Preface
Edunationredux
has been silent for some time, witnessing the unrelenting push — even in the
face of demonstrations it has failed — to reform public education by brute
force, and punitive application of standardized testing and flawed value-added
teacher assessment. After a material hiatus it seemed timely to reflect on the shifts that have occurred in so-called corporate reform of our U.S. public schools over the last year or so.
What follows is an attempt to backfill without whitewash the current reporting with some realities that framed the onset of current testing excesses, value-added assessment of teachers, the rise and decline of the alleged common core, and the same-o, same-o by players such as Mr. Obama and his obsession with testing, Mr. Gates with his obsession with playing amateur and ignorant education advocate, with our profiteering testing companies, and lastly with our real public systems still defensively dug in or in denial they are under attack.
Let’s be clear and direct on a couple of issues: No one legitimately aware of K-12 education is rejecting or has rejected the need for school testing, a common rhetorical device injected by our testing vultures — the issue has always been whether the right stuff is being tested, and who bears the design responsibility for test creation and use of insights therefrom; and few legitimate educators dispute the need for some common knowledge components to be the backbone for all learning K-12 — here the issue is whether the right human resources, for the right reasons, and with the right research backdrop created a viable knowledge and tools core. Gathering evidence suggests both issues have been fumbled in current reform, some of that fumbling incompetence, some ideology replacing critical thought, some self-righteousness, some outright corrupt action.
In the 21st Century, “spare the rod and spoil the
child” once seemed too bizarre to contemplate as civilized public policy.
Companies profiting from that testing have dug in, becoming ever more
bold in simply ignoring critique, and doubling down on installing untested
products to extract public dollars. The following observations are
prompted by two core beliefs: One, that only a broader electorate can now
exert the force to mediate present trends; and two, on balance that electorate,
most parents, and even the public resources who signed on to at least nominally
serve public schools, are either confused by the reform lenaean hydra
poisoning public education, or blissfully unaware of what it is costing the
nation in futures.
Genesis
of the Reform Movement
From
many sources, and over a great span of time our society has assessed how words
matter. If you research the most destructive words in our language there
is a proliferation of negative syntax. But oft quoted: "The
most dangerous phrase in the language is, ‘We’ve always done it this
way.’"
I
want to contest that conclusion in a brief essay dealing with the current sturm
und drang surrounding America's public schools — the argument is in
essence that the most dangerous words for our society are the words that are
never spoken, the truths preferred unsaid. Public education has been a
prime inheritor of the condition. The words won't issue even from the
prolific anti-testing press advocate, WaPo’s "The Answer
Sheet:" Public school systems in the U.S. over the
last half century have reaped, by failing in multiple ways, the punitive,
test-based, alleged "corporate reform” currently being endured.
Let's
do a bit of reality testing. Did this alleged reform movement just fall
like a random shower? Was there no activating causal sequence? Did
the notion that our public schools were failing to prepare tomorrow's decision
makers just pop into some executive’s head during a Starbucks break? Were
our schools wth low variance equally equipping America's children? Was
our private sector seeing its employees (and customers) outclass the rest of
the world? Was it seeing in new hires critical thinking, creativity, and
capacities for both excellence and innovation? Were our local public
schools the recipients of the best and brightest in our society as oversight,
our famous or infamous system of boards of education accessible by popular vote
to even school dropouts? As any complex system evolves and creates deep
roots, and breeds defenders, did the public systems remain humble, rejecting
entitlement, and resisting the temptation to socially engineer the embryonic
society they obviously footed from pre-K through the end of high school?
Did the players in those schools resist the temptation to demand more of the
nation's resources because they could tax, or their personal returns were
outstripped by alternative professions? Did our public schools,
presciently recognizing advancing digital technology, become the leaders in
related education? Unless you believe in the tooth fairy, one or more of these
or ones left unsaid will resonate as 21st Century public K-12 system failure
modes.
The
list goes on, but quickly, for public educators long protected by society to
have absolved every source of critique would have been the persona of saints. For all of the credit public system teachers deserve for persevering
there was and still is massive resistance to change in most public schools,
resistance to upgrading obsolete texts and knowledge proffered, resistance to
and ignorance of technology rolling out in the private sector, and the latter
as will be seen a key factor in launching an attack on those systems.
Couple this with most collegiate schools of education to this day as
retro as most local systems. Local systems have regularly allowed poorly
equipped and trained school administration, compounded by incompetent BOE
oversight of that management. You have the nucleus of rebellion by the
market-based segment of society dependent on that education. And there was a first shot fired.
That
event was the 1983 National Governors Association (NGA) meeting, dominated by a
speech and proposals by the CEO of IBM, Lou Gerstner. At the time still
America's preeminent technology company, the POV expressed by its
representative was the genesis of attacks on public education. That
speech was followed by comparable rhetoric about America's public system
mediocrity at The Business Roundtable, a consortium of the CEOs of America's
largest corporations. In turn the NGA's staff dealing with education, already
conservatively oriented by Republican governor dominance, became populated by
MBAs from U.S. B-schools — not educators, not even the better education gurus.
Then the perceived need for major change migrated to the Bush White House.
The anthem became, “aggressive, no excuses K-12 discipline to get tough
when the going gets tough.” The result was NCLB (No Child Left Behind) which in
fact had some rational and egalitarian roots, though short on human resources
genuinely knowledgeable about learning just beginning to be understood as
neuroscience. (Dr. Diane Ravitch, then Assistant Secretary of Education,
championed the reforms of NCLB based on testing, but subsequently witnessing
their downsides became that testing's most aggressive opponent.) Then, in
the vernacular, all hell broke loose.
It
is this next phase of alleged reform evolution that was and still is not
recognized by most of our states, by virtually any local BOE, and arguably by
few public school administrators and even teachers. Once the metaphorical
public education reform toothpaste was out of the tube it not only couldn't be
returned to the source, it stuck like plaque. All of the diverse special
interest critics of public education entered the emerging battle, but lacking
any coherent composite position on what it was. (Subsequently, reform
created such disparate odd fellows as the Obama Administration at least tacitly
joining hands with the most vehement advocates of charters and public school
replacement.)
At
this juncture, actually pre-NCLB, both our collegiate schools of education and
America's public systems had a chance to intercept what has since occurred —
both populations reflexively retreated into defensive positions, BOE and
schools’ leaderships in denial, teachers leaning on unions for a buffer or just
retreating to foxholes. The moment, when leadership within the education
establishment might have deflected corporate reform attack, was lost.
I
would interject a brief personal experience that reinforces the above
observation. In the early 1990s, the retiring dean of my doctoral alma mater's
school of education created a program named, Center for Excellence in
Education. Its purpose to research and bring related seminars to public
school superintendents in that state. Its faculty consisted of a half
dozen of the brightest scholars I had witnessed, none the product of a
traditional school of education. They assembled cutting edge tools for
school administrators, and offered these in seminars for the small number of
public school resources who perceived the need and opportunity. Although long
off of that institution's faculty, I was serving as a consultant to the
university's vice president for research and graduate studies, and prevailed on
that resource to enroll me in the CEE summer program. A quarter century
ago, what was being taught and advocated are some of the tools just emerging in
our most contemporary (irony) public schools. The point of the story,
however, is the ultimate fate of that program — the literal day that
former dean finally left the education school the traditionally-bent
replacement started to dismantle the program. It was never
replaced.
Our
broader public education establishment has been its own worst enemy in the
reform wars.
Uncontrolled
Fragmentation of School Warfare
At
this point in history the previously referenced wave of public school criticism
experienced the arguably predictable, but never predicted sequel — that
population of critics fragmented, uncontrolled, into aggressive splinters of
public school attackers, all pretty much on their own wavelength, but all in
the common spectrum that envisioned evisceration of the universal public system
to its complete replacement. Each faction created its own weapons, and
many of the splinters quickly became candidly quite corrupt in the quests.
It became open-season on public schools. The players were diverse,
either in purpose or in methods, but the target was the same. Many of the
players, in large measure many of our unprepared or naive state departments of
education, became more pawns than activists, the political tail wagging the
education dog.
An
incomplete but telling list of the enemy: Right wing ideologues who saw
this corporate rebellion against what they saw as a retro, liberal public
education monopoly, to be a chance to dismantle at least part of it via
"charters;" migration of that political force into the Bush
Department of Education, finally resulting in ESEA (Elementary and Secondary
Education Act), popularly known as NCLB as its promotional tag; via the NGA,
creation of ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council -- sounds noble, right)
a right wing organization that created legislation for conservative-dominated
state legislatures incompetent to write their own laws, pushing standardized
testing (and subsequently the alleged "common core”); the rise of the
corporate testing cabal, that saw this as a naive new market worth billions of
dollars with little need for development expenditures, and no ethical
prerogative to do needed research; the creation of a then (and still mostly)
anonymous group of primarily non-educators (instead of the professionals who
guard the quality of their area of knowledge), chaired by the CEO of a testing
company, that produced "the common core," now increasingly proving to
be a terribly flawed effort (being rejected by states and
schools, just branded as misguided, and torpedoed by sensible work like Marion
Brady's approaches to learning); "Teach for America" was created on
the premise that modest discipline expertise and five weeks of education
training would save the public schools, then and now failing; enter the misdirected dollars of a Bill Gates to push
standardized testing, with the same lame understanding of creativity and
managerial excellence installed at Microsoft; and last, but devastating, the
Obama Administration's venal endorsement and deepened installation of the
testing mentality, arguably prompted by the belief that forcing some idealistic
equilibration of education for minorities — aware it risked partially
destroying public schools — was worth that cost (this policy in the opinion of
many is as bad as the worst abuses of power and bigotry issuing from the
current Republican Congress).
The
enemy within has been equally devastating: Ignorant, to fearful, to lazy,
to self-righteous, to duplicitous BOE; sports obsessions and idiocy vamping
learning priorities; school administration almost universally poorly trained to
supply managerial excellence; compounded by the failed vetting of leadership
hires that has produced school leaders ranging from simply educationally retro
or incompetent, through the fraudulent, to superintendents' out right arrogant
pursuit of power and corrupt practice; obsolete curricular thinking; naive
substitution of usually already or near obsolete technology hardware for needed
digital logic preparation; and slavish adoption of even the most obviously
retro or insane directives from state education departments (branding tweaked secondary
teachers as college professors certainly ranks high on the list of Ohio
stupidity, and based on performances since CC+’s [College Credit+] launch has
become a quality issue).
Welcome
to U.S. public education, 2016 style.
With
candor uncommon in the present venue of squeamish or gutless public school
spokespeople, it was said well in a recent WaPo/TAS post: “Civil rights icon James
Meredith: ‘We are in a dark age of American public education.’” Perhaps
the greatest insult to the American public, and its children, has been the
refusal of any of the above list of culprits for the current education train
wreck, to either do the research or listen to legitimate research showing they
are wrong, or even acknowledging the publicly-visible failures of their various
tactics. U.S. public systems and their oversight have in turn generally
simply gone deeper into denial of a need for unforced change, and misguided by
both incredibly lame state education departments and the usual BOE
performances, have not only not created contemporary fixes, but reinvested in
those that failed.
Can
Local Control Save Public Education?
The
rewrite of ESEA (now ESSA, "Every Student Succeeds Act") under Lamar
Alexander was alleged to reduce the standardized testing binge, and restore
more public school local control. Actual text of the revised Act did
that; however, four major impediments stand in the way of a healthier
educational outcome. First, the Obama Administration has already abused
that spirit by its appointment of John King as Secretary (having failed in New York
State), and demonstrated that it has learned nothing from present reform’s
failures. Two, the moronic push powered by Bill Gates’ legacy dollars
continues, with that cabal even taking the wrong message away from the repetitive failures
that effort has produced. Three, most school policy is still either
crafted at the state level or has to survive that gatekeeping, so to actually
assert some intelligent local control means finding paths through frequent
state education incompetence or ideology — witness the corrupt and massively
politically inspired fumbling of Ohio’s Department of Education, and of its
State Board of Education, courtesy of political cronyism by Ohio’s current
Governor. Four, lastly, local control means having BOE with the
intelligence and professionalism to not simply rubber stamp school
administrative action, but summon the courage to do independent homework and
innovate. Both capacities are notably absent in two local school systems.
James
Meredith is right, an educational "dark age" has descended on
American public education, and there appears no clear vector to a renaissance. The best chance of system change in the current chaotic political
environment is local parental and taxpayer emerging awareness that their school
system is shortchanging a community’s children. The fix is not
complicated, but historically by tradition has been very difficult:
Recognition of their children’s vulnerability to ‘good enough’
education and specious inspirational nostrums; awareness that BOE have been
products of electing resources who are an umpteenth cousin, or happen to belong
to the local Rotary, or have been manipulatively positioned by a dominant
private sector, or are cherry-picked by a school because they are considered
harmless and unlikely to challenge administration despotism; then demanding
competition and voting for professional competence on a BOE. A last
factor in Ohio; a BOE member can’t be recalled, so unless they can be removed
by the court for commission of a felony or gross violation of sworn oath,
"what you sees is what you gets.” That currently in this neck of the
woods is dysfunctional.
There
is no fully satisfactory way to exit this national crisis. Smaller
countries, with less diverse populations (e. g., Finland) have addressed the
equivalent of K-12 with greater creativity and even greater rigor than the
U.S., and have succeeded. The occasional education voice in the wilderness, e. g., an accomplished lifelong educator and guru, Dr. Marion Brady, has
offered ways to update classroom
thinking.
Dr. Diane Ravitch has authored best-selling books on the damage to sustainable
learning being inflicted by excessive and misdirected standardized testing. A
genuine neural science of learning is finally emerging, contradicting just
about every aspect of present reform. Parental instinctive awareness of
the cost of specious reform has produced the highest level ever in refusals to
have their children so tested. Congress remains tone deaf, as are most state
education departments and legislatures slavishly following the conservative
party line. The testing companies long ago ceased to be good corporate
citizens with awareness of public responsibility.
Lament
The dispersion of power in a republic is and has been a
point of American exceptionalism. It can also when things go off the
rails be an impediment to timely repair or redirection. Lacking the
combination of social responsibility and selflessness as the governing
principles for school change moderation, by seemingly all parties, this reform lenaean
hydra of mythology will continue to strike and poison U.S. public school
systems. Any vector for reform of the reform appears at this point a
mirage.