Reflections on 9/11

September 11, 2008

On this day of reflection we're reminded of the importance of educating American students about their great country and the threats to it. In 2003, Fordham published Terrorists, Despots, and Democracy: What Our Children Need to Know. Its relevance is undiminished five years later. Below are excerpts from five of the 29 thoughtful essays contained in that publication.

America: Always Vulnerable, Never Inevitable
Richard Rodriguez

When I was in school, U.S. history classes seemed happily fated. There were past calamities, to be sure--slavery, the massacre of Indians, the mistreatments suffered by the poor--but these were mere obstacles to the present, obstacles overcome by battles or treaties or acts of Congress, or by the lucky coincidence of heroic lives and national need. As a boy, I loved American history, precisely for its lack of tragedy. I loved Ben Franklin and the stories of the Underground Railroad and the New Deal, because everything led happily to me, living at 935 39th Street in Sacramento, California.

The man awoke, years later, to see jet airliners (the symbol of our mobility) turned against us by terrorists; to see the collapse of the World Trade Center (the symbol of our global capitalism); to see a wall of the Pentagon (the assurance of our self-defense) in flames. What I realized that Tuesday morning is that America is vulnerable to foreign attack.

But I wonder now if we understand that our civilization has always been vulnerable. Our

» Continued

Reflections on 9/11

Perusing the platforms

Stafford Palmieri / September 11, 2008

Got the post-convention blues? Miss the fiery speeches, carefully chosen interlude music, and confetti? The Democratic and Republican education platforms are no spit-licked cowlick, sure, but reading them may nonetheless help ease your angst. Or your insomnia.

What do the two parties have to say about education in their 2008 platforms? Not much, it seems, and certainly not about No Child Left Behind. This is par for the course for the Democrats: In their 2004 party platform, they mentioned NCLB just once--that's the case this time, too--and only then to complain that it wasn't working because it wasn't fully funded.

But the Republicans' 2008 shunning of NCLB is quite a change. In 2004, the GOP platform cited that law twelve times; in fact, its education section was titled "No Child Left Behind." This year, however, the Republicans don't mention NCLB even once. Instead, they focus on education as a component of global competitiveness. They talk up policies such as merit pay, and concepts such as higher standards and technology. So do the Democrats.

But despite their similarities, the two parties' education platforms have a vastly different feel. Where the Democrats come across as accommodating, even timid in their policy proposals, and call for national compromise and unity to enact them, the GOP is confrontational and emphasizes the concept of parental choice.

The Democratic outlook on schools is gloomy, yet the platform hesitates to step on any status quo (read: teacher union) toes. For

» Continued

Perusing the platforms

A slight convergence

September 11, 2008

Near Dayton on Tuesday, Senator Barack Obama spoke at some length about public schools and his plans to improve them. Amongst his dozen or so proposals for new federal programs and initiatives, he inserted a call to double funding for charter schools. "Charter schools that are successful will get the support they need to grow; charters that aren't will get shut down," he said. "I want experimentation, but I also want accountability." His opponent, Senator John McCain, has long been a staunch charter-school supporter. This would suggest that, regardless of the election outcome, a charter-school backer will reside in the White House. Those who have heretofore worked tirelessly against such schools seem to have gotten the message, too. After Obama's speech, Dennis Van Roekel, president of the National Education Association, said, "Those of us in the education community can learn from charter school success stories and failures." We'll see if the happy talk survives post-election, but for now, charter supporters can bask in the glow of bipartisanship.

"Obama, McCain agree on charter schools," Dayton Daily News, September 10, 2008

"Obama Vows to Double Funding for Charter Schools," Associated Press, September 10, 2008

» Continued

A slight convergence

The Annenberg files

September 11, 2008

Barack Obama has long nurtured an interest in education, reports Sam Dillon in Wednesday's New York Times. Much of it grew out of his work with school-reform personalities (including the infamous Bill Ayers) and efforts in the Windy City. It started with Obama's involvement in the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which Dillon describes as a philanthropic program "that spent $150 million on Chicago's troubled schools and barely made a dent." (That was our conclusion, too, when we looked at the initiative eight years ago.) In 1995, Obama was elected chairman of the Chicago Annenberg-project board. Dillon reports that the group's executive director, Ken Rolling, thinks "the experience gave Mr. Obama an appreciation for the multiple problems facing urban schools." The senator's work in Chicago also brought him into frequent contact with that city's current schools chief, Arne Duncan, with whom Obama often talks and sometimes plays basketball. Duncan seems to us to be doing about as well as one could with Chicago's sprawling and troubled public school system, and he's learned a ton about urban education. What, one wonders, did Senator Obama learn from his Annenberg involvement? If $150 million in (exceptionally flexible) private money made no dent in Chicago, what will a few billion more (severely restricted) federal dollars do for the entire country?

"Obama Looks to Lessons From Chicago in His National Education Plan," by Sam Dillon, New York Times, September 10, 2008

» Continued

The Annenberg files

Downward slide Down Under

September 11, 2008

A cautionary tale emerges from Australia for those who, like many of Gadfly's best friends, favor national standards and curricula. It seems that a former Communist Party member has been appointed to oversee development of a history lesson plan for the entire nation. Stuart Macintyre, the ex-Red in question, subscribes to what he calls "history from below"--i.e., a history that doesn't acknowledge Australia's national accomplishments but instead focuses on the grievances of its minority groups. Then there's Peter Freebody, who will manage the construction of the country's English curriculum and who has written that being literate involves "a moral, political and cultural decision about the kind of literate practices that are needed to enhance people's agency over their life trajectories and to enhance communities' intellectual, cultural, and semiotic resources in print/multi-mediated economies." We must be wary, he believes, of approaches to teaching English that further "centralised political surveillance and technocratic control in education." Whatever. Implementing a national curriculum makes sense in theory, but if these are the sorts of folks who end up designing it.... Gadfly's wings tremble at the prospect of Howard Zinn's "people's history" of the United States at the center of our national curriculum--and Stanley Fish or one of his slimy fellow swimmers in charge of English/language arts.

"My worst fears have been realised," by Kevin Donnelly, The Australian, September 10, 2008

» Continued

Downward slide Down Under

Ego maniacs

September 11, 2008

Our apologies to the United Kingdom. This week, U.S. psychologist Martin Seligman spoke to a conference in London and, reports The Guardian, said that "lessons in happiness should be on the school curriculum to try to improve young people's mental health." In the U.K., apparently, this ship has already been launched: "Seligman's ideas of ‘positive education' are now being tested in schools in Manchester, south Tyneside and Hertfordshire," the newspaper informs us. "Pupils are being taught how to handle day-to-day stress, assertiveness, decision-making and how to change negative thoughts." Sounds so very warm and cozy. But there are only so many hours in the day, alas, and schools are traditionally thought to be places where youngsters are taught reading, math, and science rather than lessons about self-esteem and positive thinking. (Kids who are clinically depressed should, of course, receive medical attention, not classroom coaching.) A tasty recipe for burnishing pupils' self-images would be to hold the kids to high standards of academics and discipline. By expecting and encouraging students to strive for the rewards that come from setting goals, working hard, and accomplishing them, schools prepare their charges for the real world, where namby-pamby, therapeutic chit-chat is not the norm.

"Call for happiness lessons as teenage depression increases," by Carlene Thomas-Bailey, The Guardian, September 10, 2008

» Continued

Ego maniacs

Leading for Learning

Stafford Palmieri / September 11, 2008

Education Week
September 10, 2008

This collection of articles considers research on the characteristics common to charter school leaders. Though the schools themselves vary widely in organizational structure, curriculum choices, and mission, successful leaders of them tend to have much in common. The ideal charter principal is often presumed to be a person of near-mythical capabilities, containing in one body the qualities of superintendent, principal, teacher, parent, construction worker, and chief financial officer. That perception, this compilation notes, is not reality. The best leadership model, it seems, is what today is often termed "distributed leadership," a set-up in which responsibility is shared between two or three highly driven and dedicated people with different but complementary skill sets. Such a model allows for specialized handling of responsibilities, such as fundraising or facilities management, and makes it easier to grow leaders in-house and involve teachers in management decisions. The articles also report that charter board members, like regular school board members, often misunderstand their oversight roles and become mired in the minutiae of school operations, for example. A successful board member, readers learn, understands the charter laws in his state and remains focused on supporting his school's vision. This compilation (with contributions from Education Week reporters and Center on Reinventing Public Education staff members) has much more to say about what good charter school leadership looks like. It's available here.

» Continued

Leading for Learning

School Vouchers and Student Achievement: Recent Evidence, Remaining Questions

Amber M. Winkler, Ph.D. / September 11, 2008

Cecilia Rouse and Lisa Barrow
August 2008

This paper reviews the best research about the impact of publicly- and privately-financed school voucher programs on student achievement. Neither voucher advocates nor critics will discover here much ammunition for their causes. When the research finds gains for voucher students, they are tiny and most are not statistically significant. And nearly all the studies are short-term, making it tough to measure meaningful change. They do, however, consistently find that voucher parents are more satisfied with their child's schooling. The authors point out that there is scant research on vouchers' impact on outcomes other than achievement, such as high school graduation rates, college enrollment, and future earnings. So while current studies don't, can't, or can't yet find robust academic gains for voucher students, there may be other, very good, so-far-unstudied reasons to implement school voucher programs. Find the report here.

» Continued

School Vouchers and Student Achievement: Recent Evidence, Remaining Questions

Achieving Teacher and Principal Excellence: A Guidebook for Donors

September 11, 2008

Andrew J. Rotherham
Philanthropy Roundtable
2008

Wealthy individuals who lose count of their houses may well wonder: What is the most efficient way for my millions to boost teacher and principal quality in the public schools? This book is the Philanthropy Roundtable's answer. Author Andrew Rotherham believes that hiring savvy administrators and teachers is the smartest way to leaven American educational worth. "Research has convincingly shown," he writes, "what parents and educators have long suspected: teachers matter more to student learning than anything else schools do." Thus, he presents a comprehensive overview of the who, what, where, why, and how of developing the human capital of public schools--e.g., the work of Jon Schnur of New Leaders for New Schools, Teach for America, the Gates Foundation, etc. Whether you're Uncle Pennybags, or staff his foundation, or are simply interested in philanthropic efforts to improve American academics, this book is worth a read. Find it here.

» Continued

Achieving Teacher and Principal Excellence: A Guidebook for Donors