A good deal of my job involves opining about education policy. I try to keep my opinions to research I’ve seen, since I don’t feel I’m old enough to go blathering around…yet. I received this email (edited mostly to protect the author and shorten it to the best bits, not to make him sound any better or worse) this very morning, and thought you would all enjoy.
Dear Ms. Pullman [ the "Ms." is fine, since he doesn't know I'm married, but leaving off the second "n" is unforgivable—some attention to detail, there],
As the 2011 [Florida Location] Teacher of the Year I had to laugh when I saw that an “education research fellow” at the Heartland Institute wrote a letter to the editor in the Palm Beach Post heralding the use of school grades! [expand title="Click the arrow to continue reading."] I received my teaching honor (and many others) precisely because I do NOT buy into the myth that school grades improve public education. [Yes, I'm sure your political ideology makes you a good teacher. In fact, every teacher should agree with you politically and then our nation's teaching woes would be solved.] I actually care about educating kids–not about how much money can be made by privatizing education. [Because I and other Heartland are all grubby rich off children's misfortunes...We wish. About the rich part, not the misfortunes.] I actually use research-based techniques rather than pseudo-science to see that my kids succeed in school. I actually sleep well at night knowing that I am doing my part to keep public education strong and viable. [I suppose he's implying that not only are my title and organization a sham, I must not be able to sleep at night because all the research papers I've cravenly faked are slowly killing small children and stopping their savior, public education.] …
Listen, the last thing that public educators need right now are your smoke and mirrors explanations, pseudo-science, and biased policy statements funded by anti-public school groups like the Walton Family Foundation. [Actually, I don't believe we ARE funded by Wal-Mart, but thanks for the insinuation.] Most of the folks here are savvy enough to understand that schools grades were a Jeb Bush invention designed to weaken public schools and pave the way for charters, vouchers, and other “market driven” solutions. [Horror! Parental freedom!] And most folks are in the know about the Heartland Institute (and if they aren’t, they will be when my letter to the editor is printed). It’s not too tough to question the credibility of any words of wisdom from an “education research fellow” at an organization that disputes global warming (while being funded by Exxon-Mobil) and the effects of secondhand smoke (while being funded by Phillip Morris). [Yes, because global warming and smoking form the demons of your self-created, unfalsifiable religion, I guess.] I have a feeling you won’t be winning the Education Researcher of the Year title any time soon. [Well, he's probably right about that one, but ouch. He will probably never be "Gentleman of the Year," either.]
Please stay out of our local paper. Your “insight” is not welcomed nor respected.
[His name]
[A list of his teaching awards]
Well, thank you, sir. Let’s hope I’d be a little more courteous had I to respond in a public forum.
In order to redeem this post into something truly thought-provoking, let me now point you to two posts from an education blog I read. They are actually much broader, philosophically, than education policy, and concern the two poles of power and truth and realigning public policy in general to see the two complement rather than distort themselves and each other.
Here’s part 1, and here’s part 2. Come back and tell me what you think. I think they offer insight into not only why a possibly excellent teacher still viciously attacks policies that would further recognize his professional achievements and spread them so more kids could have good teachers and schools.
Image by Paul Keller. [/expand]
It is entirely fair to address any woman by “Ms.” It does not indicate marital status in any way and is the counterpart to the male “Mr.” It is especially important to address women as “Ms.” in a professional context, as their marital status has no bearing on their professional life. Anyone who addresses a woman by “Mrs.” in a professional context either grew up before the ’70s, or grew up in a rural area.
I know—I use it myself with women I don’t particularly know and need to address. I just don’t like it terribly much for myself as it seems to convey a little bit of the arch-backed, defensive feminist sort of woman. It does irk me women are denoted by marital status (“Miss” or “Mrs.”) while men always get to be plain old Mr.
It seems to me that the Mr. Greene’s bipolar model of Truth (science) and Power is incomplete. Since omniscience and omnipotence are unavailable to any mere human, our understanding and explanation of what we observe and experience in the world inevitably falls back on faith. A person does not have to be religious to have faith. Even an atheist believes there is no God. An agrarian model may see power and truth as the draft horses pulling the plow while faith holds the reins. Such a model is in no way an attempt to understand or explain the holy Trinity of the Christian faith. Nonetheless, Christians do confess that the Father is almighty, the Son is the Truth and the Holy Spirit creates and sustains faith. Is it not true and powerful to say that this third component is finally what determines the content of education? When two (or more) different faiths hold the reins of power and truth, it is difficult to plow the field effectively.
That’s a good point, dad. I hadn’t thought of it, and of course you would. It reminds me of how the medieval thinkers considered Theology the queen of learning, governing the two other main branches: Science (truth) and Philosophy (power?). I’m not sure I completely understand Mr. Forster’s divisions, but it makes sense to me to think of people within natural divisions of action and thought. And, as you say, faith is what allows us to unite these two ethically and effectively, mediating the excesses and shortcomings of each.
I wonder what Mr. Forster would say, as I believe he is religiously inclined.
A mother of two students in Florida’s public schools, I have found the state’s school grades to be quite misleading and more of a political tool or public relations gimmick than provider of useful information. For example, our Seniors in 2009 scored below the national average on the NAEP in both Reading and Math. Of the 11 participating states, only two other states scored so poorly. The number of highly graded schools and the dismal performance of Florida’s seniors seem inconsistent. While Mr. Bush used to conplain of grade inflation as a pet peeve, it appears he appreciates the abundance of highly graded schools matched with subpar performance. Adding insult to injury, these results were obtained by students with many years of exposure to the Bush strategies. The A is used for schools who make growth with their low performers as well as those with high rates of proficiency. Perhaps the use of a G for thoseschools creating growth rather than an A would have been helpful rather than presenting a far cheerier picture that The grade 12 NAEP results displayed.
Additional concerns relevant ot this flawed system include the use of cutoff scores. Such a choice can be used in creating bubble kids, those children whose score is located near the cutoff, whose small growth would create good data. See Derek Neal’s Proficiency Counts:Left Behind by Design. Thus students may not be equal targets for instruction. It is not the size of the learning gain but the reaching of cutoff scores that make up the major source of learning measurement. Thus, gifted students do not have to grow to be counted as success. They are counted as successes for scoring high on a test they may have been able to pass years ago. Florida’s school grading system is flawed and provides an impression to some parents that may not be helpful at all. It is telling that it continues as studies showing it problematic should be known to those who continue to boast about it. Florida students, teachers, and parents deserve better .
It is a system fraught with oddities. By focusing on cutoff scores rather than size of learning gain, higher graded schools can actually produce smaller sized learning gains than lower graded schools. Studies have shown skewing by socioeconomic status. I suggest your next article be a plea to end this broken system. This would be helpful.