« On Rape | Main | My New Piece at The Nation on Pre-K "Testing" »

July 01, 2011

Comments

Also, Finland is all unionized.

I appreciate your thoughts. Thanks for posting this provocative essay.

I always cringe when I see the progressive stance characterized as "there's no use in focusing on school reform until we beat poverty and fix health care, child care, and the like." (By saying there are few, you may agree, but I am not sure). I think it is true that purely top-down solutions ignore those issues at their peril (and will simply not be effective w/o taking those into account). But the reforms that progressives seek are largley NOT top-down reforms. Current top-down approaches are preventing the sort of classroom/community-based (and research-backed) reforms that progressives would LOVE to see the focus turn to. Lets get cracking on real reform, but the obstacles (NCLB) need to be cleared for us to do so.

Thanks for the great write-up of the basic drawbacks of test-based reform, Dana. I've struggled to find a succinct summary.

Anyways, I was wondering if you had any thoughts on charter school accountability, as potentially illustrated by the recent incident in Philly:
http://www.npr.org/2011/06/27/137444337/what-happens-when-charter-schools-fail

Namely, is this a dynamic more common with charter schools than others? Do charter CEOs tend to have less oversight & accountability? If so, does that represent a quantitatively greater danger to true progress in education than the alleged lack of accountability of teachers that is dominating the discussion right now?

Good read.

The comments to this entry are closed.