Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Smarmie Doofus

(14,498 posts)
Tue May 21, 2013, 09:10 AM May 2013

Astounding NY Times Editorial Spells Doom For Ed Deform

>>Astounding NY Times Editorial Spells Doom for Ed Deform: Was Brent Staples Absent Today?
UPDATED WITH LEONIE's VIEWS:

...while charter schools can be a path to excellence, they can also cause problems. Shoehorning them into existing school buildings over local objections can alienate parents and reinforce among students a harmful sense of being separate and unequal.

Mr. Bloomberg’s schools chancellor, Dennis Walcott, called the criticism an “unconscionable” assault on the Education Department... after 12 years, this mayor’s ideas are due for a counterargument. The critiques the candidates are offering hardly shock the conscience, and their complaints about the Bloomberg administration can be heard from teachers and parents in any school in the city. ... NY Times editorial

After 12 years of outright support of Bloomberg ed policies and for ed deform in general, along with some of the worst coverage of local and national education issues (other than when Anna Phillips was reporting for a year), this editorial is a sign that the increasing messages of outrage emerging from every area of the city are reaching their mark. Staples has been the most adamant supporter of deform and a union basher to boot. I hope he brings an absence note.>>>

Norm Scott at Ed Notes. I was kind of shocked by this also. Pretty much an across the board admission that everything that paper's been advocating ( successfully) for over the last 12 years is a fiesta de failure. Or... as close to an admission that we're ever going to see.

So now what? Back to letting teachers teach and to letting people who understand how schools function actually RUN them? Probably too much to hope for.

Here's the rest: http://ednotesonline.blogspot.com/2013/05/astounding-ny-times-editorial-spells.html

3 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Astounding NY Times Editorial Spells Doom For Ed Deform (Original Post) Smarmie Doofus May 2013 OP
If wishes were horses, then beggars would ride. FBaggins May 2013 #1
Yeah, "Education Reform" Addison May 2013 #2
i think there's some hope; they're clearly feeling pressure from below. paul vallas, who HiPointDem May 2013 #3

FBaggins

(26,697 posts)
1. If wishes were horses, then beggars would ride.
Tue May 21, 2013, 09:29 AM
May 2013

With both sides of the aisle pushing this stuff... a NYTimes editorial doesn't carry enough weight to "doom" anything.

Addison

(299 posts)
2. Yeah, "Education Reform"
Wed May 22, 2013, 07:06 PM
May 2013

has been a controversial topic for, oh, about a hundred years or more.

won't be going away anytime soon.

 

HiPointDem

(20,729 posts)
3. i think there's some hope; they're clearly feeling pressure from below. paul vallas, who
Sun May 26, 2013, 05:25 AM
May 2013

Last edited Sun May 26, 2013, 06:39 AM - Edit history (1)

pushed through ed deform in several big city districts, is now running around bad-mouthing it.

here's another report from the trenches:

It used to be that a handful of teachers at department meetings would be on board with the latest reform jive. They could be counted on to talk the talk, use the jargon, and just generally get excited about whatever the latest greatest education fad was that the DOE was trying to sell us.

This year I have noticed that not one teacher in my department is excited about the latest greatest fad - Danielson and Common Core. Even the teachers who did some of the Common Core PD a few years ago and were first excited about the reforms have turned on them.

I warned teachers in my school a few years ago that these reforms were not being done with us, they were being done to us. I told people that they were meant to make it easier to scapegoat teachers for all the problems in the school system and ultimately fire a whole bunch of us.

A few years ago, many teachers in my department didn't see the reform movement that way. But now when I say these kinds of things, people just nod their heads and agree.

They know Danielson isn't meant to improve teaching - it's meant to give administrators an easy tool to fire teachers. Similarly, Common Core is not seen as something meant to improve academic achievement but is seen as yet one more underfunded mandate that is being used to scapegoat teachers for all the ills in the system.

Maybe this is the way the DOE and the NYSED and the Regents want it - everybody so beaten down and demoralized that our PD department meetings sometimes resemble a prisoner of war camp. But I wonder how it is they think that can push these reforms through with almost no teachers on board with them other than a handful of teachers either too naive or too green to see the agenda behind the movement.

There is nobody sitting in these meetings who believes the reform jive at face value anymore.

Nobody.

http://perdidostreetschool.blogspot.com/2013/05/theyve-lost-everybody.html
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Education»Astounding NY Times Edito...