Why Schools Fail–Introduction

Why Schools Fail—Introduction

In 1996, Bruce Goldberg wrote a book for the Cato Institute entitled Why Schools Fail. This book is free online at the Cato Institute and provides an interesting analysis of public school education from a libertarian perspective. Political Factions will be posting analysis of the book by individual chapters as book review and as one of the books for the Ethical Politics project. Since education is such a huge part of American life and part of the political divide it is important to examine schools from all types of angles.

In the introduction to Why Schools Fail, a quote is given from a former president of Harvard University about the American education system around the time of 1959,

“It works, most of us like it, and it appears to be as permanent a feature of our society as most of our political institutions.”—James B. Contant, former president of Harvard University, The American High School Today, (New York: Signet Books, 1959), p. 19, as quoted in Bruce Goldberg, Why Schools Fail, (Washington, D.C.: Cato Institute) © 1996, p. 1 [Link(s): http://store.cato.org/free-ebooks/why-schools-fail]

The point of Why Schools Fail is to challenge the ideas that the public school system works—or at least works well and efficiently in the purpose for which it is intended—and that most people seem to like it. It should be pointed out that—even if it is granted that most people “like” the education system—it could be because they have not had the chance to experience many competing alternatives.

Goldberg, however, basically grants that this system is permanent. This is something he does not dispute. He writes, “Given the widespread support for public schooling, there are probably few who would quarrel with the observation that it is permanent.”[1] Not having read too much further in the book, this seems like Goldberg has already given away crucial ground on the permanency of a system that he is challenging. Obviously the meat of his book has not been given yet but he seems to have taken this fact for granted, while wanting to challenge other aspects of education.

Education is—and should be—a permanent feature of America. The issue is how education is implemented and what allows people to be most free. There is much value attributed to education but the question is whether it should be provided through the current government-mandated system or if other alternatives could be better options.

He notes that, “Dissatisfaction with schooling is widespread at all levels.”[2] One of his pieces of evidence to support his claim is that the dropout rate among high school students is around 25%.[3] This was true when Goldberg wrote Why Schools Fail in 1996 but the high school dropout rate has actually been decreasing.

National Center for Education Statistics [Link(s): https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=16]

“U.S. high school dropout rates reaches record low, driven by improvements among Hispanics, blacks,” Pew Research Center, October 2, 2014 [Link(s): http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/10/02/u-s-high-school-dropout-rate-reaches-record-low-driven-by-improvements-among-hispanics-blacks/]

It is interesting to note, in light of the fact that this book was written almost twenty years ago, that dropout rates are lower. This might show that schools have improved in some way by keeping more students in them all the way through to graduation, however, there may be other factors at work as well.

Another point he makes about the education system is that a third of all new teachers leave after the first two years.[4] This appears still to be the case. Some of the reasons observed for why this is the case is that teachers have to work with government mandates like No Child Left Behind, they feel they do not have enough support, the students are not disciplined, they feel underpaid and underfunded, and they feel like they have a lack of influence, at least, according to one article.[5]

The main idea that Goldberg conveys is that there is a vision of what education actually is and then there is the reality. Educational philosophers had or have normative ideas of what public education ought to be and the argument Goldberg makes is that they need to take a serious, empirical look at what actually happens in public education. He states, what to many seems to be obvious, “What seems undeniable is that there is a substantial contrast between the vision of what public education is supposed to be and the reality of schooling itself.”[6]

In public schools there is a stifling of freedom and individualism. Those are supposedly two American values and schools are meant to be training citizens. The fact of the matter is that accepting government-planned, -mandated, -run schools because they are “free” has the cost of possibly training future American citizens to be less free. Goldberg quotes Charles Silberman, author of Crisis in the Classroom,

“It is not possible to spend any prolonged period visiting public school classrooms without being appalled by the mutilation viewed everywhere—mutilation of spontaneity, of joy in learning, of pleasure in creating, of sense of self. The public schools…are the kind of institutions one cannot really dislike until one gets to know them well.”—Charles Silberman, Crisis in the Classroom, (New York: Random House, 1970), p. 10, as quoted in Bruce Goldberg, Why Schools Fail, (Washington, D.C.: Cato Institute) © 1996, p. 2 [Link(s): http://store.cato.org/free-ebooks/why-schools-fail]

Goldberg believes that there are two things wrong with the idea that all decisions about a students’ education should be left to the educational professionals and their scientifically-based research.[7]

First, he writes, “…the claims educators have made to scientific knowledge of what children require do not sustain examination.”[8] Educators have convinced others that they should be in charge of all aspects of education because they have research-based, scientific justification for teaching the way they do. Goldberg believes that this is not true. He even goes so far as to make the bold statement “…there is no such thing as educational science.”[9] This is the assumption that he tackles in the first chapter of the book which comes next and it will be interesting to read how he deals with the ideas of educational science and comes to the conclusion that such a thing does not even exist.

He gives a small preview of what he means by saying, “…they turn out to be not scientific at all but rather a combination of personal taste and simplistic, distorted versions of philosophical theories about how the mind works.”[10] In other words, they are more philosophical and preferential than actually scientific.

Second, he asserts, “…the denial of children’s individuality is not to be taken lightly.”[11] This is the other main premise of his book. When individuality is denied then students are stifled and suppressed and expected to be something else and learn a certain way. Public schools, by their very nature, cannot cater to narrow, individual needs and circumstances because a monopolistic State is involved. Goldberg basically concludes with the idea that denial of individuality and the idea that every single person must follow a general plan is the very core of school failure.[12]

[1] Bruce Goldberg, Why Schools Fail, (Washington, D.C.: Cato Institute) © 1996, p. 1 [Link(s): http://store.cato.org/free-ebooks/why-schools-fail]

[2] Bruce Goldberg, Why Schools Fail, (Washington, D.C.: Cato Institute) © 1996, p. 1 [Link(s): http://store.cato.org/free-ebooks/why-schools-fail]

[3] Bruce Goldberg, Why Schools Fail, (Washington, D.C.: Cato Institute) © 1996, p. 1 [Link(s): http://store.cato.org/free-ebooks/why-schools-fail]

[4] Bruce Goldberg, Why Schools Fail, (Washington, D.C.: Cato Institute) © 1996, p. 1 [Link(s): http://store.cato.org/free-ebooks/why-schools-fail]

[5] Cynthia Kopkowski, “Why They Leave,” National Education Association, April 5, 2008 [Link(s): http://www.nea.org/home/12630.htm]

[6] Bruce Goldberg, Why Schools Fail, (Washington, D.C.: Cato Institute) © 1996, p. 1 [Link(s): http://store.cato.org/free-ebooks/why-schools-fail]

[7] Bruce Goldberg, Why Schools Fail, (Washington, D.C.: Cato Institute) © 1996, p. 3 [Link(s): http://store.cato.org/free-ebooks/why-schools-fail]

[8] Bruce Goldberg, Why Schools Fail, (Washington, D.C.: Cato Institute) © 1996, p. 3 [Link(s): http://store.cato.org/free-ebooks/why-schools-fail]

[9] Bruce Goldberg, Why Schools Fail, (Washington, D.C.: Cato Institute) © 1996, p. 3 [Link(s): http://store.cato.org/free-ebooks/why-schools-fail]

[10] Bruce Goldberg, Why Schools Fail, (Washington, D.C.: Cato Institute) © 1996, p. 3 [Link(s): http://store.cato.org/free-ebooks/why-schools-fail]

[11] Bruce Goldberg, Why Schools Fail, (Washington, D.C.: Cato Institute) © 1996, p. 3 [Link(s): http://store.cato.org/free-ebooks/why-schools-fail]

[12] Bruce Goldberg, Why Schools Fail, (Washington, D.C.: Cato Institute) © 1996, p. 3 [Link(s): http://store.cato.org/free-ebooks/why-schools-fail]

Math Teacher Assigns Some XXX-tra Credit

Math Teacher Assigns Some XXX-tra Credit

(The title of this article has been borrowed and did not originate from Political Factions).

A high school math teacher supposedly told his students this week that they could get extra credit for his class by searching through their parents’ rooms and looking for condoms and sex toys. When first hearing this story, it seemed like this was the teacher of a health class or sexual education. It still would have been wrong but the fact that it was a math teacher makes it even stranger.

One of the parents, Kimberly Cobene spoke out about the alleged assignment: “It was to go into your parents’ private drawers or whatever to seek out sexual toys or condoms, or anything of that nature and to take a selfie with it.”[1]

“Parents said school administrators implied the assignment was meant as a joke,…”—“Alameda Teacher Suspended After Alleged ‘Sex Toy Selfie’ Assignment,” CBS, June 5, 2015 [Link(s): http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2015/06/05/alameda-teacher-suspended-after-alleged-sex-toy-selfie-assignment/]

It has been claimed that it was a joke but parents did not accept that explanation. To be fair, it is possible for a teacher to make an off-hand, inappropriate comment in response to something a student said and then for students themselves to take it too far and misunderstand it. The story only comes to us after it has passed through many different people. That being said, this is still absolutely bizarre.

The evidence that needs to be found out is some type of grading system for this “assignment” or whether students actually turned anything into the teacher. It has been reported that his grade books are being examined by the district and an investigation had been ongoing since April before the story found its way to the media. The teacher, however, remained in the classroom until very recently.

On June 5 the story was updated and the teacher had been suspended. Previously, the identity of the teacher or even the specific school had not been known; all that had been revealed was that this occurred in a particular school district. Now the identity of the teacher has been updated. Wing-Wah Leung was the sophomore math teacher who allegedly gave the assignment.[2]

Leung has been suspended until the end of the school year. By the way, school ends next week at Encinal High School. There is a possibility that Leung could return to teach again but that remains to be seen.

Not only is this unacceptable but reveals that a bureaucratic system can be so convoluted that a teacher accused of such a thing is not removed until the news media breaks the story. Obviously there needs to be an investigation and Wing-Wah Leung—despite what parents might want—is entitled to due process in that investigation. That being said, students should not have to remain in the classroom with a man with whom they and their parents are uncomfortable.

This also shows that sexual deviance is still possible—even in the “liberal” San Francisco area. Parents, students, and the news recognize that certain things are inappropriate and wrong. Not only that but this was a clear invasion of the privacy of the parents if this does turn out to be what parents and students are claiming.

Unfortunately there are more stories like this one. Another teacher in Minneapolis took middle and high school students to an adult toy shop—which would have been bad enough—but this was done without parental consent. This, however, was at a Democratic School which is a different type of education and is private. As bad as it was for the teacher, Starri Hedges, to take her students here, at least it was not at taxpayer expense.[3]

Starri Hedges teachers at a small private school in Minneapolis called Gaia Democratic School. She teaches sexual education for a fairly small class. After learning about sexual reproduction she ended the year by taking her students to an adult store named Smitten Kitten. The age range of the students was as low as eleven. Some parents, however, said they did not know about the field trip until after it had happened.[4]

Imagine signing the permission slip for that field trip. In point of fact, it was a different type of permission slip called an opt-out slip for that class. The difference between a permission slip and an opt-out slip is that a permission slip asks parents if a teacher or school may do a certain thing, while an opt-out slip notifies parents that a teacher or school will do something unless parents specifically decide that they do not want their student to participate.

Starri Hedges did not seem to be ashamed of her behavior. She admitted that she could have coordinated the trip in a better way—because coordination was the main issue, not the fact that she took students to an adult store—but she actually defended her actions.[5]

“What I saw happening on our trip, I thought it was beautiful because kids could talk to these sex educators without any shame, without any fear.”—Starri Hedges, as quoted in Meg Wagner, “Minneapolis sex ed teacher takes preteens to adult toy shop without parental consent,” New York Daily News, June 2, 2015 [Link(s): http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/minneapolis-sex-ed-teacher-takes-preteens-sex-toy-shop-article-1.2243850]

Yes, apparently minimum-wage workers in a porn shop are to be taken as wise and experienced educators of middle and high school children. Usually exposing minors to pornography by an adult is illegal.

The good news is only middle and high school students were allowed to attend, if that can be called good news. There is no government school authority over the school, meaning a school district or some other body. This, however, is a good thing because this allows parents to demand an explanation from the school with the threat that they can remove their children if questions are not answered to their satisfaction. This will definitely be the last type of field trip at Gaia Democratic School because of the backlash from parents.[6] This was the conclusion of Hedges,

“It was certainly the first time we have taken that kind of field trip and it will probably be our last, which I feel bad (about) because the kids had so much fun.”—Starri Hedges, as quoted in Meg Wagner, “Minneapolis sex ed teacher takes preteens to adult toy shop without parental consent,” New York Daily News, June 2, 2015 [Link(s): http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/minneapolis-sex-ed-teacher-takes-preteens-sex-toy-shop-article-1.2243850]

No doubt some lessons can be drawn between these two parallel stories. They demonstrate the differences in power and freedom for students and parents of students in a public school and in a private school.

While Starri Hedges seemed unremorseful the parents in her situation have more power, even though they had to react instead of act. In both stories, parents found out about sexually inappropriate assignments after-the-fact

In the case of Starri Hedges, however, parents could take immediate action, remove their students from that type of school, remove their payment from that school, and remove their children from the presence of that type of teacher. If parents did not care or even supported the assignment, they had the choice to stay or leave, with the satisfaction that their demands would be met almost immediately.

In the case of Wang-Wah Leung, parents found out about sexually inappropriate subject matter after-the-fact but Leung remained teaching from April until this last week and it took the news media to pressure the school district into taking action. Parents’ choices were limited as to whether they would accept having their students around a teacher that made them and their students uncomfortable. Another school might be a possibility but another public school would have been the same type of system.

There are many parallels to be drawn between the similarities and differences of these stories. One of the most significant aspects is the difference between a school that is publicly-mandated, where choices and freedom are limited, subjected to a bureaucratic system or a school that is subject to the free market, where parents have freedom and choices, where the voice of parents mean something, and where action can be taken in a reasonable amount of time.

It will be interesting to see what becomes of these two teachers. Again, remember that Starri Hedges is being paid more directly by parents in a private school but public school teachers are paid more indirectly through taxes and government funding. Over which situation do parents have more control, which is more democratic, and which is freer?

[1] “Selfie With Parents’ Sex Toys? Alameda Teacher Accused Of Assigning Bizarre Extra Credit For Sophmores,” CBS, June 3, 2015 [Link(s): http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2015/06/03/selfie-with-parents-sex-toys-alameda-high-school-teacher-accused-of-assigning-bizarre-extra-credit-for-sophomores/]

[2] “Alameda Teacher Suspended After Alleged ‘Sex Toy Selfie’ Assignment,” CBS, June 5, 2015 [Link(s): http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2015/06/05/alameda-teacher-suspended-after-alleged-sex-toy-selfie-assignment/]

[3] Meg Wagner, “Minneapolis sex ed teacher takes preteens to adult toy shop without parental consent,” New York Daily News, June 2, 2015 [Link(s): http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/minneapolis-sex-ed-teacher-takes-preteens-sex-toy-shop-article-1.2243850]

[4] Meg Wagner, “Minneapolis sex ed teacher takes preteens to adult toy shop without parental consent,” New York Daily News, June 2, 2015 [Link(s): http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/minneapolis-sex-ed-teacher-takes-preteens-sex-toy-shop-article-1.2243850]

[5] Meg Wagner, “Minneapolis sex ed teacher takes preteens to adult toy shop without parental consent,” New York Daily News, June 2, 2015 [Link(s): http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/minneapolis-sex-ed-teacher-takes-preteens-sex-toy-shop-article-1.2243850]

[6] Meg Wagner, “Minneapolis sex ed teacher takes preteens to adult toy shop without parental consent,” New York Daily News, June 2, 2015 [Link(s): http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/minneapolis-sex-ed-teacher-takes-preteens-sex-toy-shop-article-1.2243850]

Commentary on Federalist #1 (Video)