I just finished Diane Ravitch’s The Death and Life of the Great American School System, which I’ve been working through in fits and starts for several months now. It’s an excellent book, which methodically eviscerates every major educational reform movement since the 1960s, written by someone who was party to many of those same reforms. The writing style is really what makes the book; most chapters begin with an upbeat passage on the exciting potential of the reform movement under scrutiny, often clearly pulled from the author’s feelings at the time, then darken in both style and content as they move into implementation issues, and finally take on an almost sardonic tone as they cover the long term studies which demonstrate a negligible or negative net effect. Another very strong point is that almost every claim is clearly referenced, in a well-integrated way, which results in a nearly 30 page bibliography for a < 300 page book. The absence of references for the few unsubstantiated clams is jarring enough to make them stand out as opinions.
Perhaps the most depressing portion of the book is about the “apply business principles to education” (accountability + “choice”, which in this context means privatization) movement which has recently been institutionalized and adopted on a far greater scale than any of the reforms before it, most of which showed more promise and potential validity than this one. There are an absurd number of good arguments with which to object to such policies, many of which are covered, but perhaps the best impact is the simplest: Does anyone remember what just collapsed, based on decisions made on business principles? The whole god damn world economy? Right, let’s not introduce more of that into education.
The book also seems to support my pet theory that the real good accomplished by Teach For America and similar programs is supplying a steady stream of bodies, who are unlikely stay for long enough to become effective anyway, into the high turnover positions, allowing more potential career educators to make it through their first few years. Helpful? Yes, but not in any of the ways they claim to be.
Her suggestions for alternatives in the closing are mostly very solid as far as I’m concerned: she advocates for adequate funding (duh), efforts to attract well qualified teachers and retain them for long enough to become experienced (duh), and a holistic understanding of learning which broadly evaluates learning progress in a universally comparable way, and takes into account the effects of externalities, rather than fixating on a few easily quantified factors (duh). Most significantly, she advocates a universal base curriculum, which is sequential, holistic, and scientifically and pedagogically sound. The one point that caught me off guard is that she argues for letting the old fashioned private and religious schools be in the same breath as advocating a standardized curricula to prevent the same from imposing their quirks and bigotry on another generation, a position which seems entirely incongruous to me.
It is a little bit onerous in places, as required to maintain it’s extensive rigor, but a very good read. Highly recommended for anyone interested in education.
