Re: [eddra] Another Black Man's Response to Bracey's Comments

["Susan Ohanian" <susano@gmavt.net>]

Although there is big rightwing money behind vouchers (A few years ago I analyzed a PBS special on vouchers and came to the conclusion that if you donate $500,000, as did Schaife, you can put on a cast of stooges to say anything you damn well please about teachers and schools. Too bad us leftwingers don't have any money.), the corporate-politico alliance for vouchers, for NCLB, etc. crosses political lines.  For starters, go read the Business Roundtable archives. And Progressive Policy Institute.

I wonder why, if these politicos and think tank operatives care so much about poor Black kids, they don't do something about health care, housing, and a living wage. I wonder why they  weren't up-in arms over the Appellate Division of the NY State Supreme Court 2002 ruling. As far as I could tell, Bob Herbert is the only journalist who quoted David Saxe, the one justice who dissented. 

It's very hard to teach a hungry kid, a homeless kid, and it's worse than hypocrisy to say that vouchers will make their lives better. 

As I pointed out in my June PDK article,  when the Mount Sinai School of Medicine: Center for Children's Health and the Environment wanted to get some attention for a serious matter that has failed to catch the atttention of politicians, the U. S. Dept. of ED , the Business Roundtable, and the media, they took out a full page ad in the NY Times, announcing that 12 million American kids suffer from developmental, learning, or behavioral disabilities"--caused by lead, mercury, industrial chemicals, and certain  pesticides crossing the placenta and entering the brain of the developing fetus.

Where's the outrage? It's easier to blame the schools and the parents than to point any fingers at business & industry. Vouchers become a diversion from doing something about more serious matters.

Susan Ohanian, longtime New York teacher
http://www.susanohanian.org


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Casey Lartigue 
  To: KaleemC@aol.com ; gbracey@erols.com 
  Cc: eddra@yahoogroups.com ; gse@gmu.edu ; morenos@washpost.com ; fletcherm@washpost.com ; schemo@nytimes.com ; boherb@nytimes.com ; miked@nytimes.com ; mathewsj@washpost.com ; wa-ed-deform@yahoogroups.com ; arn-l@interversity.org ; sdillon@nytimes.com 
  Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 5:04 PM
  Subject: [eddra] Another Black Man's Response to Bracey's Comments


  Well-said, Kaleem.



  If I said anything in error at the forum I would welcome correction from Dr. Bracey or anyone else. I've read most of his annual reports over the years, taken note of his "Rotten Apple" awards, I'm a member of the Eddra e-mail discussion group, I was also at the ELC Arizona conference he referred to, and I've even suggested to others that they invite him to appear on their panels or ask him to write chapters for their books. Despite his vitriol, I don't have an axe to grind with or into him even though I often disagree with him.



  My question for Dr. Bracey at the forum was a paraphrase of a statement from DC Council member Kevin Chavous's op-ed in the Washington Post last year. Chavous wrote that based on his experience, the DC public school system was incapable of reforming itself. So I asked Dr. Bracey and Ms. Moody if they believed the DC public school system was capable of reforming itself.



  Below is an outline of what I "railed" at Mr. Bracey about.



  1)      In response to the statement that D.C. public schools have improved enough that vouchers are unnecessary, I read the following quote: "It amazes me that outsiders come along and try to destroy our public schools just at a time we are making progress." I then pointed out that the quote was from 1981, said by Rev. Gibson, a leading opponent of the 1981 tax credit referendum D.C. voters opposed 9 to 1. The point is that improvement has always been just around the corner in DCPS, talk of change is also always just around another the corner, and changes that challenge the status quo are said to be a dead end not even worth trying.



  2)      Ms. Moody referred to a poll by the National School Boards Association showing that D.C. residents oppose vouchers. I pointed out that I had attempted to acquire demographic information about that poll directly from NSBA, but was told that they would withhold the information for "strategic purposes." I suggested at the forum, accepting the findings of the poll for the sake of argument that if there is such across-the-board opposition to vouchers in D.C. that there shouldn't be so much concern that parents will attempt to use vouchers. Parents so opposed to vouchers could just mail them back, tear them up, or burn them. But the fear must be that many parents will attempt to use vouchers, regardless of what the polls say.



  3)      I pointed out that the dollar amount for D.C.'s proposed voucher program is $15 million. To put that into context, the DC public school system had $855 million allocated to it in the 2001-02 school year, according to page 1 of the Superintendent's Five-Year Report available from the DC School Board (202-442-5220). Another $163 million was allocated to DCPS for the capital improvement fund. That $15 million, I pointed, could keep the D.C. system running for about three or four days ($855 million divided by about school 180 days).



  4)      Dr. Bracey said that if he were black he would wonder why right-wingers would care for him and his child and why they were suddenly expressing interest in blacks. I pointed out: 



  A)    There were two black people on the panel and they each had different views about choice. I would be willing to bet Dr. Bracey a rotten apple that black parents given a chance to use vouchers would be more concerned about the quality of schools they could choose from than about the political ideology of the voucher advocate giving those vouchers.



  B)     I pointed out, off the top of my cleanly shaven bald head, that there are some people who would be surprised to know that their support for vouchers or privately funded scholarships have made them co-conspirators in the "right-wing" conspiracy to destroy public education. Rev. Andrew Young, Sen. Tom Daschle, Martin Luther King III, Joseph Califano, Rep. Charlie Rangel, Henry Cisneros, Rev. Floyd Flake, the late Sen. Moynihan are or have been on the Board of the Children's Scholarship Fund. http://www.scholarshipfund.org/about/board.asp?left I did not list the following, but other supporters of vouchers who would be surprised to know that supporting vouchers means they are part of the "war" against public schools includes: Milwaukee mayor John Norquist (Democrat); former Baltimore mayor Kurt Schmoke (Democrat); DC Mayor Anthony Williams (Democrat); Democrat Sen. Joseph Lieberman (for vouchers when he isn't running for VP); Democrat Robert Reich (when he isn't running for governor); Democrat politician Cory Booker; Professor Derrick Bell; state Rep. Dwight Evans (D-Philadelphia); Willie Breazell (former NAACP president); Cleveland city council member Fannie Lewis; Milwaukee's Kenneth Johnson; Polly Williams; T. Willard Fair of the National Urban League; Christopher Jencks; the late James S. Coleman; Kaleem Caire (former voucher opponent); John Witte; John Gardner; Terry Moe; Howard Fuller (former Marxist and Pan-Africanist); Nathan Glazer; Stephen Sugarman; Stephen Aarons; John Coons; Theodore Sizer; and DC School Board president Peggy Cooper Cafritz. 



  Of course, if any of the names on that brief list are in error, I hope someone will correct me. I apologize in advance to anyone who should not be on that list, is listed incorrectly as "late," or has reversed their opinion of vouchers. If there is anyone else you believe should be included on that list, including yourself, please let me know.



  Regards,



  Casey Lartigue



  ``Will allowing parents to choose from different education options `destroy public education'? Did competition from Toyota `destroy' General Motors? Or to use an even closer analogy: Has competition from Federal Express `destroyed' the government postal service, or has the latter indeed become better, faster, more innovative in response?" 
  --Rev. Andrew Young







  -----Original Message-----
  From: KaleemC@aol.com [mailto:KaleemC@aol.com] 
  Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 10:02 AM
  To: gbracey@erols.com
  Cc: eddra@yahoogroups.com; gse@gmu.edu; morenos@washpost.com; fletcherm@washpost.com; schemo@nytimes.com; boherb@nytimes.com; miked@nytimes.com; mathewsj@washpost.com; wa-ed-deform@yahoogroups.com; arn-l@interversity.org; sdillon@nytimes.com
  Subject: One Black Man's Response to Your Comments



  Greeting Gerald.

  Rarely do I address emails as vitriol as the one you have just written. The last time I responded to you was in 2001 when you portrayed those of us African Americans who support school choice as being victims of a white right wing conspiracy. I am sure you can remember my email to you and your response to me. 

  I will submit that you are a very talented writer who appears to be interested in ensuring that all children receive a good education. I know you enjoy a good relationship with one of my former advisors/educators, professor Michael Apple of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and I know Mike is very sincere in his desire for justice and equality. As invested as professor Apple is in advancing humanity and ending suffering, I cannot imagine he would hang out and co-write with a person who would want otherwise. I also must acknowledge that I missed your panel at the Manhattan Institute event the other day, but was there for the luncheon and Mayor Williams speech.

  Instead of railing against you, I wanted to share with you a couple concerns and some insight into the thinking of one black man who believes that equality and justice cannot be achieved without a heavy dose of freedom -- educational freedom included.

  Your email note below was passed to me by a colleague. Your comments appear heavy on rhetoric and anger and light on legitimate critique of what took place at the event you were part of. Moreover, I have found many of your columns of late absent of any real-time solutions to challenges facing poor people in American cities and K-12 education institutions. To not think beyond ones own ideas and outside the context of ones own reality results in a homogenized world view wrapped in status quo symbolism and stationary progress. I would argue that colonialism and paternalism are byproducts of such attitudes.

  Your comments at the event, the conversation I overheard you having with others at Tuesday's luncheon, your criticism of DC Mayor Anthony Williams, your claims of a vast white right wing conspiracy among school choice advocates, and your previous statements on the subject of school vouchers lead one to believe that you are wholly invested in paternalistic liberalism, which I define as  "Don't trust white people who do not agree with the white people like me who really love you, but don't you disagree with me either" rhetoric.  

  Being a black child sprung forth from Ghetto Realism but who holds on to those lessons of life that keep me grounded, any time a person tells me that giving a poor parent freedom to choose for themselves and their children is somehow giving into conspiracy tells me that the person saying it either has taken their own freedom for granted, not given much thought to their own statements, or is fearful of their own longevity as master of the universe...as they see the people they enjoy privileges over start to access and take advantage of some privileges of their own. I don't know you on a personal level, so I don't know how to take your comments.

  But Gerald, based on my own experiences, I strongly believe the black community needs mental, spiritual, physical and economic freedom and awakening, tremendous/steady economic investment, green spaces, family friendly and affordable residential environments, and a vibrant array of educational options for children. What we don't need are people with as much influence and as wide an audience as you have heaving the old "bogeyman" rhetoric at us and telling us which White, Black or Brown person we should and should not trust. 

  It is sad because in many ways, I believe far too many African Americans left one plantation only to give in to the trap of another -- a legacy of internalized fear of moving forward while not knowing who we can and cannot trust. Those how have desired to keep us in our place have successfully used the weapon of fear against us for a long time. The good thing is that a large and growing number of black folk are continuing to create their own shoes, lay their own foundation, and take their own steps toward manifesting a new vision for themselves, their families, their community, this country and society in general.  We are desperate need of this but I doubt we will ever obtain it if half our children fail to ever make it out of high school. Who will be our leaders of the future? Will the halls of Congress still be 95% white 20 years from now?

  While I was born to poverty and absentee parents, I am a child of the world with a global vision of progress for all of us. Out of chaos and frustration, I have learned that when you own something, you won't destroy it; when you have built something, you won't burn it down; when you have earned something, you will not take it for granted; and when you have learned what it is like to exercise freedom and benefit from justice, you can no longer view yourself as a slave.

  When a parent has been able to make the best choice possible for their child, not only do they tend to be much more invested and confident in the outcome, they can look to a future where their child will sincerely be thankful for the investment their parent made in them. Every parent and child deserves this, and one should have to go broke to obtain it. 

  I have lost too many of my brothers and sisters to nonsense. Too many missed opportunities, faded dreams, depressed emotions and damaged lives. We have to do whatever we can, within whatever legal means we can accomplish it, to make sure that the cycle of despair is broken and that children are provided every opportunity available to achieve to their potential. I sincerely hope that one day you will look at those of us who disagree with you and be able to say with great honesty that there are many of us who are striving to make a difference in the lives of children and the future of America who support giving poor families the educational freedom, justice and equality they deserve.

  I welcome your reply.

  Peace. and blessings to you and your family.

  I have attached a poem for you as well.
  ______________________________________________
  "You can watch things happen, or you can make things happen."

  Kaleem Caire
  Former-Founding national President and Chief Executive Officer of the Black Alliance for Educational Options (www.baeo.org) - one of those organizations managed by highly capable, highly educated, and self-determined black people with deep civil rights roots that are extremely committed to the progress of black children -- a group that you might believe is akin to be bamboozled by the great white bogey man.





  -----Original Message-----
  From: gerald w. bracey [mailto:gbracey@erols.com] 
  Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2003 8:27 AM
  To: eddra@yahoogroups.com; gse@gmu.edu; morenos@washpost.com; fletcherm@washpost.com; schemo@nytimes.com; boherb@nytimes.com; miked@nytimes.com; Michael Winerip; mathewsj@washpost.com; wa-ed-deform@yahoogroups.com; arn-l@interversity.org; sdillon@nytimes.com
  Subject: [wa-ed-deform] Invitation to a mugging






  A few weeks back, I got a call from the Manhattan Institute asking if I would be part of a panel on vouchers with the Institute's Jay P. Greene.  Greene would present the pro research, I the con.  Pro and con presenters from the District would give their reasons why DC should or should not have a voucher program.  I said sure.  No honorarium was mentioned.
   
  When the official invitation arrived, I didn't pay much attention to it, but as the date approached, I noticed that the "moderator" for the panel was one David Brennan, chairman, White Hat Management.  I imagine that people who know Brennan would likely use the word "immoderate" as a descriptor.  As the head of then-Governor Voinovich's school choice group, he almost singlehandedly created the Cleveland voucher plan.  In June, 2003, despite the evidence showing the Cleveland Public Schools students outperforming the voucher students, he and the Catholic Conference of Ohio slipped (literally in the dark of night according to media reports) a $10.5 million expansion (the Conference had lobbied for the expansion as a means of offsetting operating losses).
   
  Brennan runs charter schools in Cleveland.  He started them as voucher schools, but switched once the charter legislation went through.  Vouchers, at the time, were worth only $2,250, but charters got $4,500 for each kid.  Brennan is an entrepreneur.  He brought in Greene (along with Paul Peterson and William Howell) with John M. Olin Foundation money to evaluate the schools.  The resulting evaluation was called an evaluation of the Cleveland voucher program even though it looked only at Brennan's two schools.  It said good things were happening in the schools.  (Evaluations of the whole program by Indiana University researchers find that public school kids started way behind the voucher kids but, after three years, had nearly caught up in reading and language and had overtaken the voucher students in math).
   
  Brennan stands about 6'6", weighs maybe 260, wears western garb and a white cowboy hat because he is, in his words, the good guy.
   
  When I arrived at the National Press Club yesterday for the panel, I was handed an attendance list.  It set off more alarms.  The Heritage Foundation had sent six people, the American Legislative Exchange Council, former home to Bill Bennett, sent four as did the White House.  The Catholic Church had a half-dozen people in attendance (it is openly lobbying for vouchers these days) and the U. S. Department of Education three.
   
  It was not the most hostile audience I have ever faced, even though you could almost see the heat rising from the bald head of Cato's Casey Lartigue as he railed at me during Q & A (even Brennan asked Lartigue if there was a question anywhere in his comments).  That honor still goes to the Education Leaders Council conference in Phoenix three years ago when I "debated" Chris Whittle (in quotes because I had to go first, leaving Chris free to ignore everything I said and deliver a 20 minute info-mercial on the wonders of Edison Schools, Inc.).  Still, it was not exactly a warmly receptive bunch.
   
  The only TV coverage was by Rupert Murdoch's Fox Network. I don't know at this point if the other networks were invited. I forgot to watch until 5:30, so don't know if it was shown during the first half hour.
   
  The attendance list also included Diana Jean Schemo of the NYTimes and Sylvia Moreno of the Post, but if they were there, they did not make their presence known to me.  Nor did either of the two reporters listed for the Washington Times.
   
  Still, I think I held my own, emphasizing the data that Jay conveniently omitted, including that from Cleveland.  Naturally, we had different takes on Alan Krueger's recent reanalysis of Peterson's New York City evaluation.  Krueger's study was summarized by NYTimes education writer, Michael Winerip on May 7.  
   
  In a May 16 op-ed in the Wall Street Journal (a viper's nest of right wing vitriol, say Slate), Jay had accused Krueger of "poor research decisions," especially his decision to include students who had either incomplete background information or no prior test scores.
   
  In reaction, I quoted a paper by Jay and Peterson: "Let us repeat, analysis of randomized experimental data does not require controls for background characteristics or test scores.  Such controls are necessary only when one doubts that the experimental data are truly random."  The NYC data were truly random so the controls were not necessary.  Indeed, one must wonder why Peterson used them and when.
   
  Krueger found that Peterson had excluded over 40% of the sample for these reasons.  He also found that Peterson had coded race solely on the basis of the mother's race:  A child with a black mother and white father was black; a child with a black father and white mother was white.
   
  None of the results using the whole sample were significant. 
   
  We now know that Peterson dropped 40% of the kids from the sample because David Myers of Mathematica Policy Research supplied them to Krueger.  This information and the race coding information had not heretofore appeared in any published documents.  Mathematica was co-contractor for the NYC evaluation and Myers called Krueger's conclusions "a fine interpretation of the results."  He also said of the NYC study "It's not a study I'd want to use to make public policy."  For his part, Peterson accused Krueger of "rummaging theoretically barefoot through data in hopes of finding desired results (on June 13, NYTimes reporter, Sam Dillon, reported on Peterson's rejoinder paper, released at a press conference at the National Press Club).  For my part, I worried that, given Peterson's manipulation of the data without telling anyone, what might we not know about manipulations in his other studies where the data has not yet been made available to other researchers. 
   
  Jay's theme of the morning was that vouchers have been studied with randomized experiments more than most education issues and that "none of them (the studies) finds students harmed by receiving a voucher."  Therefore, why not gather more data from a voucher program in DC?
   
  I pointed out that some results did indicate harm, at least as measured by test scores.  This was true in NYC for ethnic groups other than blacks.  In Dayton results showed large positive effects, small positive effects, small negative effects and large negative effects, depending on grade.  Collapsed across grades, results were positive but insignificant.  In DC, some negative effects appeared after the first year.  These became positive for blacks only after two years and disappeared after three.
   
   
  Seems to me that if the issue has been studied so much and shows so little, why not give it up?  Especially since no one has suggested how the negative outcomes or non-outcomes might be improved by a different research or program design.  And especially given Rouse' finding on small classes. 
   
  Overall the theme of the pro-panelists and the audience (many of whom made statements not even in the form of questions) was that choice of schools was a civil right, not for the poor or for people of color but for all parents.
   
  If there had been a device for recording elapsed time while different panelists spoke, moderator Brennan might have been shown to have used more minutes than anyone else.  Indeed, during one of his rants in response to a question during the Q&A, I got by far the biggest laugh of the day by saying "I thought you were supposed to be the moderator."
   
  The panel was followed by a luncheon during which the Manhattan Institute presented DC mayor Anthony Williams its Urban Innovation Award.  Former Indy mayor Steve Goldmith and current Milwaukee mayor John Norquist preceded Williams to the podium.  Goldsmith didn't talk vouchers, but Norquist extolled the program in Milwaukee (best analysis of data is by Ceci Rouse at Princeton who found a positive effect for math, but not reading and who found larger gains for public school kids in small classes).  He also said that even the socialist government of his native land, Sweden, had introduced vouchers and that people liked them.
   
  Williams' speech on his voucher turnaround (he had previously opposed them) suggested not so much soul searching, but either arm twisting or some kind of payoff.  The Bush administration does not like dissent or resistance.
   
  The head table sat Williams, Norquist, Goldsmith, conservative columnist, Robert Novak, Brennan and his wife, the Education Leaders Council's CEO, Lisa Graham Keegan, and reps from Manhattan Institute.
   
  And so it goes in the War Against America's Public Schools (Heinemann publisher, 2001).
   
  Jerry




        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
              ADVERTISEMENT
             
       
       

  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.