"Creating People On Whom Nothing is Lost" - An educator and writer in Colorado offers insight and perspective on education, parenting, politics, pop culture, and contemporary American life.
Disclaimer - The views expressed on this site are my own and do not represent the views of my employer.
For as long as I've been paying attention, public education has been one of the primary concerns of the voting public, and it has been an endless source of "reform movements." Starting with A Nation at Risk in 1983, and continuing through the turn of the century with No Child Left Behind, Americans have perceived problems in need of serious reform in the nation's public schools. The movement behind Common Core State Standards and the push for national standardized assessments is only the latest outgrowth or development of that perception. Of course, there is plenty of misinformation, and people are constantly asking me to explain the Common Core, PARCC, NCLB, accountability, etc. And I try to do so with as little bias as possible. But we all have an opinion.
The latest voice to enter the murky world of public education reform - especially the corporate movement behind the establishment of national standards and assessment - is a teacher and education blogger with an amazing knack for statistical analysis and an ability to dig up the bones on education. Writer, teacher, researcher Mercedes Schneider began making a splash at her blog about a year and a half ago, and she has been one of the most prolific in tracking down the truth by "following the money." Now, she has compiled all the research into a fascinating expose of "Who's Who in the Implosion of Public Education." The use of the word "implosion" certainly does not hide Schneider's criticism of and contempt for the people behind the corporate education reform movement. And, it's not, as Anthony Cody notes, for the "faint of heart" in education controversy.
But it appears to be a pretty compelling and informative look at the past decade or so of changes in public education.
Despite what the American Heart Association - and Michelle Obama - like to believe, eating meat and foods with saturated fat is not unhealthy. And meat and dairy are not the villain in America's battle with expanding waist lines, diabetes, and heart disease. At least that's what most of the research shows, as collected and artfully presented by health writer and investigative journalist, Nina Teicholz in her new book,The Big Fat Surprise: Why Butter, Meat, and Cheese Belong in a Healthy Diet.
Americans have been fighting the Battle of the Bulge, and equating the enemy with meat and milk for at least fifty years now. At that approach is mostly likely based on flawed data and the mistakenly belief about what causes the body to put on weight in the form of "body fat." Teicholz, who has been writing about health and nutrition for years, began to investigate America's "issue with fat" when she was assigned a story by her editor at Gourmet to report on the trans fat problem in processed foods. She began to learn just how much mis-information led to "How Americans Got Red Meat Wrong." It's pretty clear that there is no causation, and not even any real correlation between meat consumption and America's weight and heart disease crisis.
The problem, of course, is that Americans love to latch on to a narrative, and will firmly believe it even after evidence exposes its flaws. And that has driven the low-fat and non-fat craze in food production - a movement that has done nothing to decrease America's health issues. And now that issue is invading the public education reform movement, as the new healthy lunch standards limit kids to skim and non-fat milk for no good reason. This sort of misinformation spread by deceptive organizations like the USDA, and naive campaigners like Michelle Obama, is doing nothing to address health issues, and will only seek in driving high school kids away from the federal lunch program.
It's worth noting just how misguided we have been about health and diet, as evidenced by the realization that even as Americans increase their consumption of fruits and vegetables, the weight problems continue to grow.
In the era of big data and standardization and accountability and an ever increasingly complex economy and business environment, the skills of numeracy and mathematical thinking could not be more important. And that is a problem in a country where people habitually shrug off science and mathematics by saying, "Oh, I'm just not good at math."
Of course, it doesn't have to be that way, and it's never to late to start. In fact, once people become more successful with those skills and concepts that seemed so foreign and useless (When am I ever going to use this?), they become more empowered. And they are less likely to pass their apprehension on to their children. Additionally, they may become more astute in areas of consequence such as personal finance, voting, and predictions. Now, the issue of mathematical thinking gets some clarity in an accessible new book from University of Wisconsin math professor, Jordan Ellenberg. The book is:
The primary narrative behind the establishment of Common Core State Standards and national assessments such as PARCC and SmarterBalanced is the "claim" that "American schools are failing" and that "American students are falling behind." While there is plenty of evidence to the contrary, and plenty of information about how the conversation is much more complicated than sound-bites, it's important to consider the reason and motivation behind these myths - and the impact they have had in literally altering education policy. Basically, the concern of public education advocates, and the motivation for the changes, is a belief that private schools are better than public ones. And there's the claim that if public schools were privatized - namely out from under teacher associations - then the school system would miraculously solve all social ills and America would have the top schools in the world.
But what if private school superiority were the myth?
That is the conclusion of perhaps the most important new book on education policy,The Public School Advantage: Why Public Schools Outperform Private Schools. The research of Christopher and Sarah Lubienski from the University of Illinois compiles extensive data for not only the strength of public education, but also for understanding why the "public" has long believed private is better. The reality is far more complicated than any book or review can explain. America has some fantastic schools and world-class students, and it has some schools and communities where the system is pathetic. Poverty seriously impacts student achievement - but it is a cop-out to simply use poverty as an excuse for failure. Poor kids can achieve, and the success of some charter and magnet schools should not be dismissed. At the same time, the charter model is no panacea, and it is not the only answer to poverty-stricken communities where kids struggle to even become proficient students. Regardless of the causes and the people behind the solutions, no progress can come if people are under mistaken beliefs about the current quality of public education.
After the dismal 2013 season of the Food Network's Next Food Network Starwhich awarded the title to "Paula Dean Wannabe" Demaris Philips, the star-making show that gave us people like Guy Fieri and Jeff "The Sandwich King" Morrow returned tonight with twelve new Food Network hopefuls. Our celebrity chef hosts Bobby Flay, Alton Brown, and Giada DeLaurentis return to guide the aspiring stars through weeks of trials where they will prove not only their culinary chops but also their star power and the ability to engage an audience in front of a camera. Having that coveted "point of view" which can be marketed is the key. Of course, the primary focus of this opening show is "Can They Cook?" Certainly, time in front of the camera can be awkward and take some practice. But if someone can't cook, that person can't be a star on the Food Network.
In the opening episode, the contestants were given a shot to offer their point of view in a minute or less - and that went well for some and not for others. You would think they would expect this, but it apparently caught some off guard. That said, it's not worth talking about how bad some where. Because the next task was to prepare their own "perfect bite" and then sell it in a red-carpet affair with celebrity host, E's Ross Matthews. This format is an imperative, with some really shining or redeeming themselves, and others struggling to connect. It was a perfect window into the potential of this year.
My personal bias is against the "Cowboy Chef" because while it was clear that he can cook, I am not a fan of the over-the-top, loud and crass personality that reminds me of last year's debacle of a finalist, Rodney "The Pie Guy." I really hope the "farm-to-table" girl Emma gets a chance to re-deem herself, because her message is real, and the hosts were too critical of the all-natural message. It is not too tired or cliche, and we need more press about it. Chris Kyler has a lot of potential, and I am impressed with the food of both Kenny and Chris. But it was definitely time for Donna to go home, and Sarah is not long for the competition.
Can't wait to see how it all turns out. My early predictions are for Loreal and Nicole. Luca and Rubin will be good challengers as well.
That is what many in the education reform movement would like for you to believe. That claim - that US schools are "failing," that we are "falling behind the rest of the world," that American kids are "losing the ability to compete in a global market" has driven the education reform movement since at least 1983 when "A Nation at Risk" was published. And that claim drove the passage of No Child Left Behind, as well as the recent push for Common Core State Standards, PARCC and SB standardized testing, and the Race-to-the-Top school funding (blackmail) initiative. But what if it weren't true? What if it is more complicated than that? What if the proposed solutions do nothing to address, much less solve, the problem?
Mathematics teacher explains the reality in a must-see Tedx speech at the University of Arkansas.
In his criticism of the "toxic culture" surrounding education reform, Joshua Katz asks us to consider the realities behind the claims. The most interesting point for me was the connection to "The Incredibles" theory of villains, whereby a villain actually creates the problem that he will then be the only one who can solve. The idea that corporate education interests exploited the belief that schools were failing in order to push through legislative agendas that allow them to sell more educational materials and tests is not as far-fetched as many might think. For, there are many American schools producing world-class students who do not need new national learning standards and accountability tests in order to perform.
So, what is the value of knowing words like kneidal, stromuhr, cymotrichus, or guetapens? What is the value in being able to spell them from memory? Especially, when the spell-check on my computer lists them as mis-spelled.
Of course, tonight was the national championship for the Scripps National Spelling Bee, which is broadcast on ESPN and is the Holy Grail for thousands of families across the nation. This year provided two champions, as two boys outlasted the list, finishing off with words like fueilleton. Of course, like always, it is the strangest form of entertainment, providing many bizarrely memorable moments like these. This year Ansun Suejoe and Sriram Hathwar shared the championship of a trophy and $30,000 in prize money. And, I guess, the bragging rights.
But why is this worth it? Why does this matter?
As an English teacher of advanced students, and the parent of a gifted child who has advanced far in both spelling bees and math competitions, I have to admit that I can't quite fathom a more inane pursuit than the spelling bee. And don't bother telling me about the cognitive development or the inclusion of the vocabulary component. It is just the most useless form of trivia. And I am not arguing that all educational pursuits should be utilitarian.
But imagine if all the countless hours (and thousands of dollars) spent memorizing obscure and useless words ( most of which aren't even English ) was instead spent developing skills in math and science and the fine arts. What if kids spent the hours learning how to play an instrument or write a symphony or develop their hook shot or swim a faster quarter mile or study ecosystems or … well, you get the point. And, don't even get me started on the prize money. $30K? Hell, I bet most families of top competitors spend thousands on tutors and travel and more. And the prize money doesn't come close to funding pursuits in college. Perhaps Scripps could pony up a real scholarship. Like maybe four years of in-state tuition for students who can write and develop arguments and feature stories on complex ideas and global issues.
That might be worth my time.
In all honesty, I used to intentionally fail at the spelling bee, so I wouldn't have to stand up in front of the class going through the charade. And that approach has been so perfectly captured by comedian Brian Ragan.
Michelle Obama - along with many others - is seriously concerned about America's weight and health problems. And she is committed to combating those challenges by focusing on children. It was with that focus that she led the food fightfor increasingly rigorous nutritional standards in the National School Lunch Program. The primary focus of reform of school lunches is on reducing consumption of calories, fat, sugar, and sodium. While this approach/solution seems pretty straightforward to the casual observer, the issue of food quality and its connection to "weight" is far more complicated.
The problem with changes to the food program is, basically, that kids do not want to eat the food, and school cafeterias are losing money. This has led some schools across the country to "opt out" of the school lunch program. And they have made this decision knowing they will lose federal funding for meals and more. The reality is that schools will not stay with a program of meals that kids refuse to eat. And, despite what Michelle Obama likes to claim, students are still throwing away a lot of food. And now legislators are joining the cause, introducing a bill which would allow schools waivers from the new nutritional standards. The movement to delay and roll back nutritional standards is not simply a way of pushing back against the federal government and the Obamas … but it can seem that way.
Yesterday, the First Lady decided to fight back in the food fight. Mrs. Obama sought to make this all about the children, as she noted she will not back down on plans to bring "better" nutritional standards to school lunches. However, the battle over school lunches is not simply a matter of calories, fat, sugar, and salt. And there is certainly no value to serving - even force feeding - food that kids don't want to eat. Certainly, schools need better education on nutritional choices. And they need better offerings in the cafe.
But simply restricting menus is not going to do the trick.
Amidst all the commencement speeches making their rounds this May, I offer some thoughts from the original American original, Henry David Thoreau. As part of his Transcendental philosophy, grounded in a rugged individuality and self reliance, Thoreau recommended that above all weLive Deliberately.
As I've almost helplessly watched my blog sit passive for the last month, I've come to realize just how hard it is to blog during the month of May. With AP exams and final units/projects and graduation and graduation parties and new projects for the summer, there has been precious little of value to check out on A Teacher's View. Yet, I have not been idle, still reading and writing and posting. And, of course, tweeting out ideas on a regular basis.
For a more consistent feed on what ATV is doing, consider following me on Twitter - @mmazenko
And, I am occasionally writing pieces for Yahoo Voices: Yahoo Voices Profile
Some of the ideas I have been working on and/or following lately are, not surprisingly, food related. As a teacher and administrator, the issues raised by the changes in the National School Lunch Program have been worth watching. Apparently, while most of us weren't looking, the federal lunch program and its new "healthy guidelines" has become quite the political issue. With new nutritional guidelines making the food choices more restricted and less desirable, some schools have been considering "opting out" of the federal program. In fact, many schools already have, with notable ones being the Arlington Heights district in Illinois and the Waterford School District in Wisconsin.
