Is the purpose of the current crop of charter schools to enhance public education-- or replace it?
While the money has flowed to bolster PR for school choice and charters, I've been taking look at some of charterdom's less admirable side-effects. Plus, the biggest failure of the reformster movement.
There is no point in discussing what testing program best provides accountability if the tests do not actually measure any of the things we want schools to be accountable for.
This week the Washington Post got moral, New Jersey charters got tough, and the Senate got busy.
In the edubloggoverse, we've moved quickly from a consideration of a possible ESEA rewrite to the real issue that will lurk behind all the upcoming deliberations, negotiations, and arguments with your brother-in-law at family gatherings—just how much involvement should the federal government have in the world of public education?
Over at my other blog, this week brought reactions to Arne Duncan's big-ish speech on ESEA, as well as some other folks with thoughts about what the rewrite of ESEA should look like-- including a complete AFT about-face.
"Congress must not abdicate its responsibility to help all children succeed." The first picture that popped into my head was an old white guy in a suit, knocking on some family's front door. When a parent answers, he says, "Hello. I'm Senator Bumswoggle, and I'm here to help Chris study for the big algebra test tomorrow."
This week, more Arne Duncan shenanigans, Brookings and CAP get silly, and Common Core gets the love.
I don't believe that reformers really care about the supposed problem of these many phantom bad teachers in school. My disbelief is not because of what the reformsters are doing, but because of what they aren't.
Changing the year with more Common Core commentary, Pennsylvania education spending, the biggest ed win of the year, and more news from York, PA.