When Democracy Is Not The Common Good

I've seen many people make versions of the point, and I've done so myself a few times, but Katherine Stewart in her book The Power Worshippers does it really well.

This is not a "culture war." It is a political war over the future of democracy,

It [Christian nationalism] asserts that legitimate government rests not on the consent of the governed but adherence to the doctrines of a specific religious, ethnic, and cultural heritage.

In other words, this is a brand of "conservatism" that believes that Thomas Jefferson got it wrong and that democracy is not the correct way to run a country. 

This guy

And now, according to a recent piece at Politico, these folks have a formal legal to back it up. 

It's called Common Good Constitutionalism, and one of its proponents is a Harvard law professor named Adrian Vermeule. As the article explains it

The cornerstone of Vermeule’s theory is the claim that “the central aim of the constitutional order is to promote good rule, not to ‘protect liberty’ as an end in itself”

In other words, democracy is bunk. Liberty is bunk. All that matters is the common good, as defined by wise men who understand that things like abortion bans, the end of same sex marriage, a government that extends its reach to do things like ban naughty books--that's all okay, even if the majority of citizens oppose it and vote against it.

As one might expect (and the article delineates), there are plenty of conservatives who disagree with this theory. The American Conservative wrote of Vermeule and his "moral madness" that "One can critique the limits of freedom and excesses of libertarianism without echoing the nihilism of totalitarians." 

But it has great appeal to the folks who make up what I think of as faux conservatism, the not-my-father's-conservatism that has swept through the GOP. It is also, as many critics of the article have pointed out, awfully fascist-looking. (They are also, the article points out, mostly Catholic).

Well, at least we have a name for it now, this movement that says "We should just take the power and exert it to impose what is Right and True." And we should understand that when we say an attack on public education is an attack on the foundations of democracy, these are people who don't care, people who believe liberty is only for those who align with the Right Values. Moral madness indeed.

Scaring Our Children To Death

In the Washington Post last week, yet another alarm sounded about the mental health crisis among our children, calling it "much vaster than we realize." 

This alarm has been rung again and again over the past year, including a declaration of a national emergency in the fall of 2021 from the American Academy of Pediatrics (and underlined it this year), but for folks working in the field, it's not exactly news. 

I wrote about this, sort of, in 2015, and did so in response to a story about the high rate of teen suicides in Silicon Valley. Back then I focused on the One Wrong Move syndrome, the message we send students that a single screw-up, a critical failure, can leave your whole life in shambles. And I still think that's part of it.

Things have not improved. The WaPo piece cites data saying that 75% of schools report concerns about student depression and trauma. Counselors are in short supply, both in school and out.

Causes? Some folks would like to blame the pandemic and the closure of school buildings or the trauma of personal loss to the disease, but according to the AAP, suicide was already the second leading cause of death for youths age 10-24 in 2018.

There's no doubt that the reasons are complex and varied, that the pandemic and social media and generational trauma (I just saw somebody refer to the under-25 crowd as Generation School Shootings). But I want to point at one factor in particular.

Everyone lives in scary times. In the 1930s, it looked as if the world was going to collapse, first economically and then with a rise of fascism. In the 1970s, we grew up with the assumption that nuclear holocaust was a when-not-if proposition. 

But we live in different times. For the past couple of decades, the go-to political strategy is to whip up fear and anger, anger and fear. From the days when every initiative was The War On [Your Cause Here], we have moved on to an endless series of existential crises. Every election is about the continued existence of democracy and/or our country. Every Congress vote is critical test; every Supreme Court decision is a turning point in the struggle for our very existence. Our enemies want to destroy Western Civilization. 

We are all-apocalypse, all the time.

For those of us who have grown up with this steady escalation, there's a certain recognition that this is political puffery, ever-anxious marketing designed to herd the electorate one way or another. For those of us who live in circumstances that allow us to assume that the floodwaters will not so much as soak our shoes, it's easy to distance ourselves. And much of the country is just sort of numb, hence the impulse to scream louder to cut through the haze and mobilize people.

But if you're a young person in this country, you were born into a theater where people were already screaming "Fire," and your whole life, they have never stopped. Our constant soup of rage and fear may be background noise to adults, but to students, it defines the world they have navigated for their entire lives.

There is no sentiment more quaint than "Not in front of the children." We don't have differences of opinions that the grownups need to work out on our own; we have enemies who must be silenced and obliterated and called out publicly on cable news. School exists downhill from the culture, and our culture is all about fear and anger and oncoming disasters that YOU CAN'T POSSIBLY SURVIVE SO YOU'D BETTER SEND US SOME MONEY AND GET OFF YOUR COUCH AND VOTE AND ARM YOURSELF AAAH AAH AAH AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!

I can't remember the last time the prevailing message on an issue--any issue--was "This is probably going to suck, but we are tough enough to get through it." 

For students, in addition to the general noise about onrushing catastrophe, we send messages about their weakness, about all the things they must be protected from because otherwise they'll be broken and bent, about how they must either be kept in a protective bubble or taught to put on the armor of "grit" or some other quality that we imply they naturally lack. 

Young people are the canaries--the young, vulnerable canaries--in a cultural coal mine. They suffer from adults who forget to affirm them, to tell them that they are in fact strong and resilient and beautifully and wonderfully made, that despite the fact that life will often go in directions contrary to plans or expectations, that they can still rise and advance. And they suffer from adults who reject nuance and complexity in favor of an always-on scream of impending doom, that we must all be terribly afraid because Something Terrible is about to deliver Destruction That Cannot Be Withstood.

I expect that plenty of people will not heed any of this, that the plight of the canaries will not move them. We are a culture that likes to talk about how we value children, especially when we're using it to justify our latest policy initiative, but our actions and choices show that mostly we aren't serious about it. But we could be. We could decide tomorrow to do better, to listen for the canaries, to act like the people they need us to be.

ICYMI: Nutcracker Edition (12/11)

Not a fan. But I am a huge fan of my niece, so we once again trekked south to watch her dance studio's production of this plotless fixture of the holiday season. But she was delightful. And now I have a whole lot of things for you to read.

Whatever happened to the fight over Critical Race Theory?

Nirvi Shah has a decent overview of CRT panic and how it played out during the elections. At Grid.

Bad Faith and Cruelty

Steve Nuzum is fed up with various anti-LGBTQ legislation. He explains why.

La. AG Jeff Landry Creates Tip Line to Expose the First Amendment

One more political hack hopes to score points by cracking down on students' reading rights. The indispensable Mercedes Schneider has the story (and the address, if you'd like to send something to his tip line). 

Stitt has vowed to revive a private school voucher plan, but details are scarce

From The Frontier, an excellent source of Oklahoma education news. And the news these days is not good.

Who will defend public education?

John Merrow, retired education reporter, looks at the need for someone, from any party, to step up and defend public education from the forces set against it. 

“Kids Seem to Be a Paycheck”: How a Billion-Dollar Corporation Exploits Washington’s Special Education System

It took ProPublica, the Seattle Times, and three reporters to publish this story. It is a tale of what happens when children become nothing more than a backpack full of cash to corporations looking to make a buck. 

New Data Reveals That Success Academy Attrition Is Worse Than Previously Reported

Gary Rubinstein has been crunching numbers for Success Academy, and it turns out the cohorts that start at SA are way different than the cohorts that finish.

A Shooting Star

Gregory Sampson with seven things the nation needs to know about Ron DeSantis (besides his desire to become President).

N.J. district with $7,500 signing bonuses has hired 115 teachers in 11 weeks

Golly gosh. Who would have guessed that offering people real money might entice them to take a teaching job. 

Stop Punishing Poverty in Schools

This is a powerful piece by Paul Gorski at ASCD. Here's how poverty in school looks to the students who experience it.

The Science of Reading and the Perils of State Literacy Policies: Virginia’s Cautionary Tale

For NCTE, Dorothy Suskind looks at the charges leveled at "unscientific" practices by the SOR folks.

My Favorite College Search Things

Guru Akil Bello talks about some of the delightful things he finds in his email and the world of college admissions coaching.

Elsewhere this week, I wrote about Pennsylvania's new culturally responsive standards for teacher training programs. And at Forbes.com, a look at a resurgence of the old idea that we can use test scores to sort out the Bad Teachers.

Also, a piece in The Progressive magazine about the battle to restrict reading rights. I worked hard to connect some dots on this one, and I'm pleased with the result, so take a look, please.

Here is a nice little video promoting the arts initiative in my small town corner of the world. 

And you can still subscribe, free of charge, to my substack as one other way to pick up whatever I've been laying down. 

SC: Palmetto and The Giant Conspiracy

The Palmetto Promise Institute of South Carolina has just released a report entitled "Education or Indoctrination" a "dossier" of the many, many left-wing enemies of all that is Good and True in South Carolina education--organizations that "target South Carolina teachers, students, and parents." The dossier reveals their "true agenda" in over 60 pages; a good alternate title would have been "Lock Up Your Children! They're Coming To Get You!" SCI describes it as "comprehensive but beautiful," and it really is pretty. And I have read it so that you don't have to. 

Buckle up, boys and girls. We are traveling out beyond the lands where reasonable people understand that there are many legitimate points of view and that the opposition is not necessary evil and/or stupid. These folks are far, far, far right. 

So who are these folks?

The Palmetto Promise Institute was founded (twice) by Jim DeMint, the Tea Party conservative senator who resigned his post to become president of the Heritage Foundation. It is part of the State Policy Network, that network of right-tilted thinky tanks and advocacy groups. Current chair is Phil Hughes, president of Hughes Investments, Inc., a commercial development outfit.

PPI's visiting fellow in education is Jonathan Butcher. Butcher has been around-- he came out of the University of Arkansas's Department of Education Reform (a Jay Greene joint), helped set up education savings accounts in Arizona, and was education director at the Goldwater Institute. These days he's heading up the Center for Education Policy at the Heritage Foundation. And that's just the highlights; Butcher appears to have never met a public school system he didn't want to dismantle.

That brings us to Ellen Weaver, founding president and CEO of PPI. Weaver graduated from Bob Jones University, then went to work for DeMint, somehow landed on the SC Education Oversight Committee, and then decided to run for State Superintendent of Education. In that race she was backed by Pennstlvania's pro-school-choice gazzillionaire Jeffrey Yass, and managed to beat her primary opponent through good old-fashioned lies, exaggeration, and innuendo about her supposed liberal leanings. Oh--and when it turns out you need a Masters degree to hold that office, Bob Jones University whipped up a custom 6-months masters program and zipped her right through it.

Remember all that, especially the "mischaracterizing your opponent" thing as we look at this dossier--but especially remember that as of January, the woman at the head of the organization that created this thing will be in charge of education in South Carolina. Yikes.

Ready to wade through this thing? Here we go.

Foreword

Butcher wrote the foreword, and it sets a tone. Education is "beset by special interest groups" who want to wrestle "authority--and learning options--away from families." The NEA and AFT push Black Lives Matter Week, which is all about "disrupting" the nuclear family. The National School Boards Association "colluded" with President Joe Biden's administration "to prompt officials to treat parents like domestic terrorists if they speak against leftist ideology," a thing that didn't actually happen, but we are here to raise anger and panic and not understanding.

Butcher wants you to know that the Nation's Report Card shows steep declines in learning, yet while some states have instituted education savings accounts (ESAs), South Carolina has not. Also, a bicycle, because a vest has no sleeves. This is a classic trick--state in loud tones the problem, propose your solution, and never provide evidence that your solution will actually solve the problem. 

Butcher also wants you to be upset that South Carolina has not taken steps to "protect children from racial discrimination caused by educators' application of critical race theory" (I will warn you know that you will lose track of how many things folks are supposed to be scared of that have not actually happened). 

The basic thesis here is a version of what Butcher's old mentor Jay Greene laid out in February-- choicers need to use the culture wars to help push choice policies. 

This report describes how certain interest groups want to limit learning options for students and promote critical race theory’s pernicious ideas.

Introduction

Oran Smith wants you to know that South Carolinians are nice folks, and that's why they've been reluctant to push back and so--

There is no better example of the unlikely coexistence of centrist citizens and radical left ideological efforts than in the area of public education.

That line comes with a footnote, not to a source, but to an explanation that you can tell the unions are really socialists because they use words like "workers." Parents are busy and don't want to be thought of as bigots, and teachers, he explains, are overwhelmed with their duties and don't want to be stigmatized. That's why moderate and conservative teachers "felt pressure to “like” posts of support for the left-of-center Facebook group SC for Ed in 2019, and why a large minority of teachers pay the dues that keep The South Carolina Education Association afloat." 

So, two take-aways here-- the leftists are a minority, and everyone who isn't openly with the right is, either by inclination or intimidation, against them. I half-expect, "When we crush the unions and socialists, we will be greeted as liberators."

To his credit, Smith includes a special-fonted paragraph explaining that they don't think their "policy opponents" are evil. "But, we both respectfully and emphatically disagree with their beliefs about America, about the purpose of education, and their goals for South Carolina children." And the thing is, I believe him. Lots of folks in this biz are not ideologues--just opportunists for hire, there to clear the ground for the corporate interests they represent. Now, if in the process, they have to whip up some ideologues who do think that everyone left of Barry Goldwater is evil and dangerous--well, that's not what they think.

But enough preliminaries. Let the calling out of various conspirators begin--starting with a scary graphic

\

See? They're everywhere!

1. American Federation of Teachers

Teachers unions are "the major opponents to meaningful education reform," so we'll start there. 

You know who was awful? John Dewey. He held "a progressive and romantic view of education." He opposed teaching the classics. He didn't like "personal competition." The dossier also says that Dewey "seemed to believe" that a correct view could be arrived at socially, which seems like rather a stretch. Also, Randi Weingarten is a radical, and it's her fault that school buildings stayed closed. And then there's this:

AFT is a traditional labor union, and as a labor union, it favors strikes and walkouts and other measures as leverage for collective bargaining

Nobody "favors" strikes and walkouts. Nobody. "Never mind sitting down to work this out at the bargaining table--I just want to go on strike," said no union member ever. But the dossier wants you to know that if state law permitted it, AFT would have "no qualms" about shutting down schools to demand "better working conditions." The dossier uses scare quotes around "better working conditions," as if that would be a made up excuse for the union to have that qualmless strike that everyone is dying to throw.

2. National Education Association

NEA is also bad, but in addition to strikes, they use the courts, The dossier includes the "most shocking" example, when the NEA in Rhode Island sued Nicole Solas for carpet bombing a school with over 200 FOIA requests, including requests for all of a teacher's emails that include the word "race." Solas became a cause celebre for right wing news outlets.

The dossier authors perused a copy of NEA Today (Jan 2022) and discovered that it identified disruptive parents at school board meetings with extremist right-wing groups, promoted Social and Emotional Learning, identified "voting reform" as Jim Crow 2.0, celebrated the defeat of a charterization plan in North Carolina, and celebrated union engagement and advocacy. 

The authors also rifled through some Representative Assembly resolutions, like schools being fiscally independent, supporting progressive taxation, opposing privatization, opposing immigration enforcement on school grounds, supporting the right of librarians to use their professional judgment, supporting right to strike... the list is, I guess, supposed to be self-evidently crazy radical stuff?

3. South Carolina Education Association

So, just how liberal is The SCEA? A better question is whether The SCEA leadership knows just how liberal and out of touch they are.

The authors apparently got into an SCEA webinar and caught the group saying things like "Christopher Columbus didn't discover America" and "We should be able to teach the 1619 Project" and "We need to organize and advocate for ourselves."

SCEA is also accused of, in its podcasts, "focusing on the fruit of the socialist tree: union-type grievances and demands for more money." Because only socialists want to be paid well? 

A few words about Howard Zinn

We pause now to make some connections. The authors claim that there seems to be a "common liturgy" beneath the surface of the "shockingly consistent" ideology of these groups, including calling capitalism bad and dissing Columbus and saying "the winners write the histories" (which is an odd statement to object to when you're sitting in the state that kicked off the Civil War). 

But these tropes "like so much memorized secular scripture" (there's a lot of language in this report framing leftist stuff as a religion--all the better, I suppose, for contrasting it with good Christian faith) spring from a particular source-- Howard Zinn. This dossier sees a huge smoking gun in the NEA Zinn Project.

Also, capitalism

The "education left" doesn't like the free market, and "anti-capitalism is a core tenet of the new orthodoxy." Then we turn to heroes and villains who run through the whole dossier. Bad guys are Ibram X. Kendi and Zinn; good guys are Milton Friedman and Thomas Sowell. Also, if the unionists don't like capitalism, then the only possible alternative is socialism. And probably authoritarian as well. 

4. SC for Ed

"Clearly to the left of even" the unions, these wacky folks want things like increased salary and improved funding and better working conditions. Their website includes stuff from FairTest, those crazy radicals who call for the end of "misuses and flaws of standardized testing." Also, they have had rallies. And "if social media posts are a barometer (and SC for Ed and its leaders are prolific online), the real fear of SC for Ed appears to be parents encroaching on their turf (advocating for their children and their learning needs)." No word on what would be true if social media posts are not a barometer.

Red State Revolt

SC for Ed was "no doubt" inspired by the 2018 teacher strike in West Virginia, which was another leftist led socialists. "This explains once again the choice of red as the official rally color."

5. Consultants and Foundations

The most dangerous path to radical agendas entering South Carolina’s public schools can be through Chief Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Officer positions in the district office, or retaining of DEI “consultants.”

For this part they cite Parents Defending Education and their library of Naughty School reports and list of some tales of specific districts and schools that dared to hire consultants and implement DEI or SEL programs. The dossier acknowledges "we need more diversity, inclusion, and equality in South Carolina," but not with "discrimination of another kind" (spoiler alert: there is no other kind of discrimination in their examples). "We hope we are wrong" about these programs, they say, leaving the "but we assume we aren't" part unsaid.

Palmetto State Teachers Association

PSTA is one of those alternative unions for folks who don't want their union to be too uniony. The dossier describes it as "centrist," and they've done good things like being more interested in policy than pay, so they don't get lumped in with the "constellation of the left." However, they have taken to "dogged opposition" to the enactment of any private education choice program, most recently daring to insist that choicey schools take the same state Big Standardized Test as public schools (which the dossier objects to because those schools get to ignore the state curriculum and standards on which the test is based). 

So, the dossier suggests, PSTC used to be a nice bunch of non-lefties, but we've got our eyes on you guys.

6. National School Boards Association

Never to be forgiven for backing masking policies or that time they asked the administration to help defend members from crazy far right attacks at board meetings. 

7. K-12 Associations

There's a bunch of professional associations like the National Science Teaching Association and the National Association of Secondary School Principals. Some are nice, but some insist on advocacy and are "seemingly bruising for a fight." "Seemingly" does a lot of work in that sentence.

8. Higher Education

They cite one incident involving parent protest against one book as proof that higher ed and K-12 organizations operate "hand in hand." Higher ed has been the home of "political correctness: since the 1980s. The dossier doesn't have time to study how higher ed affects the "worldview" of future teachers, but it needs some looking into.

9. Accreditors

Specifically, the groups that provide accreditation for teaching programs. The dossier notes that one of the standards talks about personal biases and increasing the practice of equality, diversity and inclusion, to which they say

Again, diversity, inclusion and equality are important, but by whose definition, Ibram Kendi's or Tim Scott's? We suspect that there is no diversity in the definition of diversity

Diversity is okay, but only the right kind. I'm hearing echoes of every person who ever complained that Civil Rights activists had a point, but they were going about it all wrong and would they please just shut up and wait.

10. Litigators

National litigators that recruit plaintiffs in South Carolina to promote humanism and extreme views of separation of church and state include the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU South Carolina, Americans United [for Separation of Church & State], the Freedom from Religion Foundation, and the American Humanist Association.

Is there anybody on any side of any issue who doesn't go out to recruit litigants? I do wish there was further explanation of the difference between "extreme" and "mild" views of the separation between church and state.

11. Standards, Curriculum, and Textbooks

Before Common Core, the dossier argues, nobody outside of the education bubble knew what curriculum standards were.

If the textbooks, curricula, and curriculum standards used in South Carolina are to be rigorous, balanced, and reflective of South Carolina values—it matters a great deal who sits on the State Board.

Wrapping up

The dossier has tried to maintain some even-handed language throughout, but for the big finish, the pristine white gloves come off.

Our tour through the world of “radical” and “disruptive” “social warrior” organizations pressing down hard on South Carolina schools, students, teachers, and parents has had the collateral benefit of revealing the marked difference in worldview from that of the typical South Carolina parent and teacher.

This broad “constellation” of indoctrination organizations has vastly different origins, goals, heroes, and villains from those of advocates of what we believe to be true education.

If you want it all reduced to a chart, they have a crackerjack graphic for you

This is, they assure us, based on primary sources "as well a vast body of proof documents and eyewitness accounts we do not have the space to even footnote here." So totally not a straw man constructed out of their fears and/or desire to agitate feelings against everyone not sharing their view. 

What's a parent (or right-minded teacher) to do?

The dossier concludes with an action list. 

Seek a parental bill of rights, one that "affirmatively protects parental rights." 

Work for "true diversity, equality, and inclusion." That means being color-blind and gender-blind. I suspect they really really didn't think that second one through.

Understand the evils of racism past and present. Tim Scott is quoted, providing yet another version of CRT in which "kids are being taught that the color of their skin defines them." 

Also, learn about NEA and AFT alternatives. Get involved in school and leadership. Parents should talk with their children regularly. Visit our website.

There's an appendix that includes the text from where legislators slipped the standard anti-"CRT" language into the budget. A list of influential national ed groups. And footnotes.

Still here?

That's the whole thing. The language does not froth at the mouth or scream loudly, and there are moments that are perfectly reasonable. And there are dozens and dozens of moments of exaggeration, fabrication and twisting of information--more than I could ever cover in even this long post. But mostly the message is simple--

There's a vast conspiracy of socialist that includes everyone on the left and in the center which is pretty much everyone involved in education. It's a specific and even-tempered version of the old arguments about the education establishment, the keepers of the status quo. They are well-connected. They aren't like the Regular People from Around Here. They want to replace parents with The State, and they have their own (not Christian) religion; that's how Godless socialists roll. 

And as is often the case, there's an assumption here that teaching someone liberal stuff is indoctrination, but teaching them right-leaning stuff is education.

The report's function is not to rant and rave. Reports like this (all the way back to A Nation at Risk) provide ammunition to the ranters and ravers, allowing them to hold up the slickly produced official-looking pages and say, "I'm not just ranting and raving--what I have to say is supported by this sober academic report." 

Did I mention that the woman in charge of the organization that produced this will soon be in charge of education in South Carolina? Going to be a rough couple of years for teachers in Palmetto State.

Netflix's Reed Hastings Provides Example #534,215 of Why Free Market And Education Are A Bad Match

You've probably noticed that your various streaming services are providing an increasingly baffling batch of service levels. Now Netflix is about to join the fray by offering what they're calling an "as-supported plan." 

Netflix Big Kahuna Reed Hastings recently explained in a NYT interview reported by Variety

“You’re right to say I didn’t believe in the ad-supported tactic for us. And I was wrong about that.” Hastings credited Hulu and founding CEO Jason Kilar (also former chief exec of WarnerMedia) for demonstrating success with advertising in premium video: “Hulu really proved that you could do that at scale and offer consumers lower prices, and that that was a better model.”

Hastings is also a long-time promoter of charter schools and choice, so when I read that quote, I immediately flashed on another "service" business that we could scale with a model for lower prices for consumers--charter and private schools.

In the world of market driven school choice, there will, of course, be tiers. There is no market that doesn't do this, because one of the things the free market is good for is sorting customers and vendors into tiers. You can buy a Lexus or a used Yugo. Tiy can shop on Rodeo Drive or at Walmart. In short, free market choice really means that you can have all the choice you can afford. 

And for vendors who serve folks on the lower tiers, it's helpful to have alternative sources of income, to sell not just your product but access to your customer base, aka advertising.

So if I want to watch a full range of streamed content without being interrupted by stupid commercials, I can pay for the higher tier; otherwise, I can go low price and regular advertising. Thousands of executives at "legacy" tv channels are slapping their heads and muttering "No shit! What a brilliant idea." As well they might, because that's also how this part of free marketeering works-- you offer a unique business model at really low prices, and then once you've buried your competition, you change your model, including putting back some of the things your competition used to do.

Anyway, imagine this model for privatized free market schooling. Folks at pricey private school get, well, school. Meanwhile, on the lower tiers where students have to depend on meager voucher amounts and shrinking taxpayer subsidies, students get to attend "The Pepsi Corp Algebra II Class, brought to you today by Diet Pepsi." Consumers will get to enjoy lower prices while being soaked in advertising and marketing. 

It's one of the unstated economic pressures to privatize. We now all know one lesson of the internet--if you are not paying for the service, then you are actually the product. If you aren't buying, then you're the one being sold. By that measure, school is filled with millions of student-products that are not being sold, a giant source of revenue that is just being left on the table and nobody is cashing in on all those young eyeballs and hearts and minds. Just because a bunch of parents and government types would object.

How much easier it will be to sell the idea once marketeers are dealing with other marketeers looking for revenue streams and not parents and educators with crazy ideas about service and protecting children.

This is not even a new idea--remember the whole idea of Channel One was "We'll show your students some news and you'll let us show them some marketing." Don't imagine for a moment that privatized school won't bring that "ad-supported model" back the first minute they think they can. 

OK: Lowering the Bar Even Further For Teaching

Oklahoma has had trouble holding onto teachers for quite some time. A 2018 report found that over the previous six years, 30,000 Oklahoma teachers had left the classroom. Keep in mind that the state only employs about 52,000 teachers. Oklahoma has real trouble recruiting and retaining.

What could it be? What could it be? The lowest per pupil spending in the region? The low pay? The constant disrespect directed at them from public figures? The fact that their right-tilted leaders have spent years and years in a schoolhouse version of this conversation:

RTL: (Set fire to buildings)

Occupants: Hey! This building is on fire! We could use some help here!

RTL: We are shocked and outraged at your failure to keep your building safe! 

Occupants: A little help here?

RTL: Nonsense. We are going to set up charter and voucher buildings where folks can escape from the fire that some irresponsible parties are unwilling to fight. 

And then, every so often the Oklahoma GOP sees some corner of the building not yet engulfed in flames and takes a can of gasoline and a blowtorch to that.

That includes, especially, the teaching profession itself. That includes a whole set of rules that allow all manner of alternative paths to the classroom, including the popular "as long as you have a college degree in something, we might as let you teach" rule. 

But it turns out that wasn't loose enough. Oklahoma had a category called "adjunct teacher," a designation awarded to someone who had nothing but a high school diploma. But an adjunct teacher had limitations, allowing only 270 clock hours of classroom teaching per semester. 

Last January, Senator Jessica Garvin  (former nursing home administrator) decided to fix that by proposing that the limitation be axed, and school districts allowed to stick adjuncts in a classroom for as long as they liked. 

"Increasing pay and other recent changes haven’t helped end the teacher shortage problem, so we need to look at what assets we already have available, like adjunct and substitute teachers, and how we can better utilize them,” Garvin said.

Yes, say Oklahoma's leaders, we tried one thing, one time about four years ago, so clearly there's nothing left to do but lower our definition of what a "teacher" is. The bill, of course, passed.

Adjuncts are supposed to have "distinguished qualifications," but local districts get to decide what they think that means. 

This is the kind of dumb law that makes me wonder whether these folks are cynical or just, you know, dumb. Now that the law has been in place for this year's start, the Norman Transcript gathered some reactions, and oh boy. 

Contemplating the 370-or-so adjuncts hired this year, Bryan Duke, interim dean at the University of Central Oklahoma's college of education had some thoughts:

He said lawmakers promised the changes would draw highly-trained professionals, but based on conversations with district leaders, he said “that is not what we’re seeing.”

“We’ll just say that I’m not aware of those qualifications,” Duke said. “And, I certainly doubt that most folks would have those qualifications.”

Seriously, lawmakers? Exactly which highly-trained professionals did you imagine were going to jump at the chance to make less than $50K for doing teaching, which is--and I can't say this often enough--a really, really hard job to do when you're an amateur. 

That may have included Rep. Kyle Hilbert ("A new generation of conservative leadership"):

“I would push back on anyone that says that just because someone doesn’t have some letters next to their name that they’re less intelligent than someone else,” Hilbert said. “Some of the smartest people I know, their highest level of education is high school. and if they’ve got a career of experience and excellence in their field, perhaps they do have some expertise that they can bring.”

This is dumb stuff to say. Dumb. It shows a complete lack of understanding of what teaching actually involves. But its State Superintendent Joy Hofmeister who really offered some useful observations to the Transcript:

State Superintendent Joy Hofmeister, though, appeared stunned when she learned during an interview that lawmakers had stripped the college degree requirement for permanent teachers. She whispered “Oh my God!” under her breath.

She called the change “worrisome,” and said Oklahoma parents expect and deserve a college-educated teacher for their child.

Educating is a science, and students benefit from college-trained graduates who have the practice and expertise in helping students lift outcomes, particularly in reading, she said.

Hofmeister said when someone enters school having previously owned a Hallmark store, they don’t have the experience and training to step into a second-grade class.

“There are some who really seem to think that what is happening in school is a lot of babysitting,” Hofmeister said, “and it’s not. Kids don’t get back these days. They need to be spent with those who have the expertise to deliver an excellent education, and we have to do more.”

Hofmeister just launched state Science of Reading academies in order to train teachers in the One True Way to teach students to read. That's $13 million wasted. If you thought it was a terrible, awful, no good, really bad thing that schools of education weren't teaching teachers the One True Way to teach reading, then how must you feel knowing that classes can now be run by people who have never learned anything about teaching reading at all?

Of course, it may be that the legislators are not so much dumb as they are focused on what has long been a set of Oklahoma education goals--to privatize it, to crush that troublesome teacher union, and to spend as little on it as possible. This is McDonaldization in action--the larger your pool of potential employees, the less you have to pay them and the more easily you can replace them. And the more you degrade teaching in public schools, the more you can push charters and other private schools. It's the Florida model--to make your charters and vouchers look better, make public schools look worse. 

Alternate pathways to the class are not automatically a bad thing, and being able to tap professional expertise can be a big benefit for schools. But this measure goes far beyond that.

And if Oklahoma legislators think that there's a vast untapped supply of people who would have made really great teachers, but skipped it because of some red tape--well, they might want to look at a 2017 survey of Oklahomans who hold teaching certificates but weren't using them. One third said more pay might tempt them, but two thirds said it would take more, like respect, autonomy, professional treatment. Do legislators imagine that people who didn't train to be teachers will be happier about mediocre pay and general disrespect? 

Oklahoma (and other parts of the country) didn't dig this hole overnight, and they won't fill it overnight, either. But solutions like "just let anyone fill the job" is just digging the hole deeper and deeper. It sends a terrible message to people who bothered to actually invest time and money in preparing to teach, and an equally terrible message to people considering entry into the profession. This is a lousy solution to a real problem.

ICYMI: A Quick Calm Moment Edition (12/4)

Christmas is still far enough away that the Board of Directors are not yet losing their mind, but at age 5 they clearly understand Christmas in ways they previously did not. Just hang on.

I'm going to remind you that this weekly post is all about amplification. They way people get heard on the interwebz is to be shared, far and wide, again and again. Every single person who can click can help out with that. So if you read something here that speaks to you, share it. Post it (from the original source) on your Facebook or Tweetster or whatever platform you hang out upon (which is important, because as folks spread out across various platforms, it takes a little more work to get the word to them all). 

Sharing really is caring, and the bigger your personal audience, the more amplification you can provide. Okay, here we go.

Erie students get an A+ for academic growth

The story of Erie is encouraging. A school district that at one point seriously considered closing all its high schools has put together a remarkable coalition to lift it up out of the ditch. Yeah, I don't think much of test scores as a measure, but several measures, something is going right up there.

What do we owe the children of the pandemic

Nancy Flanagan with a heck of a post asking some of the important questions that most NAEP panic coverage is missing. 

Conservative states are blocking trans medical care. Families are fleeing.

Politico offers some reportage on how things are working out for some families in Texas and Florida.

"Groomers"

A post about the political machinations of the anti-LGBTQ crowd in South Carolina.

The Science of Reading and the Media: Is Reporting Biased?

From Maren Aukerman at the Literacy Research Association, an excellent rundown of what's going on in the current iteration of the Reading Wars.

After a bruising Michigan election, what’s next for Betsy DeVos and her education agenda?

Chalkbeat Detroit considers the DeVos fortunes after their shellacking-by-proxy in Michigan's elections. 

Election Reflection

Teacher activist Nicole Wolff in Arizona reflects on an election that was exhausting and not entirely encouraging in its results.

The System is Just Not Built That Way

TC Weber with some things to think about considering relationships and canned SEL programs

Former area teachers say they left profession feeling exhausted, unsupported

From Fargo, a look at teachers who have been worn down by problems with student behavior and a lack of support in dealing with them. 

Cynical MAGA censors are damaging public education

Always interesting to see how these things look to people outside the education bubble. Here's nominally-conservative Jennifer Rubin at the Washington Post offering her take on the reading restrictions movement.

NC Baptist: On book bans, Moms for Liberty sure has a narrow view of liberty

And here's a take on book banning from a card-carrying Baptist in the South. 

And then there are the pensions!

Jeff Waid continues his series with a look at the arguments being made to reduce pensions for teachers.

Pursue School Improvement Through Persuasion, Not Vilification

Yes, this is a decade or two late, and yes, Rick Hess has been pretty close to the problem he's critiquing. But he's not wrong. At Ed Week.

Elsewhere, a piece I wrote is in the official magazine of the official superintendents' association. It's about the connections between small towns and their schools.

Over at Forbes, I looked at some standards movement fans spinning their wheels and still not understanding where they went wrong, and then I picked up on Oklahoma's stated intent to require taxpayers to fund religious charters. 

And here's your weekly reminder that you can get all of this stuff via substack--free and delivered straight to your inbox.