Flawed Educational Reasoning Dominates Debate

Framing is a powerful rhetorical tool used to sway public opinion to a particular perspective. As George Lakoff, has been arguing for the past two decades starting with the publication of his first book on the subject Moral Politics (1996, You Tube Clip), conservatives and liberals think differently and metaphors are a key aspect of the discourse that rouses public approval or disproval of a particular policy initiatives. Educational discourse today tends to be dominated by conservative perspectives that are sold as commonsensical, while containing major flaws in reasoning and empirical evidence.

These assumptions about education fit within the larger neoliberal reforms (of smaller government, attacks on unions and workers, less regulation and oversight, market solutions, dismantling of the social safety net and major regressive tax reform) and elicit a policy based on 1. increased accountability (NCLB), 2. standardization of curriculum, teaching and teacher training, 3. privatization efforts (charter schools, vouchers, business infusion into schools), 4. Professionalism (outside experts exert heavy influence on school and system management), 5. schooling as primarily economic in nature, based on training and sorting, and 6. the deskilling of teachers. Underlying these changes are a series of arguably faulty assumptions, including the following:

1.     Teachers, parents and students are largely to blame for the declining state of public education. You can see this assumption in NCLB, as one key component is the assumption that grading schools and making it public will force schools to try harder, with the underlying assumption that they aren’t trying hard enough now.

2.     Racial and class educational achievement gaps are thus predominantly the fault of students, parents and communities (what Richard Valencia calls deficit thinking Book)

3.     Funding (money) is not an important factor in educational achievement (even as the Education Trust provides a strong argument for the opposite position: Funding Gaps 2006)

4.     Affirmative action is no longer necessary and we actually suffer from reverse racism today. This is among the most wrongheaded assumptions to me, as the UCLA Civil Rights Project has consistently shown over the past 14 years the increased de facto (rather than de jure, by law) segregation along racial and class lines – and its deleterious effects on those students consigned to predominantly minority, poor schools (Report on Deepening Segregation).

5.     Market solutions like Charter Schools (though not vouchers) are far superior to government solutions at the state and federal level (even though there is little empirical evidence to support this claim inside or outside education – which is a public institution with substantial positive externalities (i.e., benefits that are not part of the calculation of its effectiveness or in the formation of “price”)). See Ravitch’s Blog for ongoing discussion of this topic.

6.     The proliferation of technology and media use by children is not a key factor in educational achievement and attainment (see this report from the Kaiser Family Foundation).

7.     America is falling behind the rest of the developed world in educational achievement and thus must engage in the very policy reforms that arguably contribute to this reality. While the underlining fact is true, the proposed policy initiatives to address it are questionable. There are also some questions about the validity and reliability of some of the studies as there are more selective samples of students in some countries.

8.     Schooling is predominantly about future career opportunities and the nation’s economic health (economic imperatives) and not about ameliorating social problems, developing cultural or political (democratic) competency, opening the mind, becoming well-rounded, social development or the like. This instrumentalized and economistic perspective of education is at the heart of the neoliberal policy model.

To challenge the nature of educational policy and reform in America today, we must challenge the public discourse, convincing parents, teachers and key stakeholders and decision-makers that a more holistic, well-rounded education will improve not only the quality of education but the performance on the tests that now dominate the entire educational landscape.