This isn't Connecticut specific, but it's important enough for people to know about. It's from YES! which allows articles to be re-printed in their entirety. You can read the essay here, or directly on their website.
The Myth Behind Public School Failure
In the rush to privatize the country’s schools,
corporations and politicians have decimated school budgets, replaced teaching with standardized testing, and placed
the blame on teachers and students.
by
Dean Paton
Until about 1980, America’s public schoolteachers were iconic
everyday heroes painted with a kind of Norman Rockwell patina—generally
respected because they helped most kids learn to read, write and
successfully join society. Such teachers made possible at least the idea
of a vibrant democracy.
Since then, what a turnaround: We’re now told, relentlessly, that
bad-apple schoolteachers have wrecked K-12 education; that their unions
keep legions of incompetent educators in classrooms; that part of the
solution is more private charter schools; and that teachers as well as
entire schools lack accountability, which can best be remedied by more
and more standardized “bubble” tests.
What led to such an ignoble fall for teachers and schools? Did public
education really become so irreversibly terrible in three decades? Is
there so little that’s redeemable in today’s schoolhouses?
The beginning of “reform”
To truly understand how we came
to believe our educational system is broken, we need a history lesson.
Rewind to 1980—when Milton Friedman, the high priest of laissez-faire
economics, partnered with PBS to produce a ten-part television series
called Free to Choose. He devoted one episode to the idea of
school vouchers, a plan to allow families what amounted to publicly
funded scholarships so their children could leave the public schools and
attend private ones.
You could make a strong argument that the current campaign against
public schools started with that single TV episode. To make the case for
vouchers, free-market conservatives, corporate strategists, and
opportunistic politicians looked for any way to build a myth that public
schools were failing, that teachers (and of course their unions) were
at fault, and that the cure was vouchers and privatization.
Jonathan Kozol, the author and tireless advocate for public schools,
called vouchers the “single worst, most dangerous idea to have entered
education discourse in my adult life.”
Armed with Friedman’s ideas, President Reagan began calling for
vouchers. In 1983, his National Commission on Excellence in Education
issued “A Nation At Risk,” a report that declared, “the educational
foundations of our society are presently being eroded by a rising tide
of mediocrity that threatens our very future as a Nation and a people.”
It also said, “If an unfriendly foreign power had attempted to impose
on America the mediocre educational performance that exists today, we
might well have viewed it as an act of war.”
For
a document that’s had such lasting impact, “A Nation At Risk” is
remarkably free of facts and solid data. Not so the Sandia Report, a
little-known follow-up study commissioned by Admiral James Watkins,
Reagan’s secretary of energy; it discovered that the falling test scores
which caused such an uproar were really a matter of an expansion in the
number of students taking the tests. In truth, standardized-test scores
were going up for every economic and ethnic segment of students—it’s
just that, as more and more students began taking these tests over the
20-year period of the study, this more representative sample of
America’s youth better reflected the true national average. It wasn’t a
teacher problem. It was a statistical misread.
The government never officially released the Sandia Report. It languished in peer-review purgatory until the Journal of Educational Research
published it in 1993. Despite its hyperbole (or perhaps because of it),
“A Nation At Risk” became a timely cudgel for the larger privatization
movement. With Reagan and Friedman, the Nobel-Prize-winning economist,
preaching that salvation would come once most government services were
turned over to private entrepreneurs, the privatizers began
proselytizing to get government out of everything from the post office
to the public schools.
Corporations recognized privatization as a euphemism for profits.
“Our schools are failing” became the slogan for those who wanted
public-treasury vouchers to move money into private schools. These cries
continue today.
The era of accountability
In 2001, less than a year into
the presidency of George W. Bush, the federal government enacted
sweeping legislation called “No Child Left Behind.” Supporters described
it as a new era of accountability—based on standardized testing. The
act tied federal funding for public schools to student scores on
standardized tests. It also guaranteed millions in profits to
corporations such as Pearson PLC, the curriculum and testing juggernaut,
which made more than $1 billion in 2012 selling textbooks and bubble
tests.
In 2008, the economy collapsed. State budgets were eviscerated.
Schools were desperate for funding. In 2009, President Obama and his
Education Secretary, Arne Duncan, created a program they called “Race to
the Top.”
It didn’t replace No Child Left Behind; it did step in with grants to
individual states for their public schools. Obama and Duncan put
desperate states in competition with each other. Who got the money was
determined by several factors, including which states did the best job
of improving the performance of failing schools—which, in practice,
frequently means replacing public schools with for-profit charter
schools—and by a measure of school success based on students’
standardized-test scores that allegedly measured “progress.”
Since 2001 and No Child Left Behind, the focus of education policy
makers and corporate-funded reformers has been to insist on more
testing—more ways to quantify and measure the kind of education our
children are getting, as well as more ways to purportedly quantify and
measure the effectiveness of teachers and schools.
For a dozen or so
years, this “accountability movement” was pretty much the only game in
town. It used questionable, even draconian, interpretations of
standardized-test results to brand schools as failures, close them, and
replace them with for-profit charter schools.
Resistance
Finally, in early 2012, then-Texas Education
Commissioner Robert Scott kindled a revolt of sorts, saying publicly
that high-stakes exams are a “perversion.” His sentiments quickly spread
to Texas school boards, whose resolution stating that tests were
“strangling education” gained support from more than 875 school
districts representing more than 4.4 million Texas public-school
students. Similar, if smaller, resistance to testing percolated in other
communities nationally.
Then, in January 2013, teachers at Seattle’s Garfield High School
announced they would refuse to give their students the Measures of
Academic Progress Test—the MAP test. Despite threats of retaliation by
their district, they held steadfast. By May, the district caved, telling
its high schools the test was no longer mandatory.
Garfield’s boycott triggered a nationwide backlash to the “reform”
that began with Friedman and the privatizers in 1980. At last, Americans
from coast to coast have begun redefining the problem for what it
really is: not an education crisis but a manufactured catastrophe, a
facet of what Naomi Klein calls “disaster capitalism.”
Look closely—you’ll recognize the formula: Underfund schools.
Overcrowd classrooms. Mandate standardized tests sold by private-sector
firms that “prove” these schools are failures. Blame teachers and their
unions for awful test scores. In the bargain, weaken those unions, the
largest labor organizations remaining in the United States. Push
nonunion, profit-oriented charter schools as a solution.
If a Hurricane Katrina or a Great Recession comes along, all the
better. Opportunities for plunder increase as schools go deeper into
crisis, whether genuine or ginned up.
The reason for privatization
Chris Hedges, the former New York Times correspondent, appeared on Democracy Now!
in 2012 and told host Amy Goodman the federal government spends some
$600 billion a year on education—“and the corporations want it. That’s
what’s happening.
And that comes through charter schools. It comes through standardized
testing. And it comes through breaking teachers’ unions and essentially
hiring temp workers, people who have very little skills.”
If you doubt Hedges, at least trust Rupert Murdoch, the media mogul
and capitalist extraordinaire whose Amplify corporation already is
growing at a 20 percent rate, thanks to its education contracts. “When
it comes to K through 12 education,” Murdoch said in a November 2010
press release, “we see a $500 billion sector in the U.S. alone that is
waiting desperately to be transformed by big breakthroughs that extend
the reach of great teaching.”
Corporate-speak for, “Privatize the public schools. Now, please.”
In a land where the free market has near-religious status, that’s
been the answer for a long time. And it’s always been the wrong answer.
The problem with education is not bad teachers making little Johnny into
a dolt. It’s about Johnny making big corporations a bundle—at the
expense of the well-educated citizenry essential to democracy.
And, of course, it’s about the people and ideas now reclaiming and
rejuvenating our public schools and how we all can join the uprising
against the faux reformers.
Dean Paton wrote this article for Education Uprising, the Spring 2014 issue of YES! Magazine. Dean is executive editor of YES!
This blog is a place to keep current with news regarding Common Core and SBAC without having to wade through the editorials inherent in Facebook groups. I try my best to do the wading for you; all links are actually relevant to parents in Connecticut. I also belong to a closed Facebook group of Connecticut teachers, and sometimes share things I read there. Once in a while I share my own experiences, and occasionally I do manage to connect some dots, or at least raise some pertinent questions.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are very welcome, but are moderated. Please keep in mind that this blog is specifically for dissemination of information that is free from political affiliation bias and uneducated fear mongering. Comments containing either will not be approved.
Additionally, although you may know me from Facebook, and I am not shy about who I am, because I do share personal experiences here I ask that you respect the privacy of my children by refraining from using my real name. Comments that use my real name will unfortunately not be published.