
Special Nite Cap: Catch Up on Today's Post 6/5/17
Featured PostPlan to outlaw for-profit charters hits online ed too :: SI&A Cabinet Report




Tests like the SAT, ACT, the GRE—what I call the alphabet tests—are reasonably good measures of academic kinds of knowledge, plus general intelligence and related skills. They are highly correlated with IQ tests and they predict a lot of things in life: academic performance to some extent, salary, level of job you will reach to a minor extent—but they are very limited. What I suggested in my talk today is that they may actually be hurting us. Our overemphasis on narrow academic skills—the kinds that get you high grades in school—can be a bad thing for several reasons. You end up with people who are good at taking tests and fiddling with phones and computers, and those are good skills but they are not tantamount to the skills we need to make the world a better place.
What I argue is that intelligence that’s not modulated and moderated by creativity, common sense and wisdom is not such a positive thing to have. What it leads to isTesting for Wisdom? | Truth in American Education:
Future teachers: You are entering a low social esteem, often thankless, profession — condescended to by many and ignored by the rest. You’ll get tired of hearing, at your neighborhood barbecues or cocktail parties, that you are “only” a teacher, and you’ll be lectured by complete strangers, with no training in education, on how they could teach better than you. Your students’ parents might be completely disengaged from their children’s lives and of no help in your mission or, possibly worse, over-engaged, telling you how their little Juan is unique and must be treated with special care — implying all your other students are interchangeable. While lecturing you on the importance of treating students with sensitivity and respect, the school’s administration might treat you with neither.
A commencement speech aims to uplift graduates as they enter the workforce; sorry, kids, I’ll earn an “F” on that score.Future teachers: You are entering a low social esteem, often thankless, profession — condescended to by many and ignored by the rest. You’ll Commencement speaker warns graduates: ‘You are entering a low social esteem, often thankless, profession’ - The Washington Post:

Precisely because political economy (education policy) fails to grasp the interconnections within the movement (education), it was possible to oppose, for example, the doctrine of competition (school choice movement) to the doctrine of monopoly (school resource allocation) the doctrine of craft freedom (charter schools) to the doctrine of the guild (industrialists and elites) and the doctrine of the division of landed property (school funding formulas based on property values) to the doctrine of the great estate (school district boundaries), for competition (market-based school choice) craft freedom (charter schools), and division of landed property (school funding formulas based on property values) were developed and conceived only as accidental, deliberate, violent consequences of monopoly (school resource allocation), of the guilds (industrialists and elites) of feudal property (segregation of education resources), and not as their necessary, inevitable, and natural consequences.
It’s hard to think of a better poster child for “conscious capitalism” than [charter schools]. These days, the [for-profit charters] are floundering and a potential buyout is on the horizon. What does that say about the conscious capitalism it championed?[Enrollments] have declined for six straight quarters, [millions of students] walked away during the same period. Last month activist hedge fund funds swooped in buying up 8.3% of [for-profit charters] and demanded an overhaul. The [for-profit charter chains] responded by reshuffling boards, bringing in a handful of big box retail stars and promoting [individuals] who hail from private equity.A failing [school] isn’t exactly news. In the dog-eat-dog world of global capitalism lots of [schools] have their moment in the sun only to crash and burn a few years later.But [charter schools] were supposed to be different.[Charter school proponents] have long argued that [charters] are wired differently — that they runs on a “conscious capitalism” model that outsmarts the competitive pressures of our [neighborhood public schools] through creativity and innovation.[There is a] growing consensus that [for-profit education] is doing irreparable harm to [communities] and the people who live in them. Our for-profit system is increasingly viewed as a zero-sum game in which [neighborhood] destruction and rising inequality are firmly linked to the rapacious behavior of corporations.Free-market [choice], according to [charter school proponents], is actually a “beautiful”, “heroic” system that, properly harnessed, can operate “in harmony with the fundamentals of human nature” and communities.We don’t need to rein in [charter schools] through onerous labor [agreements] and regulations, because the virtuous feedback loop of honoring stakeholders plus innovation will leave “unconscious” [schools] in the dust.The conscious capitalism model is appealing. It’s simple, easy. We can avert looming [community] catastrophe by becoming conscious consumers who frequent conscious [charter schools]. After all, [attend school at charter] is a heck of a lot more fun than lobbying for regulations on [charter schools]. More [charters], less [neighborhood schools]. Problem solved.[Charter school proponents] were right about one thing: people do love to [enroll their children] at [charter schools] – or at least, they used to. These days that demon called competition has caught up with the [community-based charters]. [Large, for-profit] behemoth [charter school chains] now offer [franchise schools in all fifty states].The point of this dour appraisal is not to crow over [charters] misfortune. It’s to take a hard look at models that claim to solve the ills of capitalism without challenging the in-built drives of our for-profit system.[Charter proponents] have loudly declared unions akin to herpes and state regulation little more than “crony capitalism” – that all we need to solve community crises are better, smarter, “conscious” capitalists. The crisis of [charter schools] belies this notion. There’s no way to “fix” corporations’ compulsion to produce ever more, ever more cheaply. It’s written into the DNA of global capitalism.Attractive as the conscious capitalism model may be, we simply can’t rely on companies to deliver dignified workplaces, equitable models of [education].All [students] are not equal in our global economy, and even the best intentioned [schools] run up against the implacable foes of profit and competition. Ultimately, the thorny problem of sustaining both decent livelihoods and a livable [communities] won’t be solved by [market-based approaches to schools]. It’ll be solved through political struggle and demands that put people before profit.

Nationwide, state-funded preschool program enrollment reached an all-time high, serving nearly 1.5 million children, 32 percent of 4-year-olds and 5 percent of 3-year-olds. State funding for preschool rose 8 percent to about $7.4 billion, a $564 million increase. State funding per child increased to $4,976, exceeding pre-recession levels for the first time. Six state funded preschool programs met all 10 current quality standards benchmarks. Nine states had programs that met fewer than half; and seven states do not fund preschool at all.




Richard Phelps writes in The Education Writers Association casts its narrowing gaze on Boston, May 1-3:
An organization claiming to represent and support all US education journalists sets up shop in Boston next week for its annual “National Seminar”. The Education Writers Association’s (EWA’s) national seminars introduce thousands of journalists to sources of information and expertise. Many sessions feature journalists talking with other journalists. Some sessions host teachers, students, or administrators in “reports from the front lines” type panel discussions. But, the remaining and most ballyhooed sessions feature non-journalist experts on education policy fronting panels with, typically, a journalist or two hosting. Allegedly, these sessions interpret “all the research”, and deliver truth, from the smartest, most enlightened on earth.Given its central role, and the profession it represents, one would expect diligence from EWA in representing all sides and evidence. Indeed, EWA claims a central purpose “to help journalists get the story right.”


