In November, Barack Obama bewildered education reformers by tapping Linda Darling-Hammond, a Stanford professor who had advised his campaign, to oversee the transition's education policy team. Their verdict was swift and harsh. "Worst case scenario," wrote Mike Petrilli, vice president for national programs and policy at the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, an education think tank, the day after The Wall Street Journal leaked the news. "This is a sign that the president-elect isn't a bona fide reformer," he later told me. Kate Walsh, president of the National Council on Teacher Quality, confirmed, "The reform community is scared to death."
The "reform community" is an aggressive group of education advocates who argue that the certification programs which produce teachers, and the unions that represent them once they're in the classroom, have had too tight a grip on progressive priorities in the field for too long. Instead, they want to shake up the system through programs that bring in new blood and hold teachers accountable. They place their hopes in nervy, pioneering leaders like Michelle Rhee and Joel Klein, the chancellors of the D.C. and New York City public schools, respectively. In Darling-Hammond--an academic, union favorite, and vocal critic of Teach for America and No Child Left Behind--they see the opposite: an ideological enemy representative of a sluggish status quo.
Reformers are right to be nervous. During the campaign, Obama deftly appeased all sides of the policy debate. While appealing to the unions, which have long been bastions of Democratic support, he also gave great hope to reformers inside and outside the party by supporting merit pay and pledging to increase funding for charter schools. In asking Darling-Hammond to helm the transition--a precursor, some worry, to her appointment as secretary of education--Obama has suggested that he wasn't entirely serious about change, at least when it comes to education. It's a misstep that threatens to derail his quest for post-partisanship--and ruin a critical opportunity to revolutionize America's lagging schools.
Darling-Hammond first roiled the reform community--largely a young, fervent crowd--in the early 1990s, when she emerged as the toughest critic of Teach for America (TFA), a program started by Princeton graduate Wendy Kopp to draw some of the nation's top college students into teaching. Darling-Hammond, a former public school teacher, is a staunch advocate of bolstering teacher-certification programs. TFA teachers, by contrast, aren't required to have a teaching degree before they serve two-year stints in some of the country's poorest school districts. "TFA is bad policy and bad education," Darling-Hammond wrote in a 1994 article.
Today, TFA is one of the reform movement's prized accomplishments. It boasts 20,000 current teachers and alums, many of whom, like Michelle Rhee, have gone on to become leaders in the field. Darling-Hammond has softened her criticism, but, in an education debate this fall, she told a McCain adviser that TFA isn't a program that "builds your profession." She's also published studies showing that teacher certification is critical to improving students' performance, even as other research showed the opposite. "She's either dishonest or the sloppiest person in education research I've ever seen," says Vanderbilt education professor Dale Ballou, who co-wrote a 2000 report criticizing a teacher-certification study spearheaded by Darling-Hammond. (She fired back at the time, saying Ballou's report "ignores and misconstrues" the evidence.) And, in January 2007, she proposed a "Marshall Plan for Teaching," a $3 billion agenda for improving training and certification programs and diminishing the "parade of underprepared and inexperienced teachers" in public schools.
Darling-Hammond has also gone after No Child Left Behind (nclb), which reformers see as a flawed but important bipartisan law that calls for raising accountability standards, enhancing student testing requirements, and closing the achievement gap among students of differing racial and socioeconomic backgrounds. In a May 2007 article in The Nation, she wrote that the country needs "something much more than [nclb] and much different." Last fall, she penned an op-ed criticizing high-stakes testing, a measure many reformers support. It didn't help that, during the campaign, she signed an education manifesto at odds with a rival, tough-minded reform agenda. (Both documents were circulated and hotly debated at the Democratic convention this year.) "The ideas associated with Darling-Hammond are ones that educators love because they're warm and fuzzy," says Petrilli of the Fordham Institute. "They're not tough, not admitting that sometimes adults aren't doing their jobs."
Print
COMMENTS (30)
There are two different kinds of "reformers" in education today. One camp, which includes what I consider more right-wing organizations like the Fordham Foundation, wants to shake up the public school system with vouchers, alternative teacher-induction methods, merit pay based mainly on test scores, a multiple-choice test-based accountability. The other reform camp, in which I'd include Darling-Hammond and progressive-leaning educators, also wants to improve the public school system. But they advocate for better teaching with stronger credentialing programs and professional development, accountabilty systems that are based on more than test scores, equity for all students, and new ideas for ... view full comment
There are two different kinds of "reformers" in education today. One camp, which includes what I consider more right-wing organizations like the Fordham Foundation, wants to shake up the public school system with vouchers, alternative teacher-induction methods, merit pay based mainly on test scores, a multiple-choice test-based accountability. The other reform camp, in which I'd include Darling-Hammond and progressive-leaning educators, also wants to improve the public school system. But they advocate for better teaching with stronger credentialing programs and professional development, accountabilty systems that are based on more than test scores, equity for all students, and new ideas for curriculum and instruction to meet the needs of 21st-century students.
So to say "the reform community is scared to death," well, that's only one type of reformer, who to me has an overly-optimistic belief that making education more like a free market will improve the system.
Here's some thoughts: Maybe 95% of the people who write/talk about education (including this writer) no nothing about it at all. Maybe Obama has studied the issue and sees some wisdom on all sides. Maybe we're about to read 3 dozen comments from people talking about 'lazy' teachers are and how 'unions suck' who have never set foot in a classroom. Maybe Michelle Rhee's prior 'accomplishments' really weren't particularly impressive (nor backed by any real data) and maybe 'teach for america' really isn't such a panacea.
Here's some thoughts: Maybe 95% of the people who write/talk about education (including this writer) no nothing about it at all. Maybe Obama has studied the issue and sees some wisdom on all sides. Maybe we're about to read 3 dozen comments from people talking about 'lazy' teachers are and how 'unions suck' who have never set foot in a classroom. Maybe Michelle Rhee's prior 'accomplishments' really weren't particularly impressive (nor backed by any real data) and maybe 'teach for america' really isn't such a panacea.
Yeah, this topic is the most annoying of all. Everyone thinks they're a huge expert, and almost no one knows anything about it all, except to scream 'TEACHERS ARE LAZY!!!' My advice before you comment; read a real study, learn some math, and step into a damn urban class room. (Reading Johnathan Kozol might not be a bad idea either.)
Yeah, this topic is the most annoying of all. Everyone thinks they're a huge expert, and almost no one knows anything about it all, except to scream 'TEACHERS ARE LAZY!!!' My advice before you comment; read a real study, learn some math, and step into a damn urban class room. (Reading Johnathan Kozol might not be a bad idea either.)
"That's why, even if she does not secure a position in the Obama administration, the symbolism and influence she has in this preliminary stage are troubling." Seyward Darby absolutely has no idea what she's talking about, none, zero. She has no background in this, all she knows how to do is parrot the 'kewl kids.' If she wants to actually BE a journalist (rather than simply a fool), she might educate herself on this topic. First question for Ms. Darby, 'what exactly did Michelle Rhee achieve before she was given her current leadership job?' The answer might surprise you.
"That's why, even if she does not secure a position in the Obama administration, the symbolism and influence she has in this preliminary stage are troubling." Seyward Darby absolutely has no idea what she's talking about, none, zero. She has no background in this, all she knows how to do is parrot the 'kewl kids.' If she wants to actually BE a journalist (rather than simply a fool), she might educate herself on this topic. First question for Ms. Darby, 'what exactly did Michelle Rhee achieve before she was given her current leadership job?' The answer might surprise you.
Our literally Soviet education system must be some karmic retribution for our broader rejection of socialism... Bottom line is that education will never excell in America so long as it is a monopoly. Its boggling that people of all striped accept that monopoly is inefficient and wasteful, yet somehow believe education to be some magical exception.
Well, expect more of the same old same old, pretty much what I expected from an Obama actually in charge.
Our literally Soviet education system must be some karmic retribution for our broader rejection of socialism... Bottom line is that education will never excell in America so long as it is a monopoly. Its boggling that people of all striped accept that monopoly is inefficient and wasteful, yet somehow believe education to be some magical exception.
Well, expect more of the same old same old, pretty much what I expected from an Obama actually in charge.
It's been written that the advantage of democracy is that you get the government you deserve. Thus, all those who want educational reform but vote for supporters of the teachers unions deserve what they get. The citizens of the District of Columbia had a choice for President between a man who wanted to expand the DC school voucher program and one who voted to end the program that they already had. They gave 93 % of their votes to the man who voted against a better education for their children. They deserve their lousy schools.
It's been written that the advantage of democracy is that you get the government you deserve. Thus, all those who want educational reform but vote for supporters of the teachers unions deserve what they get. The citizens of the District of Columbia had a choice for President between a man who wanted to expand the DC school voucher program and one who voted to end the program that they already had. They gave 93 % of their votes to the man who voted against a better education for their children. They deserve their lousy schools.
Great opportunity to provide payback to the NEA. As for payback to all those African-Americans who came out and voted for Obama and placed their dreams in his hands, better luck next time.
Great opportunity to provide payback to the NEA. As for payback to all those African-Americans who came out and voted for Obama and placed their dreams in his hands, better luck next time.
It's been written that the advantage of democracy is that you get the government you deserve. Thus, all those who want educational reform but vote for supporters of the teachers unions deserve what they get. The citizens of the District of Columbia had a choice for President between a man who wanted to expand the DC school voucher program and one who voted to end the program that they already had. They gave 93 % of their votes to the man who voted against a better education for their children. They deserve their lousy schools.
It's been written that the advantage of democracy is that you get the government you deserve. Thus, all those who want educational reform but vote for supporters of the teachers unions deserve what they get. The citizens of the District of Columbia had a choice for President between a man who wanted to expand the DC school voucher program and one who voted to end the program that they already had. They gave 93 % of their votes to the man who voted against a better education for their children. They deserve their lousy schools.
The Secretary of Education along with our nation's government leaders must reform school safety and student discipline by establishing a reasonable protocol as a guideline providing accountability of local school boards to follow when adopting policies relating to the operation and administration of public schools. Currently 21 states allow Physical (Corporal) Punishment of Children in Public Schools. 29 state legislatures have banned the practice. Educators model physical violence as the acceptable way to solve problems when they punish children by hitting them with wooden paddles or other instruments. In the State of Tennessee, State Law allows school faculty members to administer phys ... view full comment
The Secretary of Education along with our nation's government leaders must reform school safety and student discipline by establishing a reasonable protocol as a guideline providing accountability of local school boards to follow when adopting policies relating to the operation and administration of public schools. Currently 21 states allow Physical (Corporal) Punishment of Children in Public Schools. 29 state legislatures have banned the practice. Educators model physical violence as the acceptable way to solve problems when they punish children by hitting them with wooden paddles or other instruments. In the State of Tennessee, State Law allows school faculty members to administer physical punishment of children without parental consent or notification. Physical Punishment (Paddling) is often used a first response to minor infractions because it is easy and allowed. Local school boards are unresponsive to constituents/parents and state legislators excuse it as a "Local Control Issue". For example, the Harrold Independent School District in Texas currently allows undisclosed employees to carry loaded, concealed guns with the approval and support of Governor Rick Perry. Texas is also considering tracking truant students with GPS anklets. Human Rights Watch and ACLU issued a report on 8/20/08 titled "A Violent Education" with recommendations to Government Officals to Immediately Abolish Corporal Punishment of Children in Public Schools. The report cites U.S. Department of Education statistics for 2006 where public schools reported disciplining over 200,000 students by hitting them with wooden paddles or other instruments for such minor infractions as chewing gum or violating school dress codes. Over 100 countries do not allow physical punishment of children in public schools. Several professional organizations are opposed to Corporal Punishment of Children in Public Schools including the American Association of Family Physicians, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the National Parent Teacher Association. My husband and I were referred by the U.S. Dept. of Education to a non-profit organization, stophitting.org, for information on Corporal Punishment of Children in Public Schools.
I am a teacher in Canada. So is my wife. Our family in the US has numerous teachers, and for years family gatherings have been full of horror stories about no child left behind and the high stakes testing movement ( Reform! ) How can this travesty continue??
The best minds of the generation have gone onto the financial services. And ruined the world economy. So where are you getting teachers? Just from average folks. Whaddya expect. So now dump on the teachers for being losers. Oh, and make sure they keep being positive towards children.
Good luck America.
I am a teacher in Canada. So is my wife. Our family in the US has numerous teachers, and for years family gatherings have been full of horror stories about no child left behind and the high stakes testing movement ( Reform! ) How can this travesty continue??
The best minds of the generation have gone onto the financial services. And ruined the world economy. So where are you getting teachers? Just from average folks. Whaddya expect. So now dump on the teachers for being losers. Oh, and make sure they keep being positive towards children.
Good luck America.
One "Old School" policy in need of reform is the practise of school corporal punishment. The "board" is still administered to a quarter of a million children annually in 21 states. It is a failed practice that sometimes leads to injuries of school children and lawsuits against school districts. It is administered inequitably to poor children, boys, children with disabilities and minorities. Over l00 countries have banned it. The new Secretary of Education should push for a federal remedy. Tying corporal punishment bans to federal funding in reauthorization measures like Leave No Child Behind would lead states to drop this barbaric practice. Lets hope the Obama Secretary of Education he ... view full comment
One "Old School" policy in need of reform is the practise of school corporal punishment. The "board" is still administered to a quarter of a million children annually in 21 states. It is a failed practice that sometimes leads to injuries of school children and lawsuits against school districts. It is administered inequitably to poor children, boys, children with disabilities and minorities. Over l00 countries have banned it. The new Secretary of Education should push for a federal remedy. Tying corporal punishment bans to federal funding in reauthorization measures like Leave No Child Behind would lead states to drop this barbaric practice. Lets hope the Obama Secretary of Education helps expel the paddle in U.S.schools. It's time!
How dangerous is Seyward Darby? She's apparently yet another in a line of young hacks unwilling to actually make the effort to learn anything about a policy issue on her own, but who would instead rather attempt a climb to the editorial top by mouthing elite-pleasing banal platitudes.
How dangerous is Seyward Darby? She's apparently yet another in a line of young hacks unwilling to actually make the effort to learn anything about a policy issue on her own, but who would instead rather attempt a climb to the editorial top by mouthing elite-pleasing banal platitudes.
The Ed Sec will generally give speeches on and enforce Administration policy. What about the director of the Institute of Education Sciences? That position is much more independent of the White House and Congress. The real doomsday scenario is if LDH or someone like her were to take the IES director position. She would be less of a problem in Obama's actual Cabinet. At IES she could unravel one of the few good things to happen under the Bush Administration: the increase in scientific rigor of federal education research.
The Ed Sec will generally give speeches on and enforce Administration policy. What about the director of the Institute of Education Sciences? That position is much more independent of the White House and Congress. The real doomsday scenario is if LDH or someone like her were to take the IES director position. She would be less of a problem in Obama's actual Cabinet. At IES she could unravel one of the few good things to happen under the Bush Administration: the increase in scientific rigor of federal education research.
Shorter Darby: By not putting the reformers in charge, Obama has started another battle. This article drips with sympathy for the "reformers," a group that has shown no evidence that any of their ideas work (TFA has never shown any credible evidence that their students perform better than average). Much of Rhee's "success story" is misleading and trumped up. The "reform" movement pushes for more testing, when there is already too much testing. While tests are important, their significance is lessened by the fact that test scores are always easily manipulated. The "reformers" seem to be ivory tower types who went to Ivy League schools and think they are smarter than everyone else. Why else wo ... view full comment
Shorter Darby: By not putting the reformers in charge, Obama has started another battle. This article drips with sympathy for the "reformers," a group that has shown no evidence that any of their ideas work (TFA has never shown any credible evidence that their students perform better than average). Much of Rhee's "success story" is misleading and trumped up. The "reform" movement pushes for more testing, when there is already too much testing. While tests are important, their significance is lessened by the fact that test scores are always easily manipulated. The "reformers" seem to be ivory tower types who went to Ivy League schools and think they are smarter than everyone else. Why else would someone come up with the insulting conclusion that the problem is that a lot of teachers are lazy and don't care about their students (thus the emphasis on testing like crazy, ending tenure, and basing pay on "merit," which the teachers oppose because it is a stupid way to pay teachers - given how easily tests are manipulated it creates mega incentive for cheating)?
This article just seems like one long child-like rant from the "reform" group.
It strikes me that the comments just made reflects an ignorance about the reality of impoverished urban schools. Before indicting Darling-Hammond and proposing "reforms," and I don't know what that means, proponents should not only visit these schools but work there themselves for longer than 2 years. And by the way, how many TFA teachers remain in these hard to staff schools. The students need teachers who stay in the classroom long enough to develop the complex nature of instructional practices that are effective pedagogy for ALL children. That takes years and, by the way, I wonder why Michelle Rhee left the classroom.
It strikes me that the comments just made reflects an ignorance about the reality of impoverished urban schools. Before indicting Darling-Hammond and proposing "reforms," and I don't know what that means, proponents should not only visit these schools but work there themselves for longer than 2 years. And by the way, how many TFA teachers remain in these hard to staff schools. The students need teachers who stay in the classroom long enough to develop the complex nature of instructional practices that are effective pedagogy for ALL children. That takes years and, by the way, I wonder why Michelle Rhee left the classroom.
Sounds like Darling-Hammond is exactly what is needed to turn back the tide of the test-em-till-they drop regime that has enriched many of George W. Bush's friends in the testing industry but has produced shell-shocked students with deficits in the kinds of communication and critical reasoning skills necessary in today's world. Shame on Seyward Darby for taking up for the profiteers and the corporately financed thinktanks over the needs of our children.
Sounds like Darling-Hammond is exactly what is needed to turn back the tide of the test-em-till-they drop regime that has enriched many of George W. Bush's friends in the testing industry but has produced shell-shocked students with deficits in the kinds of communication and critical reasoning skills necessary in today's world. Shame on Seyward Darby for taking up for the profiteers and the corporately financed thinktanks over the needs of our children.
This article is based entirely on the spurious notion that the "reformers" are progressives. Instead, their "reforms" are the educational equivalent of Newt Gingrich's right-wing reformist movement in 1994.
At the core of these bogus reforms is not mere teacher bashing (always a popular sport), but a pseudo-corporate ideology obsessed with competitiveness which would do far more harm than any of its dubious and negligible improvements in delivery of better quality of education.
The sad truth is that these conservative strategies are detrimental to genuine student achievements in skills which prepare them for the rapidly expanding variety of challenges they will face in future vocational or un ... view full comment
This article is based entirely on the spurious notion that the "reformers" are progressives. Instead, their "reforms" are the educational equivalent of Newt Gingrich's right-wing reformist movement in 1994.
At the core of these bogus reforms is not mere teacher bashing (always a popular sport), but a pseudo-corporate ideology obsessed with competitiveness which would do far more harm than any of its dubious and negligible improvements in delivery of better quality of education.
The sad truth is that these conservative strategies are detrimental to genuine student achievements in skills which prepare them for the rapidly expanding variety of challenges they will face in future vocational or university endeavors, but an unhealthy regime of incessant testing that inevitably requires an egregious percentage of classroom teaching be devoted to drilling students in extremely narrow test passing skills.
Either the writer of this article is lazy or duplicitous in pushing the fallacy that these are progressive changes to education.
The "achievement gap" between races is based on the IQ gap. There may be many bad teachers, there may be ossified union practices, but the simple reality is that most black students don't have the capacity to be above average. This does not make them bad people, merely developmentally limited, and accounts for the disruptive behavior which interferes with education in many inner city schools. Throw all the billions you want at the problem, median IQ isn't going to change.
The "achievement gap" between races is based on the IQ gap. There may be many bad teachers, there may be ossified union practices, but the simple reality is that most black students don't have the capacity to be above average. This does not make them bad people, merely developmentally limited, and accounts for the disruptive behavior which interferes with education in many inner city schools. Throw all the billions you want at the problem, median IQ isn't going to change.
I have known her work since I started as a teacher in Cinti in the 70's. She is the one person who has consistently understood that teacher quality is the key to improving education in this country and has pushed for the tools to do that. She opposes TFA that wants to have fly-by kids teach students for a few years before going on to their important "life's" work. Instead, create master teachers from a qualified core of teachers, pay them for their expertise, and give teachers a path to a career that does not mean selecting financial sacrifice to serve this nation's most important undertaking. Darling Hammond is considered by most of us to be the brightest, most articulate, and wisest voice ... view full comment
I have known her work since I started as a teacher in Cinti in the 70's. She is the one person who has consistently understood that teacher quality is the key to improving education in this country and has pushed for the tools to do that. She opposes TFA that wants to have fly-by kids teach students for a few years before going on to their important "life's" work. Instead, create master teachers from a qualified core of teachers, pay them for their expertise, and give teachers a path to a career that does not mean selecting financial sacrifice to serve this nation's most important undertaking. Darling Hammond is considered by most of us to be the brightest, most articulate, and wisest voice in education.
Anticipating comments about post 18,(and because of the delays in posts appearing), some readers may try to wish away the reality of IQ. You might also note the ad on TNR's home page asking readers to compare their IQ with Obama's.
Anticipating comments about post 18,(and because of the delays in posts appearing), some readers may try to wish away the reality of IQ. You might also note the ad on TNR's home page asking readers to compare their IQ with Obama's.
I think this article is a little disingenuous regarding Darling-Hammond's opposition to TFA. TFA's placements are for two years and most participants leave the teaching field immediately after, just when they have really learned what they're doing. Darling-Hammond has stated that this is not a career building program. It focuses resources/attention on people who aren't going to teach long term. They pop in and out of areas where stability and continuity would do the most. While TFA does important work (placing people in disadvantaged areas) and while some alumni do continue teaching it is not a panacea.
I think this article is a little disingenuous regarding Darling-Hammond's opposition to TFA. TFA's placements are for two years and most participants leave the teaching field immediately after, just when they have really learned what they're doing. Darling-Hammond has stated that this is not a career building program. It focuses resources/attention on people who aren't going to teach long term. They pop in and out of areas where stability and continuity would do the most. While TFA does important work (placing people in disadvantaged areas) and while some alumni do continue teaching it is not a panacea.
Jean, let me be the first to say - that's crap. Exhibit A would be the KIPP schools, which do a pretty good job of teaching poor, mostly black kids.
No, teachers aren't lazy. But let's face it, 40 years ago the best and brightest women became teachers, because they had few other opportunities. As those opportunities opened up (yay!), the B&B became docors and lawyers because the pay was higher (among other reasons, I'm sure). Since at the K-12 level teaching is dominated by women, losing the B&B to other professions necessarily lowered the quality of teachers. And the best of that bunch didn't want to teach in "depressed" areas.
The way to go is what KIPP does: longer school days ... view full comment
Jean, let me be the first to say - that's crap. Exhibit A would be the KIPP schools, which do a pretty good job of teaching poor, mostly black kids.
No, teachers aren't lazy. But let's face it, 40 years ago the best and brightest women became teachers, because they had few other opportunities. As those opportunities opened up (yay!), the B&B became docors and lawyers because the pay was higher (among other reasons, I'm sure). Since at the K-12 level teaching is dominated by women, losing the B&B to other professions necessarily lowered the quality of teachers. And the best of that bunch didn't want to teach in "depressed" areas.
The way to go is what KIPP does: longer school days, longer school years, and parental buy-in. No, not a panacea, but a big step in the right direction.
Thank goodness, there's some sense in the replies to Seyward's post. The 'reform' Seyward's talking about is off the mark to say the least. There's new work coming out that demonstrates more of just that. Stay tuned.
Thank goodness, there's some sense in the replies to Seyward's post. The 'reform' Seyward's talking about is off the mark to say the least. There's new work coming out that demonstrates more of just that. Stay tuned.
We don't have to step into a classroom to know what's going on. We have our kids to tell us that.
We don't have to step into a classroom to know what's going on. We have our kids to tell us that.
As a professor who trains many teachers and is involved in education research, I'm 100% certain that kids who come from stable homes with appropriate discipline, good nutrition, and involved parents do just fine; however, those who live in poverty almost always have a trail of other problems behind them: poor nutrition, violence, a lack of books in the home, emotional instability, money problems, etc. They do not do well. If anybody thinks that schools alone can fix these things, they really fundamentally misunderstand what is and what is not within the schools' ability to change. The wider community needs to support these kids and families; if not, then no change will occur.
Oh, and charter ... view full comment
As a professor who trains many teachers and is involved in education research, I'm 100% certain that kids who come from stable homes with appropriate discipline, good nutrition, and involved parents do just fine; however, those who live in poverty almost always have a trail of other problems behind them: poor nutrition, violence, a lack of books in the home, emotional instability, money problems, etc. They do not do well. If anybody thinks that schools alone can fix these things, they really fundamentally misunderstand what is and what is not within the schools' ability to change. The wider community needs to support these kids and families; if not, then no change will occur.
Oh, and charter schools were mentioned. Okay, those might serve a tiny fraction of children in urban settings, but what about all of the kids in rural America?
Thanks for such a truthful statement
Thanks for such a truthful statement
The fact is that a whole bunch of "certified" NEA/AFT card-carrying teachers are worthless failures who couldn't get jobs in any other field; what's more Democratic politicians know this and act accordingly. Don't believe me? Then look at where Bill Clinton and Al Gore sent their children to school when they moved to DC back in the 1990s. Did Bill and Al send their kids to the DC public schools, schools staffed by those NEA members who donated so generously to their campaigns? Hell no! Bill and Al sent their kids to Sidwell Friends and St. Albans respectively, exclusive, expensive and largely white private schools. Did Barack and Michelle Obama send their children to the Chicago public schoo ... view full comment
The fact is that a whole bunch of "certified" NEA/AFT card-carrying teachers are worthless failures who couldn't get jobs in any other field; what's more Democratic politicians know this and act accordingly. Don't believe me? Then look at where Bill Clinton and Al Gore sent their children to school when they moved to DC back in the 1990s. Did Bill and Al send their kids to the DC public schools, schools staffed by those NEA members who donated so generously to their campaigns? Hell no! Bill and Al sent their kids to Sidwell Friends and St. Albans respectively, exclusive, expensive and largely white private schools. Did Barack and Michelle Obama send their children to the Chicago public schools, staffed by certified NEA members? Hell no, Sasha and Maila go to a private school. Teachers union members are idiots. I mean really, can't they see the utter contempt in which the politicians who they support hold them? Do they really buy into the excuses offered by Democratic politicians such as Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton as to why their children don't attend public schools? Democratic politicians are perfectly happy to take lots and lots of money from the NEA and the AFT, but you don't see them trusting their children to the public school system staffed by a bunch of NEA hacks with worthless education degrees and certificates. No, the Obamas and Clintons want their children to actually learn something, which is why they're sent to private schools.
Trying to portray Linda Darling-Hammond as "status quo" is absurd. I am a high school principal in California, and from her position at Stanford, she has been one of the most prominent and effective advocates of progressive school reform in the state, if not the nation. She supports real redesign of schools, not tinkering around the edges. She is a huge advocate of teacher quality and teacher training. And she is always focused on equity and on improving the achievement of low-income students and students of color. She has been a teacher, a researcher, a policy advocate, and a school founder. I can't think of a better "change" pick for Secretary of Education.
Trying to portray Linda Darling-Hammond as "status quo" is absurd. I am a high school principal in California, and from her position at Stanford, she has been one of the most prominent and effective advocates of progressive school reform in the state, if not the nation. She supports real redesign of schools, not tinkering around the edges. She is a huge advocate of teacher quality and teacher training. And she is always focused on equity and on improving the achievement of low-income students and students of color. She has been a teacher, a researcher, a policy advocate, and a school founder. I can't think of a better "change" pick for Secretary of Education.
To brand one of America’s most progressive education leaders, respected scholars, and effective catalysts for change in education, as an agent of the status quo is ludicrous. To brand an idea as bad because it may have union support or good because it is “disruptive” is just as silly. The chief litmus tests for proposed innovations need to be their effectiveness, fairness, scalability, and most of all whether they are in the best interests of children.
Universal public education is the most powerful social innovation to emerge from the creative crucible of American democracy. Notwithstanding, our systems for staffing and managing public education are antiquated relics of early ... view full comment
To brand one of America’s most progressive education leaders, respected scholars, and effective catalysts for change in education, as an agent of the status quo is ludicrous. To brand an idea as bad because it may have union support or good because it is “disruptive” is just as silly. The chief litmus tests for proposed innovations need to be their effectiveness, fairness, scalability, and most of all whether they are in the best interests of children.
Universal public education is the most powerful social innovation to emerge from the creative crucible of American democracy. Notwithstanding, our systems for staffing and managing public education are antiquated relics of early twentieth century models of factory management and industrial relations. No one understands this better than Dr. Darling-Hammond does.
During the campaign, candidate Obama’s pragmatic idealism resonated with the great majority of American voters. He eschewed ideology, and with Dr. Darling Hammond’s assistance, articulated a comprehensive program of strategic investments in education and human capital at the preschool, K-12, and post-secondary level.
The task of the next Secretary is to implement this agenda. What matters most is choosing someone the President-elect has the utmost confidence in to get the job done.
Clear away the pablum, and the union is about one thing and one thing only - money. First, money for the union bosses and second money for the teachers. Lower hours, lower qualifications, lower performance and more pay. The teachers who are wonderful - and there are many - are not teaching because of the union. The many mediocre and poor teachers are.
Clear away the pablum, and the union is about one thing and one thing only - money. First, money for the union bosses and second money for the teachers. Lower hours, lower qualifications, lower performance and more pay. The teachers who are wonderful - and there are many - are not teaching because of the union. The many mediocre and poor teachers are.