Time's Person of the Year: Barack Obama

As if it would be anybody else (click here for article).

A Call to Education Journalists

Alexander Russo calls out to education journalists to do their job regarding the potential new Education Secretary:

"Do your jobs, reporters and editors. Bug someone who was on the working committee into talking to you, or report that they won’t. Track down Wendy Kopp and ask her straight out what she thinks about Darling-Hammond or Duncan (or Rhee, for that matter). Look up campaign donation records and tell us what you find. FOIA some shit. Sending out a few emails and rehashing tired claims or old speeches just doesn’t cut it."

This is an interesting piece, and I am always in favor of journalists in any area "doing their jobs". And I love the "FOIA some shit" line. Just as interesting though is the comments section to this article which debates the necessity of Russo's suggestions.

For my own two cents in this debate, I feel that education journalists should be taken just as seriously as journalists in other fields, but they aren't. The reason it doesn't is that, sadly, education in general doesn't get taken as seriously as an issue as it should be. This is not to say that there aren't issues just as important, and even more important, than education (i.e. the economy, war) But if we valued education as much as we should, we would see just as much speculation about Education Secretary as we do about Secretary of State, Defense, and Treasury. Instead, the speculation is left to us who are wonks, experts, and education bloggers/journalists.

D.C. Reacts to Rhee's Time Cover

Some people are happy about Rhee's Time cover because it brings more support and attention to reforming the D.C. Public School (and reforming the nation's education system in general). Other's aren't fans. A quote from the by Cathy Reilly, head of the Senior High Alliance of Parents, Principals and Educators from the Washington Post:

"I don't know what she was thinking," Reilly said. "I don't think sweeping things out is the way to go, and that way of relating to people metaphorically sends a message right down to the children."

Overall, the Post article was filled with mixed on reactions to the Time cover.

More of the Same

In my earlier post on Michelle Rhee and her Time cover, I compared her to Crazy Joe Clark of Lean on Me fame. Then there is this cover from 1988 with the real Joe Clark on it. How funny is that?

The Ball Buster

I am referring to the woman in the picture above, D.C. School Chancellor Michelle Rhee. Some might gasp at such a description, but I can't think of a more appropriate description. Michelle Rhee is a ball buster. And yes, you do need a ball buster to do the job that Ms. Rhee is trying to do. For better or worse, she is now the de facto face of education reform in this country.

Certainly, she has a tough task at hand, and no one can doubt that she needs to get tough to do it. But there is also a lot of room to worry. This part of the Time article has already given a lot of people pause, including myself:

"In many private encounters with officials, bureaucrats and even fundraisers–who have committed millions of dollars to help her reform the schools–she doesn’t smile or nod or do any of the things most people do to put others at ease. She reads her BlackBerry when people talk to her. I have seen her walk out of small meetings held for her benefit without a word of explanation. She says things most superintendents would not. “The thing that kills me about education is that it’s so touchy-feely,” she tells me one afternoon in her office. Then she raises her chin and does what I come to recognize as her standard imitation of people she doesn’t respect. Sometimes she uses this voice to imitate teachers; other times, politicians or parents. Never students. “People say, ‘Well, you know, test scores don’t take into account creativity and the love of learning,’” she says with a drippy, grating voice, lowering her eyelids halfway. Then she snaps back to herself. “I’m like, ‘You know what? I don’t give a crap.’ Don’t get me wrong. Creativity is good and whatever. But if the children don’t know how to read, I don’t care how creative you are. You’re not doing your job.”

Fair enough, but standardized tests also don't take into account the seriousness with which most students take them given there is no link between the test scores and grades. Don't even get me started with the issue of human grading of more subjective test questions. And as far as education being too "touchy-feely", students are not robots. People, especially young people, are highly emotional, and complex beings that come from numerous different backgrounds. They respond to different methods of teaching, discipline, evaluation, etc. in different ways. Don't get me wrong, there should be strong discipline, tough standards, and accountability. But it isn't so black and white.

Another concern with Rhee that myself and others have is that she may go too far in trying to shake things up. Yes, things need to be shaken up, but how much is too much? Robert Pondiscio makes a better argument than I can on this point:

"Here’s what worries me: accurate or inaccurate, fair or unfair, the increasingly confrontational, impatient, blunt, even rude public persona that’s affixing itself to the Washington, DC schools chancellor runs the risk of getting in the way of what Michelle Rhee wants to accomplish. I’ll put it bluntly: piss off enough people whose help is essential to your success, and your failure becomes inevitable, a consummation devoutly to be wished. Then for years to come, the answer to the reforms anyone proposes becomes, “Oh yes, we tried that in Washington under Michelle Rhee and you remember how that worked out.” If she fails, Michelle Rhee’s failure will not be hers alone. At worst, she runs the risk of damaging the ed reform “brand” for a generation."

Rhee kind of reminds me of another famous education reformer:

Granted, this is an exaggerated comparison, and I'm not saying that this is the way to do things. But Crazy Joe and Ms. Rhee both have more in common than people think. And without question, both are ball busters when it comes to education reform. Let us all hope that Rhee does what she needs to do to get the job done without going overboard.

Learning Objective: How to BS to the America people

Before I decided to become a teacher, I wanted to be a journalist. Although I changed my mind to become a professional journalist (instead choosing to work on a blog like this), quality journalism is something I still have the highest respect for. When it comes to bad journalism, my disgust and reprehension is equally as strong, if not stronger. One example of bad journalism that almost never disappoints (or, I suppose, almost always disappoints) is cable news. There are many reasons for their poor quality of work, and one of them is the constant stream of pundits brought on the air to fill time.

The New York Times now reports on a school in Virginia called the Leadership Institute that trains conservative pundits who appear on cable news to better able to spew out their talking points (i.e to bull shit to the American people). While the article is primarily about this conservative institute, for the sake of fairness, it also points out that the liberal Center for American Progress started a "pundit project" that helps pundits with "on-air training" at Daily Kos's annual convention.

A good piece of journalism about bad journalism. Except I do have one question: why is the article part of the "Fashion and Style" section?