Skip to main content

Once again: it is all the teachers' fault

Maybe if we say it again and again, education "reform" advocates appear to think, people will finally believe that the most dysfunctional part of our public education system is not the US Department of Education, not No Child Left Behind, not Race to the Top, not Wall Street data coaches, not Vision 2015, not tests that don't actually employ reliability and validity, not inadequate funding models, not the withdrawal of School Resource Officers, not the elimination of the Minner Reading Teachers, not the failure to fund special education, not the creation of a charter "slush" fund, not the emphasis on high-stakes testing that lacks any real research base ...

Nope.

None of those.

Once again the News Journal editorial page places the blame squarely where it belongs:

It's all the teachers' fault.

Who knew that nice Ms. So-and-so who spent all those extra hours working with your son who can't quite read up to grade level was really plotting to leave him illiterate?

Who knew that passionate Mr. What's-his-name who sponsors the yearbook, works with after-school study groups, and calls parents at night and on weekends because he can't get them during the business day was secretly part of the Educators Illuminati?

Who knew that Coach Growler who laid down the law to his football front line that if they didn't pass algebra they weren't playing on Friday night was a conspirator deftly undermining America's potential educational success?

The News Journal knew.

The Rodel Foundation knew.

Governor Markell knew.

It's all the teacher's fault.

Oh, and Matt Damon's.  Don't forget him.  In one impromptu thirty-second set of remarks the actor appears to have driven a stake into the heart of public education.

And here I just thought he made mediocre movies.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...