David Brooks, Diane Ravitch and the Education Wars
I'm usually a fan of John Merrow's work, so I found this article puzzling:
Having accused Ravitch of intellectual dishonesty, Brooks seems to walk down that same path, with the help of a foil, Whitney Tilson, whom he identifies for his readers as 'the education blogger.' That's the same Whitney Tilson who was a founding member of Teach for America and who now serves on the Board of KIPP New York; the same Whitney Tilson who supports Democrats for Education Reform and who was a major player in the campaign of rumor and innuendo to discredit Linda Darling-Hammond when she was being considered for Secretary of Education. That Whitney Tilson! Even he must have been surprised to be labeled merely as 'the education blogger.'
Brooks approvingly passes along Tilson's observations about test-obsessed schools like KIPP (!) and the Harlem Success Schools, places where students are far more likely to participate in chess, dance and drama than do their counterparts in regular public schools.
…Brooks' conclusion -- if a school teaches to the test, it's the fault of the leaders, not of the test -- may follow logically from his premises, but it's a house of cards, and not just because Ravitch is being painted unfairly. The flaw lies in Brooks (or Tilson's) failure to examine the dominant default model of public education today, which is precisely Ravitch's point: test scores rule. Yes, inspired leaders can trump that thinking, and kids lucky enough to attend one of those schools may well emerge as more than a score.
It's true, as Wendy Kopp of Teach for America asserts, that more winning schools are opening every year, and a body of evidence proves that strong leaders, talented teachers, a powerful sense of mission and coherent curricula like Core Knowledge make a difference. However, the evidence suggests that their success also requires superhuman effort that produces a high burnout rate among teachers and school leaders.
Is this a model for genuine and widespread reform? Let's look at the numbers. We have about 100,000 public schools. Perhaps 5,000 or maybe even 10,000 are defying the odds. At that rate, how long will it take? Where will the thousands and thousands of inspired leaders and teachers come from?
Why do Brooks and others defend a system in which success seems to require superhuman effort? To be blunt, our 'answer factory' approach to education is outmoded and counter-productive in a world that technology has transformed, and continues to transform at an unimaginable rate. What is needed is a major rethinking of the structure of school -- a recasting of the basic operating model.
Pitting Ravitch against Tilson makes for a readable column in the hands of a gifted writer like David Brooks. While I regret his unfair treatment of Ravitch, she has proven time and time again that she can take care of herself. What bothers me more is that Brooks and most observers are missing the larger point.
Which is this: Our public schools are the equivalent of yesterday's pony express. Just as a faster pony express would not be sufficient to deliver the mail today, the "faster horses" that reforms like KIPP, Teach for America and charter schools represent are not in themselves adequate for our 50 million school-age children, nor will they ever be.
I have some thoughts about what truly transformed schools would look like, and I imagine you do as well. Some of these schools already exist, others perhaps only in your imagination. Please share your thoughts on what to do next, not just on how to end this counterproductive 'education war' but also on how to proceed positively.
I look forward to your responses.
My thoughts:
· Is Merrow saying that Brooks was dishonest in citing me without identifying my ties to reform organizations? I wish Brooks had put my full bio in this column, but also understand the tight word limits Brooks operates under – and he only cited me pointing out the obvious fact that the best charter schools do a lot of testing.
· Merrow is sorely mistaken in saying I was "a major player in the campaign of rumor and innuendo to discredit Linda Darling-Hammond when she was being considered for Secretary of Education." I indeed was (and still am) a vociferous critic of Darling-Hammond, but it's a complete lie to say that I was engaged in a "campaign of rumor and innuendo" – the truth is precisely the opposite: my many critiques of her were lengthy, factual, and couldn't have been more public. I emailed them to thousands of people and posted them on both my Obama and School Reform blogs, where they are STILL posted, 3 ½ years later: http://edreform.blogspot.com/2007/12/obamas-disappointing-choice-of-linda.html and http://tilsononobama.blogspot.com/2008/12/my-thoughts-on-secretary-and-deputy.html.
Interestingly, as I was reviewing my old emails about LDH, I was reminded that I was once before accused of smearing her. Here's an excerpt from my reply (http://tilsononobama.blogspot.com/2008/12/education-attacks-on-darling-hammond.html):
Affeldt's article is well articulated -- but is nonsense. He is confusing bitter, personal attacks with spirited arguments about who would provide the best leadership and has the best ideas to reform a system we all agree is broken so that every child in America gets at least a solid education. This isn't personal -- I don't doubt for a moment that LDH cares deeply about kids and wants to do what's best for them. And I don't even think her ideas are bad -- it's that they're so LIMITED! She fails to appreciate that it's THE SYSTEM that's the problem and needs to be reformed and also fails to even acknowledge that there are WAY too many ineffective teachers who simply need to find other careers -- and that no amount of better training can change this. She also doesn't understand that the power of Teach for America (and a handful of similar programs) is not just the direct outcomes (students learn more in TFA teachers' classrooms), but also that TFA is a remarkable recruiter of talent into a sector sorely lacking it. It's NOT a coincidence that KIPP and nearly every important education reform organization was founded by or disproportionately staffed by TFA alums. I could go on, but you get the idea...
In summary, if all of the reforms she proposes were adopted, I don't think it would move the needle much to chance educational outcomes -- but everyone would feel good about the pseudo-reforms and real reform would be derailed. THAT'S why she and her ideas are so dangerous!
· Merrow makes a good point here, but draws the wrong conclusion from it:
the evidence suggests that their success also requires superhuman effort that produces a high burnout rate among teachers and school leaders.
Is this a model for genuine and widespread reform? Let's look at the numbers. We have about 100,000 public schools. Perhaps 5,000 or maybe even 10,000 are defying the odds. At that rate, how long will it take? Where will the thousands and thousands of inspired leaders and teachers come from?
Why do Brooks and others defend a system in which success seems to require superhuman effort?
Yes, achieving extraordinary outcomes with the most disadvantaged children requires extraordinary effort by extraordinary people – nobody ever said it was easy! Do I think we can quickly convert all of our schools – or even the bottom 10% of schools – to extraordinary ones, filled with extraordinary people making extraordinary efforts? Not a chance – but we sure should be doing everything we can to get on that path! I don't understand why we can't aspire to have our teaching profession be something like our medical profession. It's really hard to get through medical school and pass the boards, and the hours of training during internships and residency are grueling, but I don't hear anyone arguing that it's impossible to attract and retain high caliber people in the field of medicine. In fact, precisely the opposite is true: the fact that it's a real challenge and that only the best make it ATTRACTS great people! Teach for America has certainly figured this out…
· "Our public schools are the equivalent of yesterday's pony express. Just as a faster pony express would not be sufficient to deliver the mail today, the "faster horses" that reforms like KIPP, Teach for America and charter schools represent are not in themselves adequate for our 50 million school-age children, nor will they ever be." I don't understand this critique at all.
--------------------
David Brooks, Diane Ravitch and the Education Wars
Last week in this space, I speculated about the most influential educator in America. Although I put forth more than a half dozen names, most respondents 'voted' for Diane Ravitch, the historian/policymaker/apostate whose book, The Death and Life of the Great American Public School, is a best-seller.
Her landslide victory is not particularly surprising, because she is a Five Star General in the ongoing education wars; her badly outgunned army includes the two teachers unions, Linda Darling-Hammond and a lot of teachers.
The opposing side includes Brian Williams and NBC's Education Nation, Oprah Winfrey, Teach for America, Joel Klein, Michelle Rhee, charter school supporters, Waiting for Superman and a lot of powerful business and financial leaders.
Add to that list David Brooks, the influential columnist for the New York Times. That's particularly disappointing, because the normally perceptive Brooks seems to have swallowed a questionable argument hook, line and sinker.
posted by Whitney Tilson at 11:13 PM
<< Home