specifically she is doing to follow their lead.  But perhaps she is merely being humble in not telling us directly that the fearless climber scaling the peaks is her and hers is the lead we should follow.  But we would probably know that ... if we only believed.

Let's move (those pencils)!

I listened to Michelle Obama's launch of a new national campaign to attack childhood obesity last night on C-SPAN radio last night.  It's a critical problem, because overweight children face significantly increased risk of health problems over their lifetimes, not to mention a host of potential social and psychological issues.  MO's tackling of the problem is all well and good, but it focusses almost exclusively on the nutrition side, with no acknowledgement of the fact that recess and phys ed are among the first things to be cut under the pressure-cooker NCLB's test-prep regime -- which her husband's policies only intensify.  From ABC News:

But many physical education programs across the nation's school systems are among the first to fall victim to deeper budget cuts.

In fact, only 4 percent of elementary schools, 8 percent of middle schools, and 2 percent of high schools offer daily physical education, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

"What we're trying to really encourage school districts to think about is even when things are very, very tough, don't cut those extracurricular activities," said Duncan.

Of course, Duncan's policies do nothing of the kind.  Do Race-to-the-Trough applicants get extra points for assuring that their students get at least an hour of vigorous physical exercise every day?  I don't think so.  Perhaps Duncan is referring to his penchant for closing schools, which will force students to walk farther and often through gang-patrolled streets to get to class -- as occurred in Chicago under his reign, with lethal results.  Hey, nothing like scurrying along for fear of one's life to get the heart pumping!

Politics, Ideology, and Education

I've been reading Elizabeth DeBray's book of that title (subtitle: Federal Policy During the Clinton and Bush Administrations).  I learned 2 things.

First, we have Osama bin Laden to thank for NCLB.  Many of the elements of NCLB were championed by the Clinton Administration.  But the Republicans hated it.  Abolition of the Dept of Education was a plank in the Republican platform in the 1996 election.  After 9/11, education was Bush's top domestic priority, and Republicans went along with it in a show of party loyalty with their wartime president.  Kennedy was initially sidelined (Bush's guys were negotiating with the New Democrats, like Lieberman), but then got involved, softening the bill a bit and extracting a bit more funding.  Only Paul Wellstone, bless his soul, took an active stand against all the standardized testing and draconian punishments.

Second, both researchers and educators were completely locked out.  In other words, everyone who actually knew something was excluded.

Plus ca change we can believe in.  We still have terrorists and nitwits in charge of setting our education policy.

"The worst is one who is despised"

When the Master governs, the people

are hardly aware that he exists.

Next best is a leader who is loved.

Next, one who is feared.

The worst is one who is despised.

- Tao Te Ching

Poor Joel Klein has been taking quite a beating lately.  First he gets booed and shouted down for 5 minutes straight by parents and teachers while trying to make a speech.  Then he gets hammered by the New York State Senate Finance Committee:

Klein was roasted by Senate Finance Committee Chairman Carl Kruger (D-Brooklyn) for ignoring the concerns of parents and lawmakers and treating them as "annoyances."

"You come to us for money, but you don't come to us for involvement," Kruger said.

Kruger also referred to Klein's tenure as "nine years of torture, nine years of acrimony, nine years of nail biting and hand twisting."

Of course, Klein is unfazed.  He knows exactly why this is happening to him: "When you do tough things, you are going to get pushback and resistance."

Note, Joel, you might also get pushback and resistance for doing stupid and dishonest things.  Difficult though it may be for you to fathom, not everybody who disagrees with you is necessarily wrong.

Great ideas still not coming from Washington

Arne Duncan gave a speech at the National Press Club last May, wherein he said: "You know, when I was in Chicago, I didn’t think all the good ideas came from Washington. Now that I’m in Washington, I know all the good ideas don’t come from Washington. The good ideas are always going to come from great educators in local communities."

I guess that explains why his ideas for ESEA re-authorization, outlined in the Obama administration's 2011 budget proposal, are a federal bureaucrat's wishlist: national standardized tests, cradle-to-career child surveillance systems, and a big pot of discretionary dollars for the US Secretary of Education to dole out to states that do his bidding. 

Given the sea of red ink we are embarking upon, I think the notion that Congress will give Arne another big pot of playmoney is fantasy -- even if his ideas for reform had some currency outside the small gang of thugs driving the deformation of American education, which they don't.  No Republican is going to risk his seat to support such federalization of education policy, however attractive its union-bashing elements might be.

Arne wants to replace NCLB accountability with national standardized tests that measure growth toward "College and Career Readiness."  It's a brilliantly stupid idea that will eventually lead to the complete discreditation of the test-driven accountability train.  Any national testing regime is going to invite widespread scrutiny, and under such scrutiny it will collapse.  The reason why it will collapse is quite simple: as is well-known among psychometricians, year-to-year changes in student test scores are almost completely random.  Aggregating these bits of randomness to the class or school level mostly results in more randomness.  This is what New York City does for it school progress reports, and, because the results are meaningless junk, why nobody believes them any more.  (As an indication of how bad they are, New York City Department of Education ignored its own reports in making its recent school closing decisions.)

It's evident that there is going to be no real national dialogue on the issue.  Duncan has resolutely ignored the eminently sensible alternatives proposed by the Broader, Bolder Agenda -- even though  he two-facedly signed onto it.  So I say, let the test-o-maniacs have their way.  A national testing regime couldn't possibly be worse than all the ridiculous state tests we have now,  and, sad to say, an accoutability metric that produces meaningless junk would actually be an improvement -- because what we have now produces toxic junk.  Argument is not going to sway these obsessed clowns who have never spent a day in the classroom as a teacher, but think they know best.  Let them have their way and fall on their faces.  The sooner we let them demonstrably fail, the sooner we might move onto something that makes sense.