Interversity.Org

Take a byte out of life-a roaring lion of a byte~! David,  people like me draw cartoons.  We do it because too many words in a piece lose me.  I honestly don't get the debate you have posted.  Maybe if I were smarter, wiser, and all that other good stuff, I could get the point.  I guess that's why I draw. What is your point? gh

Recently, Kathleen Keeson of the "Defending Public Schools" group, criticized some of my comments on portside (a significant left moderated listserve), and presented their tentative platform. Although DPS invited discussion, portside apparently decided against posting commentary about it. No response of any kind was posted.

That is certainly portside's right, it is their listserve. Some may find my own positions appalling at times - but they are also tentative and subject to change, if valid counter-arguments are presented. For I do recognize my lack of educational credentials when questioning the "collective wisdom and insight" claimed by Kesson & Co.

A cat can look at a king, especially when, in the words of the DPS preamble, "any social policy as important as education needs to be worked out democratically through dialogue and debate". Perhaps they mean dialog among themselves and others who agree. If so, their chances of transforming the public school system are that much less, for if this were indeed "worked out democratically", other people must be won over to their model of change. How better to do that than to "dialog and debate" in a forum like this?

With all due respect,

David Ecklein

PS: My wife, Marcosa J. Santiago, M.D. actually does have relevant credentials as a pediatric psychiatrist, and has consulted extensively with various school systems over a 30 year period. She agrees with the view expressed in my rejoinder. We both wonder why Praeger (with its history) takes DPS seriously, but "left-wing organizations and publications" are "reluctant".

[DE] The following is the tentative DPS platform, with [DE] marking
my comments on it. Prof. Keeson's submissions are indicated by [KK].

*******

[KK] It was a pleasure to see that Bill Gates' critique of
education stirred some responses on this listserve.
I'd like to address the concerns of Dave Ecklein, who
suggests that "no one on the left has (to my knowledge)
come up with an overall critique and some proposals for
correction or overhaul," with the following platform,
created from the collective wisdom of the authors
featured in our four book series, Defending Public
Schools (2004 Praeger). I believe that the platform
speaks for itself, and you may note that the
publication mentioned in the second paragraph, a
leading "left wing" journal, declined to feature it in
their pages. I'm sorry to hear that Ecklein perceives
the rather substantial number of writings by
leftists/progressives/radicals in education as merely a
"lazy and ill-defined bunch of sour grapes."
Ironically, many of us on the left in education are
curious about the reluctance of most left-wing
organizations and publications to take the problems of
education seriously, and address more than the most
basic educational topics (and those rarely). At any
rate, the editors of Defending Public Schools offer the
following points in the service of widening the
conversation about important educational issues,
democracy, and our future.

[DE] My remark about "sour grapes" in left educational commentary
was aimed specifically at the portside contributions and similar items I have casually encountered recently. It does not indicate a review of the "substantial number of writings" by "leftists/progressives/radicals in education". Now Prof. Kesson, writing for the DPS group, has presented a tentative platform of their recommendations for school reform. But the very name of the group "Defending Public Schools" portends a defensive posture rather than an "overall critique".

Although I am not in the education field, I do accept the invitation to comment on this DPS 11-point platform, which is somewhat repetitive and far from comprehensive. Public education policy, to be democratic, should be open to lay scrutiny. After all, we furnish the tax dollars, and more importantly, the students. We all must live with the results and social costs of a far from optimal system. These comments are offered in a heuristic and tentative spirit, open to correction and revision, my own and/or yours.

*******

[KK] SAVING PUBLIC EDUCATION - SAVING DEMOCRACY

.. We want to believe that public schools serve us,
the public, "We, the people." We want to believe that
schools strengthen our democracy, our ability to
meaningfully participate in the decision-making
processes that impact our communities and our lives.
Educational resources need to be directed towards
increasing people's awareness of the relevant facts
about their lives, and to increase people's abilities
to act upon these facts in their own true interests.
Since the 1980s and even before, the statist view of
schools has defined the purpose of education in terms
of the interests of the state and the interests of
concentrated private/corporate power. We believe that
public education ought to serve public interests, not
the interests of private power and privilege.

At a time when our democracy and many of the liberties
we hold dear are in crisis, we propose the following
eleven steps, in the spirit of Pope and Rauber's Saving
the Environment (The Nation, March 8, 2004), to
preserve the institution of public education, reverse
anti-democratic educational trends that have
accelerated under the Bush administration, and
transform public schools. We realize that there are
points within these points that people of good will may
debate, and that any social policy as important as
education needs to be worked out democratically through
dialogue and debate. Our platform, based on the
collective wisdom and insight of the contributing
authors in our book series, Defending Public Schools,
is put forth not as a final document but as a
conversation starter for progressives who care about
the future of education and our society.

[DE] OK - let's talk it over!

*******

[KK] 1. The statist view of schools treats teachers as
mere appendages to the machinery of the state and seeks
to hold them accountable to serving the interests of
state power. Linked as it is to the interests of
private wealth, this view defines children's value in
life as human resources and future consumers. We
believe that education should foster critical
citizenship skills to foster a more viable and vibrant
democratic society. Schools should be organized around
preparing for democratic citizenship through engagement
with real-world issues, problem-solving, and critical
thinking, and through active participation in civic and
political processes. Informed citizenship in a broad-
based, grassroots democracy must be based on principles
of cooperation with others, non-violent conflict
resolution, dialogue, inquiry and rational debate,
environmental activism, and the preservation and
expansion of human rights. These skills, capacities,
and dispositions need to be taught and practiced.

[DE] DPS posits a "statist view of the schools" and then contrasts that with organization "around preparing for democratic citizenship...grassroots democracy...expansion of human rights" etc. But public schools are to a degree "statist", in whatever society they are imbedded. In this sense the postal service is "statist", the fire department is usually locally "statist". Social security is "statist" and ought to stay that way. The term "statist" has been a pejorative weasel-word used by reactionaries to characterize publicly owned or government run institutions when promoting privatization. But DPS is surely not promoting private alternative schools with progressive civics programs, although such have and do exist from time to time, often with positive effect for those who can find (and afford) them. The DPS idea is that progressive civics can be part of the public school program, and is a substitute for developing "human resources" and "future consumers".

But the school is not the post office. It delivers not letters, but the dominant ideology. Remembering that the dominant ideology is the ideology of the dominant class, it is an increasingly uphill battle to extend a progressive civics curriculum beyond a certain point. Those who would attempt pushing the envelope must also make an extracurricular attempt to convince the public served by the schools that this is desirable and necessary; otherwise isolation or worse can befall such worthy left initiatives. More ideal schools can only be sustained in a more ideal and accepting society.

*******

[KK] 2. In the past two decades, the business sector has
become increasingly involved with education in terms of
supplementing public spending in exchange for school-
based marketing (including advertising space in schools
and textbooks, junk fast food and vending machines, and
commercial-laden "free" TV). We believe that students
should not be thought of as a potential market, but as
future citizens. We call for the elimination of
advertising in schools and curricula and of the
marketing of unhealthy products on school grounds.

[DE] I agree that advertising and marketing unhealthy products have no place in public schools. But this is a strong temptation for hard-pressed school districts. Imposing an elimination of such practices without securing equivalent resources would amount to an unfunded mandate, a familiar form of hypocrisy in high places.

The involvement of business in education has other, perhaps more serious, manifestations. I am on record as no admirer of Bill Gates. Microsoft has simultaneously stimulated the spread of personal computers and has crippled their potential, due to its virtual software monopoly. The Microsoft products leave something to be desired, as most who use Windows in its increasingly high-cholesterol versions well know. It is expensive and notorious for bugs and security flaws. What Apple tried a generation ago,
Microsoft has succeeded in doing; co-opt the public school systems of this country. They have done this by providing free or below-cost classes and excursions for teachers and other educational decision makers; by distributing their inferior products at cut-rate "educational discounts"; and now by pretending interest in school reform. Beware of Gates bearing gifts!

Open-source Linux software available in the public domain is the natural alternative for adoption by the public school system. It does not need the resources required by the current versions of Windows to do the same job, saving many usable computers from disposal and replacement by the "latest and greatest". It is supported by an international community, and is rapidly being adopted (in place of Windows) overseas. Industry here is gradually turning to it as the many points of superiority become more obvious.

*******

[KK] 3. Fund all schools equally and fully, eliminating
the dependence on private corporate funds as noted
above, and on the property tax, which creates a two-
tiered educational system by distributing educational
monies inequitably. Include universal pre-k and
tuition-free higher education for all qualified
students in state universities.

[DE] I agree. This is close to what Kucinich, alone among last year's
presidential candidates, was proposing. In fact, in a more ideal society, I would be in favor of a more federalized approach to school systems, with funding supplied from the federal government for mandated federal minimum standards. Local options, for programs exceeding this minimum mandate, would be funded at the local level. This would preserve the district individuality desired by most of the public, and allow particular regional problems (and assets) to be addressed.

*******

[KK] 4. The current system seeks to use a series of
"carrots and sticks" to coerce compliance with an
alienating system of schooling aimed at inducing
conformity among teachers and students through high
stakes testing and accountability. This system
alienates teachers from their work by stripping it
of all creative endeavor and reduces it to following
scripted lesson plans. We believe that teaching is
a matter of the heart, that place where intellect
meets up with emotion and spirit in constant
dialogue with the world around us. We call for the
elimination of high stakes standardized tests,
and the institution of more fair, equitable, and
meaningful systems of accountability and assessment
of both students and schools.

[DE] Regarding teaching as merely "a matter of the heart, etc." sounds
poetic but can lead to boundary crossings and violations, favoritism, and loss of focus on the subject matter. The most important quality in a teacher is mastery of the subject matter, followed closely by the desire and skill to communicate that knowledge to the student. Mutual respect and enthusiasm for learning will be the result.

Why is there so much opposition to the notion of testing? Perhaps if there were more of it along the way, the shock of "high stakes standardized tests" like SAT would be lessened. Teachers are not expected to be clairvoyant, and periodic testing may indicate areas where the student needs to concentrate effort. It can also indicate what difficult points need amplification by the teacher to aid in the student's passage to greater subject matter comprehension.

Students should be expected to master the subject to some minimal standard. I understand Japanese educational theory considers that all healthy (mentally and physically) students are capable of such mastery, even if some take more time and attention to reach that goal. I also understand that little opprobrium attaches to those who take somewhat longer. At least this aspect of Japanese educational policy should be studied for what we can learn. However, I notice that no regard to educational experience of other nations or cultures is referenced in this document.

*******

[KK] 5. Federal educational policy, embodied in No Child
Left Behind, sets impossible standards for a reason.
Public access to institutions of learning helps promote
the levels of critical civic activism witnessed during
the 1960s and 70s that challenged the power of the
state and the corporations that it primarily serves.
The current reform environment creates conditions where
public schools can only fail, thus providing
"statistical evidence" for an alleged need to turn
education over to private companies in the name of
"freedom of choice." In combination with the growing
corporate monopolization of the media, these reforms
are part of a longer-range plan to consolidate private
power's control over the total information system, thus
eliminating avenues for the articulation of honest
inquiry and dissent. In the end, as evidenced by
Secretary of Education Rod Paige's recent
characterization of the National Education Association,
anyone who contests state-corporatism will be labeled a
"terrorist" or, in more Orwellian terms, a "thought-
criminal."

[DE] While almost anything might be Bush's intention, the NCLB still has some potential for reform itself. By coining the very name, the
administration has stolen a march on real reformers. It might be better to recast and redefine NCLB, and the opportunity for doing so may come with its imminent failure in the current form. For one thing, the consequences for failing public schools should be reversed - they should get more aid and attention, not less.

*******

[KK] 6. Teachers matter. Teaching is a public act that
bears directly on our collective future. Pay teachers
a salary commensurate with other professions, and
ensure the quality of the profession by meaningful
forms of induction, preparation, mentoring,
professional development, and career advancement, and
by improved working conditions. High learning
standards should serve as guidelines, not curricular
mandates, for teachers. Restore teacher control, in
collaboration with students and communities, over
decision-making about issues of curriculum and
instruction in the classroom - no more scripted
teaching, no more mandated outcomes, no more "teacher-
proof" curricula. Local control of education is at the
heart of democracy; state and nationally mandated
curriculum and assessment are a prescription for
totalitarianism.

[DE] "Local control" can be a disaster, depending on the community. We already know of stickers on biology books in some localities, proclaiming evolution (the core historical understanding of life) a "mere theory". Until there are localities which mandate stickers for Gideon Bibles proclaiming creationism a "mere theory", I will not trust local mandates on core curriculum subjects.

Anyone who has suffered under inept teachers at various points in their education will not agree to the central position of authority allotted them in this plank of the platform.

And finally, most of the developed world has a more federalized educational system than exists in the US (Netherlands and a few others are exceptions). Does this mean they are taking "a prescription for totalitarianism"?

I do not understand this attitude that teachers are expected to be superior beings, above public scrutiny. "High learning standards should serve as guidelines, not curricular mandates, for teachers." No one in any normal job or profession has this kind of leeway. A guideline is a suggestion, a mandate is a requirement. Other workers and professionals who do not meet some reasonable level or standard can expect a pink slip, even with union protection. One bad teacher who is shielded can adversely affect the future of hundreds of youngsters.

*******

[KK] 7. The current system alienates students by stripping
learning from its engagement with the world in all of
its complexity. It reduces learning to test preparation
as part of a larger rat race where students are
situated within a larger economic competition for
dwindling numbers of jobs. We believe that excellence
needs to be defined in terms of teachers' abilities to
inspire children to engage the world, for it is through
such critical engagement that true learning (as opposed
to rote memorization) actually occurs. Students living
in the 21st century are going to have to deal with a
host of problems created by their predecessors: global
warming and other ecological disasters, global
conflicts, human rights abuses, loss of civil liberties,
etc. The curriculum needs to address what students
need to know and be able to do in the 21st century to
tackle these problems- and it needs to be relevant to
students' current interests and concerns.

[DE] This plank again inveighs against testing. How does the teacher know that the student is engaged? Even student-teacher classroom dialog is a form of test, and not always the best one. Some students are at a disadvantage in social interaction, and written communication may be less loaded for them. Also, any teacher who corrects homework is engaging in a form of testing.

The school system in the US is asymmetrical. The tertiary system (college level), said by some to be slipping a little lately, is still world-class. The primary and secondary systems are the ones in question here. Alarmed by US students arriving without adequate preparation, colleges and universities have resorted to remedial reading, writing, and math classes in efforts to help these students avoid disappointment. I believe that much of the pressure for testing is coming from this situation; it has been apparent
recently with the addition of an SAT essay requirement.

Also, the need for a progressive civics curriculum is reiterated from the first plank (see my remarks on that one). We can't wait for the political situation to become favorable to such an ambitious and system-critical program. We must provide this kind of education soon. Isn't it true that in those countries with a strong labor movement and left much of this type of education is conducted by party schools? At high points in the US left, the same was done here. With the scattered left of today, in an era of weakened labor support, we must develop our own independent forms of progressive education. Of course, it is always appropriate to try raising
the level in public schools, and it is certainly necessary and possible to struggle around academic freedom issues and hard-established precedents when progressive teachers are attacked, but even in the best of current circumstances doing anything much more comprehensive with the official curriculum seems like an arm wrestle with a gorilla.

*******

[KK] 8. Children of immigrants make up approximately 20
percent of the children in the United States, bringing
linguistic and cultural differences to many classrooms.
Added to this are 2.4 million children who speak a
language other than English at home. We need to ensure
that the learning needs of English language learners
are met through caring, multicultural, multi-lingual
education.

[DE] I think multilingual education is somewhat overrated on the left, sincechildren have the capacity for quickly comprehending
other languages at an early age without a great deal of formal intervention. This ability falls off as the child ages, and exposing the young child to non-English instruction may interfere with the natural linguistic acquisition. Those older children arriving in the US system (particularly teenagers) and those with learning disabilities may need special attention, perhaps a period in
English language school if not actual multilingual courses.

My wife is a pediatric psychiatrist not having English as her first
language, and we discuss this issue from time to time. I am only repeating her own opinion, and those of relatives who have settled in Quebec. There, the new Canadian school immigrant has to master not only English, but French as well. The children have done well at it, the adults have had more difficulty. In spite of that, no one seems to consider this Canadian policy unreasonable.

There is strong evidence that members of non-English language communities would prefer their children to master English as soon as possible, without being delayed by the multilingual approach. Even where Spanish is a dominant language, they know their children will stand a better chance with English mastery. Retention of original language and culture is an issue which each family must resolve to its own comfort, but if both are practiced in the home, then retention is likely.

*******

[KK] 9. Citizens in a pluralistic democracy need to
value difference and interact with people of differing
abilities, orientations, ethnicities, cultures, and
dispositions. We need to discard outmoded notions of a
hypothetical norm, and either describe ALL students as
different, or none of them. All classrooms should be
inclusive, meeting the needs of all students, together,
in a way that is just, caring, challenging, and
meaningful.

[DE] It seems to me that inclusion should be tempered by rejection of
disruptive behavior, crossing or violating personal boundaries, and other forms of violence or threats thereof commonly met in the somewhat undisciplined milieu of US elementary and high schools. My brother moved from Seattle to New Zealand last year. He is very pleased with the change in school atmosphere for his two young children, who after the usual initial adjustment patterns, are blossoming like never before. They are happily at work on their studies and projects, in spite of school uniforms, behavioral
expectations, and testing! Mayhem in a place of learning is simply not tolerated there, or in many other countries for that matter.

Not only is there no regard for the experiences of other countries and
cultures in this platform (so much for diversity), but there is no mention of pervasive disruption and what to do about it. Columbine was not that long ago.

*******

[KK] 10. All students should have opportunities to learn
and excel in the fine and performing arts, physical
education and sports, and extra-curricular clubs and
activities, in order to develop the skills of
interaction and responsibility necessary for
participation in a robust civil society.

[DE] Well, something else besides civics is finally on the platform. But nothing is said about "reading, writing, and arithmetic". Nothing is said about reviewing US history, physics, and biology texts, which in many cases contain egregious errors of fact and presentation. Certain team sports are a little overemphasized, even at the expense of physical education itself; those who do not excel do not make the team. I have no real criticism of any of these subjects and activities, but they should not be indulged at the
expense of the core curriculum. And which ones should be chosen of the many possible activities should certainly be a locally funded mandate, with citizen participation in the decisions.

As an example, at one of my high school reunions (Cedar Falls, Iowa), I learned that the town, as a local option, voted in a half-cent on the dollar sales tax to pay for a renovated music auditorium and sound stage at the public high school. It is beautiful and certainly everything a professional production company could ask for. The townspeople are so proud of it. Remember, this is "Music Man" country. Elsewhere, it might be a different choice.

*******

[KK] 11. Teachers and educational leaders need to link their
own interests in the transformation of schooling to a
broad-based movement for social, political, and
economic justice, and work together for the democratic
renewal of public life and public education in America.

[DE] This hyperbole puts the cart a bit before the horse. We need a truly democratic society to realistically support development of truly democratic public schools. This DPS summary is more of a wish than a program.

*******

Kathleen Kesson, E. Wayne Ross, David Gabbard, Sandra
Mathison, and Kevin Vinson are co-editors of the
forthcoming book series that includes Defending Public
Schools: Teaching for a Democratic Society (Kesson);
Defending Public Schools: Schooling and the Rise of the
Security State(Gabbard); Defending Public Schools: The
Nature and Limits of Standards Based Reform and
Assessment (Vinson); Defending Public Schools:
Curriculum and the Challenge of Change (Vinson)
(published by Praeger, 2004).

Kathleen Kesson is Professor of Urban Childhood Education
Long Island University School of Education Department
of Teaching and Learning.

David A. Gabbard is Associate Professor in the Department of
Curriculum and Instruction at the East Carolina University, Greenville.

Sandra Mathison is Professor and Head of the Department of
Educational and Counseling Psychology and Special Education at the
University British Columbia, Vancouver. She has extensive teaching
and publishing experience in the United States.

E. Wayne Ross is Professor in the Department of Curriculum Studies
at the University of British Columbia, Vancouver. He has extensive
experience teaching in U.S. universities, most recently at the University
of Louisville, Kentucky. He is published with Peter Lang, the State
University of New York, Garland, and the American Social Association,
as well as numerous professional journals.

Kevin D. Vinson is Assistant Professor in the Department of Teaching
and Teacher Education at the University of Arizona, Tucson.

David Ecklein is not professor of anything. In ancient times,
he did attend better than average Iowa primary and secondary
public schools (they tested a lot), and holds a BSEE from MIT
(wow, did THEY test!), with all the dueling scars this entails.
See www.diacad.com for more (including a picture of his "personal
computer" circa 1959).