OP-ED | A Few Thoughts On Education Reform
by Sarah Darer Littman | May 4, 2012 2:47pm
(29) Comments | Commenting has expired
Posted to: Opinion
As the education reform debate comes to a head in our state, I hope our legislators and the people of Connecticut will think long and hard about what constitutes education and the true nature of learning, not just for our state, but for the entire country.
Let’s have a look at how some of Connecticut’s “reformers” view education. Here’s a post from ConnCAN CEO Patrick Riccards’ blog about the “13 Most Useless College Majors.” They include most of the liberal arts majors, like English, Political Science, Philosophy. History, Fine Arts, etc.
I find this incredibly short sighted. It’s the sign of someone who doesn’t understand what makes young people tick, what’s more, what our nation requires of its workforce to be successful in the 21st Century global economy. It’s symptomatic of what’s wrong with the entire corporate reform movement and our country’s current education policy.
Look at the company with a $600 billion market capitalization, Apple Computer. It was led by a man who attributed a major part of his success to auditing a course in calligraphy. Not all Fortune 500 CEO’s were STEM or business majors. In fact, in an article in Business Week Peter Crist of executive search firm Crist Kolder Associates spoke of the advantage liberal arts graduates have over those with undergraduate degrees in business or the STEM subjects: an expansive and inquiring mind, without which the leap from middle management to the top job is impossible. “I don’t believe leaders are born,” Crist says. “I believe over a long period of time, leadership traits are imbued in an individual.” One of the ways that this happens is through studying literature, history and philosophy – the history of big ideas.
Last night on Twitter, Jeff Klaus, husband of Achievement First CEO Dacia Toll, responded to the statement “Education reforms do not have to be paid for with bargaining rights” with this. It’s not the first time Klaus has compared educators, teachers or those opposed to provisions of SB24 with a slavery analogy. This isn’t just astonishing and offensive, but if we consider the true meaning and value of an education, one has to wonder who is really fighting for what is best for our kids.
Two weeks ago, Darryl Robinson, a graduate of DC charter schools, an eloquent, passionate op-ed in the Washington Post, in which he spoke about how he felt his schools had failed to prepare him for college: “I did what I’d been taught growing up in school: memorize and regurgitate information. Other Georgetown freshmen from better schools had been trained to form original, concise thoughts within a breath, to focus less on remembering every piece of information, word for word, and more on forming independent ideas. I was not. I could memorize and recite facts and figures, but I didn’t know how to think for myself. Now, in an attempt to think deeper, I sometimes overthink myself into silence.”
Gov. Dannel P. Malloy’s stated attitude towards reform is: “I’ll settle for teaching to the test if it means raising scores.”
The reason why so many teachers and parents oppose the original form of this bill is because we’re not willing to settle. We aren’t “plantation owners.” We believe all children are more than their test scores and with equitable funding (which, contrary to CCER’s misinformation, was a major factor in reducing the achievement gap in Massachusetts) they can learn not just to read and perform mathematical calculations, but more importantly to think critically about the world around them and become lifelong learners. Far from wanting to keep kids in “slavery”, we don’t want to sell them short by believing they should be taught to a test.
Sarah Darer Littman is a columnist and an award-winning novelist of books for teens. Long before the financial meltdown, she worked as a securities analyst and earned her MBA in Finance from the Stern School at NYU
Tags: education reform, Patrick Riccards, Jeff Klaus, Sarah Darer Littman, liberal arts, critical thinking
(29) Comments
posted by: brutus2011 | May 4, 2012 5:58pm
I still believe that the true obstacle to the improvement of student learning is the management structure of our public schools.
This structure is top-down with the allocation of funds diffused throughout the layers above the classroom until what should be spent on the bottom is not—or simply put, administrative costs are skimmed from the top.
For proof, examine any mid to large municipal budget to see that the education portion is roughly one-half.
This is astonishing when you consider that everyone agrees that the kids are not learning what they should.
But our education managers, both public and private, are intent upon keeping their, and their friend’s, jobs come heck or high water.
And who are the scapegoats?
Teachers—the ones with no power to change the structure of the public education system but the ones who are made to shoulder the entire accountability.
If teacher’s unions are to blame in this, it is that they have allowed the administrators and education managers to frame the issue with teachers as the patsies.
I also still believe teachers could take over the implementation of the curriculum in their individual schools at a far greater return on investment than what is in place now.
But then what do I know?
posted by: CONconn | May 4, 2012 10:55pm
Thank you for continuing to prove that Jeff Klaus knows nothing about teaching and learning. But who can blame him for making such ridiculous attacks? His wife stands to make a fortune if the “reformers” have their way.
posted by: BeckyTyrrell | May 5, 2012 1:38am
It is a popular conclusion that the problem with school funding is too much administration. This is not true, compare the ratio of managers to staff they oversee and you will find education has generally one of the highest ratios. Compare education to other “businesses” and you will find education to be one of the most heavily mandated fields second only to healthcare. Good administrators are leaders who give teachers the structure to do what they do best. As far as the portion of the municipal budget that is attributed to education, think about it. The municipal side provides highly necessary services that require far less employees and more equipment. The education side requires people, teachers, paraprofessionals, psychologists, nurses, cafeteria workers and yes, administrators. Someone smarter than I explained it this way, school districts are like pyramids, simply removing a piece only weakens the structure.
Full disclose, I am a school Board member, so as a volunteer layman who has children in the schools and pays taxes in my community I am very aware of the cost of education. I, and most Board members I know, work to ensure that our tax dollars are spent to improve the quality of education and inspire out students.
posted by: Linda12 | May 5, 2012 6:37am
Sarah,
Without the high stakes test, the “reform” movement has nothing. Everything is based on the test: preparing for the test, taking
practice tests, the testing days and then testing the next test. The main purpose of the test will be to evaluate get rid of teachers.
Breeding a nation of test takers will not make more career and college ready young adults.
But they have nothing without the high stakes test and they have memorized their talking points and they are sticking to them. It sounds good to the masses and the uniformed.
We lose so much valuable time to test prep, testing and using the kids for guinea pigs to test the next test.
If SB24 passes as originally designed I would not sacrifice my child to a public school education in CT.
These charter takeovers would never fly in a Wesport, Avon or Greenwich.
The philanthrocapitalists, who would never send their kids to public school, are experimenting on the children of the poor.
posted by: ctperson13 | May 5, 2012 7:53am
Sarah—is there something missing from your paragraph re Jeff Klaus—ie. his statement? I find that paragraph confusing.
That said, thank you for highlighting more of the incorrect and harmful thinking behind this “reform movement.”
posted by: GoatBoyPHD | May 5, 2012 10:35am
Let’s get into the origins of the CT testing programs: accountability, social promotion and drop outs.
Teachers in 9th grade isolated their largest instructional problemwas students unprepared to perform the work required. The pressure to graduate 8th graders and kick the can to another school (a transition) was a prevalent and correctable practivce. It was a teachers v teachers thing with the High Schools blaming the drop out rates in large part to the lack of student preparation downstream,
CT’s passed legislation periodically to address the problem:
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2001/act/Pa/2001PA-00166-R00SB-01175-PA.htm
A summary of relevant CT legislation from 1980 to 2005.
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2005/rpt/2005-R-0020.htm
I agree with Brutus whhch is why I support parental vouchers. Let the parents choose their teachers.
posted by: lkulmann | May 5, 2012 11:15am
Believe it or not, teachers have just been empowered in CT. Parents have been heard loud and clear. I know how the system works and there needs to be real change in public education. Obviously, upper management is going to stand their ground and teachers will continue to be used as scapegoats UNLESS you prove them wrong. If teachers and parents work together advocating for classroom needs for the kids and you meet resistance from management, speak out…everyone is listening. Parents and teachers must stick together and exclude management until you are sure they on the same page. In my experience, many managers/supervisors just put
bandaids on some big wounds that
require major surgical intervention just
to keep the peace. No more bandaids
please, fix the problems long term.
Demand better for your kids!
posted by: Reasonable | May 5, 2012 2:21pm
Sarah: Darryl Robinson’s failure to think for himself, does not necesarily mean the school system did not prepare him for college. He may have had a memory problem that a school system can’t be blamed for. No one likes to admit to personal faults. It’s easier to blame someone else.
posted by: brutus2011 | May 5, 2012 6:20pm
to “BeckyTyrrell:” If you are the current President of the Plainville BOE, then I thank you for your service to your community.
I respectfully disagree with your analysis of the appropriateness of administrative function in our public schools.
I think our major perspective difference can be found in the demographic difference between Plainville and New Haven. (Plainville’s population is 14% of New Haven’s [17K v. 123K] and Plainville’s median income is 66% greater than New Haven’s [58K v. 38K])
New Haven has a peculiar political situation in that the incumbent mayor has been in office for 2 decades and has, predictably, erected a patronage system that extends into the public school district. I doubt that Plainville has such a toxic political situation to deal with concerning its schools.
As to your pyramid analogy, I believe that it is flawed relative to modeling public school management in that it only works when applied to the top-down model as employed by many school districts today.
Consider inverting the current top-down model and making management culture conform to a bottom-up collaboration as opposed to the current top-down dictatorial way of doing things.
Think of the savings on salaries, health benefits, and the real biggie, administrative pensions.
Think of the creativity and innovation released by allowing teachers to set the structures of the learning environment that so many administrators are afraid to take leadership and handle to the benefit to all in our schools.
And if you think teachers would run amok if there was an absence of managerial authority, then you do not know my colleagues. Teachers are the one group who can police themselves better than any manager.
Anyway, I hope that you might discuss some of my ideas with your school district.
Real school reform should begin with consideration of resource allocation at the classroom level—not from the top and layers in- between.
posted by: Reasonable | May 5, 2012 7:11pm
Ikullman: It’s easy to say that teachers should proceed with a difficult task of working togerether with parents—when 60% of the students come from one parent homes. Sometimes, things that look good on paper—are very difficult to achieve, but we have to keep trying.
posted by: mpalmer | May 5, 2012 7:22pm
When talking about teaching to the test, as in all things public money, follow the money.
Who makes money on designing, approving and promoting the tests? Who sells the textbooks that teach to the test? Who makes money on designing, approving and promoting the curriculum that determines what textbooks are approved? If you teach to the test, it can be a very predictable market.
Multiply the number of textbooks by the number of students in each target audience yearly. Then look at the programs and materials for administrators, teachers, paras, etc. etc. etc.
Education is an income stream. Teachers who teach kids how to learn (as adults) are not a quantifiable income source for materials suppliers. They don’t teach tests.
posted by: saramerica | May 5, 2012 8:27pm
Ctperson: I think it’s because the link should be on “this” rather than “responded”. Link goes to Klaus’ response on Twitter, which reads: “that’s like saying in 1864 that we can abolish slavery without affecting plantation owners rights.”
posted by: ctperson13 | May 6, 2012 6:54am
Becky Tyrrell,
Education is not a business. Children are not widgets. You have bought into a philosophy that has been sold quite effectively over the past couple of decades by corporate philanthro-profiteers such as Bill Gates, Eli Broad and the Walton family. Attempting to run public education the same way that a business is run is part of the reason that we are in this mess in the first place. People like Bill Gates (who doesn’t even have a college degree, by the way) need to keep their controlling, egotistical noses out of education and stick to business.
mpalmer—Agree with you 100%. Testing, books, workbooks—all the trendy educational “tools” that REAL educators know are actually harming the learning environment—are making people tons of money. What a surprise that Bill Gates is promoting more and more technology in the classroom—heck, he wants to replace teachers with online learning in some cases. Who are the people that are going to profit from this trend? Is there any clear evidence that technology is actually conducive to learning? My gut instinct tells me that I’d rather have my children interacting with other human beings than a computer screen. How about you?
posted by: Reasonable | May 6, 2012 11:38am
brutus2011: “You missed the boat” when you stated that “the obstacle to the improvement of student learning is the management structure of public schools.” The true obstacles are TEACHER UNIONS though their mandated annual contracted union raises—that continue to force board of education cuts in their annual budgets—that result in teacher layoffs and reduced education programs.
“Let’s not pussyfoot around Brutus, and call a spade a spade!” Unions have contibuted greatly to sending our business and industry AND JOBS, overseas—and are forcing cuts in our educational system—through forced, mandated raises.
Nothing will happen as long as leaders like Pres. Barack Obama and Gov. Dannel Malloy—continue to “go to bed with the unions!”
posted by: Linda12 | May 6, 2012 2:20pm
To CTperson13 and other readers. Silicon Valley techies send their kids to traditional schools where they use BOOKS!
Silicon Valley CEOs Send Children to Computer-Free Waldorf Schools
By admin | Published Monday, October 24
The New York Times published an article that looks at why many Silicon Valley tech wizards send their children to Waldorf schools, where children do not use computers. Technology experts say they believe technology has it’s time and place. Here is a clip from the article:
http://watersedgewaldorf.org/silicon-valley-ceos-send-children-computer-free-waldorf-schools/
posted by: CONconn | May 6, 2012 3:18pm
Thank you, Reasonable, for contributing yet another unreasonable anti-union rant that is devoid of substance of an understanding of what is actually happening with this “reform” movement.
posted by: lkulmann | May 6, 2012 4:03pm
@reasonable…whether a child comes from a single parent home or a 2 parent home is a non issue. WHOEVER has legal responsibility sending this kid to school every day is who you can deal with if needed. You are responsible to educate these kids while in school. You’re it! Unless kids are hatched, the home they come from is not your concern. If there are social issues,, turf it to SS. If parents could care less about there kids education, its still your job to teach the kids and like it. Let me give you an example as to how that would work in healthcare. If there was an elderly person in a nursing home who had no one…no family, friends. We still take care of him and if anything, we give a little extra TLC and become his family. Stop bickering about what should be and deal with what it is….already….Ughhhh
posted by: ctperson13 | May 6, 2012 4:31pm
Reasonable—
Union-mandated raised aren’t necessitating BOE cuts. Stop regurgitating what you hear from the corporate-elite-controlled mainstream media. BOE budgets are being cut because districts are being inadequately funded. And what funding they ARE receiving is being largely sucked up by ever-expanding administrative positions which pay between 2 and 4 times what the average teacher makes. A situation, by the way, that will worsen EXPONENTIALLY if Gov. Dan gets his way.
Re. Companies shipping manufacturing jobs overseas…Again, BULLSH@$! Corporations (WalMart, anyone?) are shipping jobs overseas because they care only about making as much profit as possible. They don’t give a crap if employees in China are working under horrific conditions, or whether lax environmental regulations in developing countries are destroying the planet. In a sense I guess you’re right. Without unions greedy, immoral giants like WalMart would be able to pay people in U.S. factories despicably low wages, and thus keep jobs here in this country. The problem is not UNIONS—the problem is immoral, pathological GREED!
posted by: BeckyTyrrell | May 6, 2012 6:04pm
To ctperson,
I think you may have misunderstood my comments. If you noticed I place the “businesses” in quotations because I believe education should NOT be compared to business. I was trying to make a point about the assumption that school systems are top-heavy. I had the honor to speak to our staff at convocation a few years ago and the basis of my comments came directly from Jamie Vollmer’s blueberry story. I get that what schools do is precious and very misunderstood.
To Brutus, yes…you have identified me 
You are absolutely right that New Haven and Plainville are very different places and I agree that given your situation I might have a whole different opinion. I guess this reinforces why the fed and state governments should keep the one size fits nobody solutions to themselves and give local districts the ability and funding to fly. If we don’t, then we need to accountable.
posted by: CONconn | May 6, 2012 10:21pm
Jeff Klaus’ comment comparing teachers to slave owners is the single most disgusting comment made in this history of the “reform” movement. It reeks of last minute desperation the corporate education pirates must be feeling, knowing that it’s starting to look like Achievement First may not be seeing the cash grab of millions they were expecting.
posted by: ctperson13 | May 7, 2012 6:46am
Becky Tyrrell,
I’d never heard of the Vollmer story so I googled it and read it. That’s a wonderful story. But I’m confused—if you agree that a school is not a “business,” why are you comparing education to other businesses to make your point? Ie comparing administrators to other “managers?” And I would have to disagree with you re administrators—there seems to be a trend toward increasing the number of high-paid administrators in public school systems. Often, these are people with little classroom experience who make between 2 and 4 times what the average teacher makes. They eat up tremendous portions of budgets that could otherwise go toward the people who could actually make a difference in terms of reducing class sizes and contributing to the learning environment. In my small suburban town, we have a full-time supt. for 946 elementary students. Then we have two principals, an asst. principal, a director of sp. ed., a curriculum and technology specialist. All making six figures or more (the supt., when you figure in all of her perks, makes about $150K). 150K!!! We could pay THREE additional teachers for what this woman gets paid. Yet the two elementary schools are now sharing one Challenge and Enrichment teacher. I have a child who has been identified as academically gifted. I would rather our limited resources be dedicated to a teacher who can spend dedicated time enriching his learning environment than to a woman who appears to spend most of her time trumpeting the results of the latest CMT test round.
Eli Broad (real estate billionaire) started a foundation that trains school administrators. Please read this article. They are disrupting districts all over the country. Please read this article:
http://parentsacrossamerica.org/2011/04/a-guide-to-the-broad-foundations-training-programs-and-policies/
There is a nationwide trend toward funneling resources into high-paid administrative types, while simultaneously keeping down the “costs” for the teaching force. Please don’t buy into it.
posted by: ctperson13 | May 7, 2012 6:58am
Linda12—thank you or the article re techies and their non-techie schools. I’ve been arguing against the allocation of precious resources toward tech for several years. Think I’ll send this to the members of my town’s BOE.
posted by: Linda12 | May 7, 2012 8:19am
Once again to CT person and others….read the Waldorf school philosophy…isn’t that we are all striving for and not solely the creation if a test prep nation.
On another note read this NY times article from this weekend. Pearson, the company with the absurd pineapple question and the recipient of a 32 million dollar contract with the state of NY, is now trying to come up with a systemized and outsourced procedure to approve of teacher licensing. And this of course would have to be contracted through them and it will become a new way to rip off the taxpayers via the new education industry.
What other systems can they create to raid the public education coffers?
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/07/education/new-procedure-for-teaching-license-draws-protest.html?hpw
posted by: saramerica | May 7, 2012 12:57pm
I would urge all of you who care about more than teaching to the test to check out http://parentsacrossamerica.org/. We are just in the process of forming a chapter in CT, galvanized by what we’ve seen transpire in the ed reform debate.
posted by: brutus2011 | May 7, 2012 2:46pm
to “saramerica:” Great news! Please keep us/me informed about the parents across america Ct chapter.
One of the main reasons I post is to share my experience as an educator and also as one who was a successful student.
When I went into education I thought it was about erudition and uplifting others and I was so excited.
What I found was cronyism, patronage, administrative shenanigans, outright lies to keep jobs, alcoholism, jobs for sexual favors, and a system that purported to be about kids but really prioritized the adults.
Now do I knock my fellow teachers? No, I think the majority of us truly want and try to make a positive difference.
Do I knock administrators and managers? Yes, because the financial incentive generally replaces the good motives of those that they manage. Add local politics to the mix and you have the dysfunctional public education system we have today.
And it is dysfunctional because most parents and citizens have no real idea of what goes on and those who run the failing school districts work very hard to make sure that what really is happening is opaque.
It really is simple but is made to be complex through the wonders of information asymmetry.
Anyway, the more parents and citizens become aware of the extent of the dysfunction of our public schools then the closer we are to forcing our elected representatives and local elected officials to honor the public trust.
It has been said that education reform is the greatest civil rights issue of our time.
I disagree.
Education is the greatest issue of our time because the survival of our republic, indeed our way of life, many very well depend on if we get this right.
posted by: ctperson13 | May 7, 2012 3:04pm
Sarah,
Thank you. I’ve ended up at the Parents site a couple of times in my search for more information.
Linda12—In regards to Pearson, check this out—apparently the NY Times has accused the Pearson Foundation of partnering with the CCSSO in order to help the “business side” of Pearson win contracts. I know that CCSSO came up on Jon Pelto’s blog. Wasn’t CT intially going to funnel money through the CCSSO, and then decided to funnel it instead through the SSEC. This was related to those no-bid contracts of Pryor’s, right? Maybe the NY Times attention prompted Pryor to change his mind regarding who he’d choose for his partner in crime?
posted by: ctperson13 | May 7, 2012 3:08pm
Oh, and surprise, surprise—here’s a little piece on how the Pearson Foundation has partnered with Bill and Melinda Gates:
http://www.pearsoned.com/pearson-foundation-partners-bill-melinda-gates-foundation-create-digital-learning-programs/
posted by: GoatBoyPHD | May 7, 2012 4:29pm
Linda12,
It’s good to see you come out in favor of Charter Schools like Waldorf. Waldorf, as you know, is pro-school choice. Preferably independent tax credit funded. Pro-voucher and Pro Charter when part of a public system and classified as Waldorf-style.
Waldorf does use technology in Middle School and up where applicable to their training method.
