The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
My Review of a Magisterial HBD-Aware History of Education Reform
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

My new column in Taki’s Magazine is a review of an important new history of American education reform efforts from an HBD-aware perspective:

Getting Schooled
by Steve Sailer
November 04, 2015

My old friend Raymond Wolters, a professor of history at the U. of Delaware for 50 years, has come back from five months in the hospital waiting for his lung transplant to write the first narrative account to make sense of the fads and fashions that have roiled K–12 public schools since the failure of forced busing to prove a panacea for racial disparities in school achievement: The Long Crusade: Profiles in Education Reform, 1967–2014.

Granted, I’m biased in favor of The Long Crusade, in part because I didn’t have much hope that Professor Wolters would live through his health woes to write it, in part because I am quoted a few dozen times in it.

(By the way, seeing myself quoted alongside more respectable figures, I have to admit that I really do come across as a sarcastic bastard.)

Read the whole thing there.

 
Hide 72 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Seems like educational reformers tend to come from elite schools.

    • Replies: @Lagertha
    exactly! Finally, someone sees this fact. And, the worst part is: these "reformers" grew up in wealth (relative; none of them come from old families with multi m/b). They were probably lucky enough to go to private schools (NYC elites/boarding schools in New England/schools like BS, Stuy/ HM) so they don't have a god-given clue about ANY other schools....and, I mean, nada, non, zilch, nothing. I have been around these people forever...and, I didn't get a chance to drown them in The Pond. But, none of them know how to deal with the education of students and environments of which they have never experienced. Why is this so hard for everyone to understand? Why do we trust that anyone who says they are a reformer really is a reformer? I want evidence. At this point, after 50 years of trying to close the "achievement gap," I want evidence that someone knows something i don't know, something new.
  2. And what is the reason for that book not available for purchase at Amazon?

  3. OT.

    Teaching Fat Studies
    … Oregon State University …
    The emergent, interdisciplinary field of Fat Studies (FS) has at its core the identification and elimination of bias based on body weight, shape, and size. Akin to Women’s Studies(WS), Queer Studies, and scholarly fields of inquiry based on race and ethnicity, FS evolved from grassroots activism and a strengthening po litical movement to resist discrimination and promote body acceptance as well as health for people of all sizes

    • Replies: @Clifford Brown
    Nuke it from orbit, son.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCbfMkh940Q
    , @theo the kraut
    How dare you to omit the queen bee's labour of love, cited at the bottom of:
    http://oregonstate.edu/ctl/fat-studies-teaching-about-weightism-social-justice-issue

    "Reflections on Fat Acceptance: Lessons Learned from Privilege" by, wait for it--*Linda Bacon*, PhD.

    That's her: http://www.lindabacon.org/media-images-2
    She's more, say, feeble than fat--what does that lady smoke?
  4. Sounds like an interesting book. Nice to hear that Steve gets quoted, even if he is a sarcastic bastard.

    Chasing the latest educational fad to close the “gap” is disrupting and futile. We’d be better off following Steve’s advice.
    http://www.vdare.com/articles/sailers-four-point-plan-for-improving-schools

  5. In my city this week, the school board brought forward information that economically disadvantaged whites still scored better than non-disadvantaged blacks. This is not at all surprising to anyone familiar with the literature, but the school board was scandalized because, to them, this was proof that somehow either all their teachers were racists or we were failing the black kids somehow. Now they want to “do something!”

  6. I’ll repost my comments here:

    The courts have been the biggest bane of public education. It supported the progressive educators, or in many cases created rights that not even progressive educators had dreamed up. Progressive educators, who wouldn’t have been able to get a foot in anywhere were it not for this reality.

    So while I’ll read the book, but if it doesn’t mention the tremendous damage the courts have done, then that book still needs to be written.

    The courts don’t care about reality or expenses. When the federal government dreamed up the unfunded mandate of special education, the courts were there to expand and increase the costs to the states and school. The courts declared that kids who don’t speak English deserve an education too, which the federal government then expanded to mean that anyone who isn’t “academically proficient” in English and speaks a language other than English is coded as an English Language Learner. Which means that over 50% of the kids coded ELL were born here and think of English as their native language. A significant chunk of ELL kids are *third* generation citizens. And of course, the courts declared that, even though states have no say in federal immigration policy, they can be forced to educate all non-citizens.

    The federal government has done nothing but create absurd mandates for forty years, beginning with the original ESEA. Both progressives and conservatives have done much to increase the demands on schools, both determined to ignore reality.

    And with all that, scores are still up substantially in elementary and middle school. Despite keeping more kids in school, our high school scores haven’t (yet) dropped.
    Yes, we could be doing better. But what’s amazing is despite the determination of the courts and the federal government of all political persuasions to ignore reality and implement “progressive” education, the schools aren’t terrible.

    • Replies: @Eustace Tilley (not)
    "But what's amazing is...the schools aren't terrible."

    Beg to differ with you on that one, mate.

    I was in a mega-grocery store two months ago. The teenaged clerk could not add 20 and 12 in her head. (True story).

    "...we are demanding too much be taught." Are you serious?

    , @Clyde

    The courts don’t care about reality or expenses. When the federal government dreamed up the unfunded mandate of special education, the courts were there to expand and increase the costs to the states and school.
     
    How about the Kansas City school system for courts not caring what is mandated to be spent? Court mandated to integrate at a cost of billion dollars plus, including lots of new schools built. The politically connected contractors loved that proviso.
    Upshot is whites bailed to the suburbs so the KC schools are black as ever and are miserable failures that have not elevated blacks one iota. The real intent of this mad spending (theft from the taxpayers) was to make the SJW judges feel real, real, real good about themselves. Judges who undoubtedly already lived out in the suburbs where their children went to decent suburban schools far away from the judicially decreed mess.
    , @Jack D
    It depends which schools. Many of the public high schools in Philadelphia are abysmal . Take for example Benjamin Franklin High School (Franklin is rolling over in his grave): http://www.greatschools.org/pennsylvania/philadelphia/2101-Franklin-Benjamin-High-School/quality/

    where 1% of the students are rated "proficient" in science.
    , @Jim Don Bob
    One of the most destructive things did was to rule that students had rights. When I was in school, the principal could suspend or expel anybody on his own authority. Now it's quasi-judicial, and the trouble makers know it. The inability of the school to discipline these morons makes learning difficult to impossible for those of their classmates that want to learn.

    Staggered 10 year terms for the Supreme Court!
  7. A few other comments:

    Much of that is because the much maligned teachers pretty much ignore the mandates, and can get away with it.

    ******************

    I would quibble with it being the “first narrative account” of education reform, with or without the “make sense of”. Larry Cuban, Diana Ravitch, Rick Hess, have all written accounts of education reform that explain what actually happens, if not always explaining why.

    I don’t think you’re right about Common Core, which is much more progressive than traditional, and makes no mention of content. It can’t, really. Content is the purview of history and science, not math and English. English is mostly about reading texts, and to the extent that “content” is about familiarity with classic texts, then Common Core’s emphasis on non-fiction is the opposite. Moreover, the new history and science stds trying to gain acceptance are all skills, no content.

    I’ve written quite a bit about Hirsch over the years, including Hirsch’s main intellectual (as opposed to political) detractor, Grant Wiggins. He and his supporters do a bit of a bait and switch. They start by saying “reading without content knowledge is IMPOSSIBLE” and then you say wait–why can’t you gain knowledge through reading?” and they say well, sure, you can, but it’s a lot harder.

    In other words, high IQ people consume books to gain knowledge, but that’s harder to do with less intelligence. So the content needs to be taught explicitly. He never says this, of course.

    But then there’s a big problem with content knowledge teaching, which I am certainly not opposed to in theory: the kids forget the content. It’s as if they were never taught. I just taught a history class last year, and slowed down instruction considerably, teaching less and less, and doing less through direct lecture, because the kids just don’t remember. Part of this is, I suspect, what we discussed before in the Flynn thread. But part of this is that we are demanding too much be taught. And part of it is that our goals about what is taught are just idiotic.

    Seventy years ago, much of geometry instruction was nothing more than memorization of formulas. That would have been very, very boring. Our kids today wouldn’t tolerate it, and our kids back then, who often valued the opportunity of school, didn’t always learn it. We didn’t blame the teachers when they didn’t.

    This may also explain the problem with Success for All fadeout. Decoding is fine, but if they can’t absorb and remember content, learning will slow way down.

    • Replies: @keypusher
    Ed, do you have a recommended list of books on education reform? I got my sister (a high school math teacher) Ravitch's first book on your say-so. Not sure my sister has gotten around to reading it. :-) But if you had a list, it would be worth knowing about. Might be a good thing to post on your website too.
    , @Immigrant from former USSR
    Dear Education realist:
    I like you blog very much.
    I disagree with what you wrote
    "Seventy years ago, much of geometry instruction
    was nothing more than memorization of formulas."
    I do not remember studying of the formulae from Geometry,
    except the Pytharogus theorem. For me it was mostly 2D and 3D pictures,
    relationships between lines, surfaces etc.
    Use this occasi0on to witness my deep respect of Mr. Sailer's work.
    , @Jack D
    Humans have terrific capacity for memorization. Before writing existed (which was most of human history) the only way knowledge could be passed on was thru memorization and so we developed a strong capacity for it. Probably when we were still apes we needed to memorize which trees had the best bananas or something, so memory existed even before words. In Islamic countries, there are children who memorize the entire Koran. None of your students, probably even the dumbest ones, have no problem reciting the words to the latest rap tunes - they probably know dozens of them. So if they can't remember what you are teaching in class, it's because they just don't care. If they really wanted to remember this stuff, if they had a desire to remember it in order to impress their friends and find mates, etc. , they would be memorizing the hell out of it, but they just don't care.
    , @Steve Sailer
    The ability to remember content longterm varies terrifically among individuals and among subjects within individuals.
  8. “a sarcastic bastard”: just one of nature’s Britons, cast on a foreign shore.

    • Replies: @SFG
    I actually think that about myself sometimes, and it doesn't even make genetic sense. Or perhaps a Frenchman. This American 'positive thinking' stuff just doesn't come naturally.
  9. • Replies: @Alfa158
    Someone at Yahoo must be asleep at the switch. The Unz moderator wouldn't allow some of the race realist comments that are being posted for that story.
  10. @education realist
    I'll repost my comments here:

    The courts have been the biggest bane of public education. It supported the progressive educators, or in many cases created rights that not even progressive educators had dreamed up. Progressive educators, who wouldn't have been able to get a foot in anywhere were it not for this reality.

    So while I'll read the book, but if it doesn't mention the tremendous damage the courts have done, then that book still needs to be written.

    The courts don't care about reality or expenses. When the federal government dreamed up the unfunded mandate of special education, the courts were there to expand and increase the costs to the states and school. The courts declared that kids who don't speak English deserve an education too, which the federal government then expanded to mean that anyone who isn't "academically proficient" in English and speaks a language other than English is coded as an English Language Learner. Which means that over 50% of the kids coded ELL were born here and think of English as their native language. A significant chunk of ELL kids are *third* generation citizens. And of course, the courts declared that, even though states have no say in federal immigration policy, they can be forced to educate all non-citizens.

    The federal government has done nothing but create absurd mandates for forty years, beginning with the original ESEA. Both progressives and conservatives have done much to increase the demands on schools, both determined to ignore reality.

    And with all that, scores are still up substantially in elementary and middle school. Despite keeping more kids in school, our high school scores haven't (yet) dropped.
    Yes, we could be doing better. But what's amazing is despite the determination of the courts and the federal government of all political persuasions to ignore reality and implement "progressive" education, the schools aren't terrible.

    “But what’s amazing is…the schools aren’t terrible.”

    Beg to differ with you on that one, mate.

    I was in a mega-grocery store two months ago. The teenaged clerk could not add 20 and 12 in her head. (True story).

    “…we are demanding too much be taught.” Are you serious?

  11. @education realist
    A few other comments:


    Much of that is because the much maligned teachers pretty much ignore the mandates, and can get away with it.

    ******************

    I would quibble with it being the "first narrative account" of education reform, with or without the "make sense of". Larry Cuban, Diana Ravitch, Rick Hess, have all written accounts of education reform that explain what actually happens, if not always explaining why.


    I don't think you're right about Common Core, which is much more progressive than traditional, and makes no mention of content. It can't, really. Content is the purview of history and science, not math and English. English is mostly about reading texts, and to the extent that "content" is about familiarity with classic texts, then Common Core's emphasis on non-fiction is the opposite. Moreover, the new history and science stds trying to gain acceptance are all skills, no content.

    I've written quite a bit about Hirsch over the years, including Hirsch's main intellectual (as opposed to political) detractor, Grant Wiggins. He and his supporters do a bit of a bait and switch. They start by saying "reading without content knowledge is IMPOSSIBLE" and then you say wait--why can't you gain knowledge through reading?" and they say well, sure, you can, but it's a lot harder.

    In other words, high IQ people consume books to gain knowledge, but that's harder to do with less intelligence. So the content needs to be taught explicitly. He never says this, of course.

    But then there's a big problem with content knowledge teaching, which I am certainly not opposed to in theory: the kids forget the content. It's as if they were never taught. I just taught a history class last year, and slowed down instruction considerably, teaching less and less, and doing less through direct lecture, because the kids just don't remember. Part of this is, I suspect, what we discussed before in the Flynn thread. But part of this is that we are demanding too much be taught. And part of it is that our goals about what is taught are just idiotic.

    Seventy years ago, much of geometry instruction was nothing more than memorization of formulas. That would have been very, very boring. Our kids today wouldn't tolerate it, and our kids back then, who often valued the opportunity of school, didn't always learn it. We didn't blame the teachers when they didn't.

    This may also explain the problem with Success for All fadeout. Decoding is fine, but if they can't absorb and remember content, learning will slow way down.

    Ed, do you have a recommended list of books on education reform? I got my sister (a high school math teacher) Ravitch’s first book on your say-so. Not sure my sister has gotten around to reading it. 🙂 But if you had a list, it would be worth knowing about. Might be a good thing to post on your website too.

  12. Hmm. Out of stock at amazon. Not carried at B&N. And my two local county libraries don’t even have a listing for it.

  13. Immigrant from former USSR [AKA "Florida Resident"] says:
    @education realist
    A few other comments:


    Much of that is because the much maligned teachers pretty much ignore the mandates, and can get away with it.

    ******************

    I would quibble with it being the "first narrative account" of education reform, with or without the "make sense of". Larry Cuban, Diana Ravitch, Rick Hess, have all written accounts of education reform that explain what actually happens, if not always explaining why.


    I don't think you're right about Common Core, which is much more progressive than traditional, and makes no mention of content. It can't, really. Content is the purview of history and science, not math and English. English is mostly about reading texts, and to the extent that "content" is about familiarity with classic texts, then Common Core's emphasis on non-fiction is the opposite. Moreover, the new history and science stds trying to gain acceptance are all skills, no content.

    I've written quite a bit about Hirsch over the years, including Hirsch's main intellectual (as opposed to political) detractor, Grant Wiggins. He and his supporters do a bit of a bait and switch. They start by saying "reading without content knowledge is IMPOSSIBLE" and then you say wait--why can't you gain knowledge through reading?" and they say well, sure, you can, but it's a lot harder.

    In other words, high IQ people consume books to gain knowledge, but that's harder to do with less intelligence. So the content needs to be taught explicitly. He never says this, of course.

    But then there's a big problem with content knowledge teaching, which I am certainly not opposed to in theory: the kids forget the content. It's as if they were never taught. I just taught a history class last year, and slowed down instruction considerably, teaching less and less, and doing less through direct lecture, because the kids just don't remember. Part of this is, I suspect, what we discussed before in the Flynn thread. But part of this is that we are demanding too much be taught. And part of it is that our goals about what is taught are just idiotic.

    Seventy years ago, much of geometry instruction was nothing more than memorization of formulas. That would have been very, very boring. Our kids today wouldn't tolerate it, and our kids back then, who often valued the opportunity of school, didn't always learn it. We didn't blame the teachers when they didn't.

    This may also explain the problem with Success for All fadeout. Decoding is fine, but if they can't absorb and remember content, learning will slow way down.

    Dear Education realist:
    I like you blog very much.
    I disagree with what you wrote
    “Seventy years ago, much of geometry instruction
    was nothing more than memorization of formulas.”
    I do not remember studying of the formulae from Geometry,
    except the Pytharogus theorem. For me it was mostly 2D and 3D pictures,
    relationships between lines, surfaces etc.
    Use this occasi0on to witness my deep respect of Mr. Sailer’s work.

  14. @slumber_j
    Off-topic: http://news.yahoo.com/sad-homecoming-haitians-deported-dominican-republic-055540399.html

    Someone at Yahoo must be asleep at the switch. The Unz moderator wouldn’t allow some of the race realist comments that are being posted for that story.

  15. Uh I shouldn’t post before coffee, please delete my first comment on this subject,

    OT: How the GOP elites rig the primaries:

    http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-gops-primary-rules-might-doom-carson-and-cruz/?ex_cid=538twitter
    When the New Left wanted to take over the Democrat Party the first thing they did was change the delegate rules, this allowed them to depose organized labor and take over the party in 1972.

    They’ve got six open fags and only three AFL-CIO people on that delegation!”-George Meany

  16. Where can one get a copy of this? It is currently not available on Amazon (well, except a copy for $8k+) and (to tie together two iSteve themes) the only copy I see on Worldcat is at the University of Utah.

    Before posting I tried to answer my own question. It looks like the book is available at the publisher: http://www.washsummit.com/shop/the-long-crusade
    I wonder why the lack of other availability, especially given the link to Amazon on that page and the wide availability of his earlier book Race and Education, 1954-2007.

    Interview with Wolters at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3Tbyb5Qljc&feature=youtu.be
    Steve mentioned at ~13:00 and ~16:20
    He discusses his inability to find an academic publisher for this book starting at 35:20 (more at 53:50).

  17. There’s no need to read this book. It can be dismissed out of hand, regardless of its merits or truthfulness. The SPLC lists its publisher, Washington Summit Publishers as a white nationalist group. Wolters can forget about this book being reviewed in any “respectable” publication. As far as the mainstream is concerned, he might as well march around with his buddies in KKK robes carrying a swastika and a burning cross.

    Compare with the new movie about Dan Rather, the modestly titled “Truth”. Because Rather was fighting for a good cause (the defeat of George Bush) it was OK for him to use fake evidence. I heard Rather just this morning say on the radio that even though the documents “might” have been fake (and he had no other real evidence), they portrayed the truth and the truth was more important than a few fake documents.

    So you have to understand “truth” as existing independently of any evidence – if the evidence disagrees with the “truth” we disregard the evidence – the truth is a bedrock which cannot be disturbed by mere evidence. If you understand leftism as a religion and substitute “faith” for “truth” then this all makes perfect sense.

    So, Wolters might as well have written a book denying the existence of God – he will convince the true believers of the religion of equality as much with all his facts and figures as he could convince the religious with evidence of the non-existence of God.

    • Replies: @Percy Gryce

    There’s no need to read this book. It can be dismissed out of hand, regardless of its merits or truthfulness. The SPLC lists its publisher, Washington Summit Publishers as a white nationalist group.
     
    Perhaps that's why there are presently no copies to be had through Amazon:

    http://www.amazon.com/Long-Crusade-Profiles-Education-1967-2014/dp/1593680414
  18. @education realist
    I'll repost my comments here:

    The courts have been the biggest bane of public education. It supported the progressive educators, or in many cases created rights that not even progressive educators had dreamed up. Progressive educators, who wouldn't have been able to get a foot in anywhere were it not for this reality.

    So while I'll read the book, but if it doesn't mention the tremendous damage the courts have done, then that book still needs to be written.

    The courts don't care about reality or expenses. When the federal government dreamed up the unfunded mandate of special education, the courts were there to expand and increase the costs to the states and school. The courts declared that kids who don't speak English deserve an education too, which the federal government then expanded to mean that anyone who isn't "academically proficient" in English and speaks a language other than English is coded as an English Language Learner. Which means that over 50% of the kids coded ELL were born here and think of English as their native language. A significant chunk of ELL kids are *third* generation citizens. And of course, the courts declared that, even though states have no say in federal immigration policy, they can be forced to educate all non-citizens.

    The federal government has done nothing but create absurd mandates for forty years, beginning with the original ESEA. Both progressives and conservatives have done much to increase the demands on schools, both determined to ignore reality.

    And with all that, scores are still up substantially in elementary and middle school. Despite keeping more kids in school, our high school scores haven't (yet) dropped.
    Yes, we could be doing better. But what's amazing is despite the determination of the courts and the federal government of all political persuasions to ignore reality and implement "progressive" education, the schools aren't terrible.

    The courts don’t care about reality or expenses. When the federal government dreamed up the unfunded mandate of special education, the courts were there to expand and increase the costs to the states and school.

    How about the Kansas City school system for courts not caring what is mandated to be spent? Court mandated to integrate at a cost of billion dollars plus, including lots of new schools built. The politically connected contractors loved that proviso.
    Upshot is whites bailed to the suburbs so the KC schools are black as ever and are miserable failures that have not elevated blacks one iota. The real intent of this mad spending (theft from the taxpayers) was to make the SJW judges feel real, real, real good about themselves. Judges who undoubtedly already lived out in the suburbs where their children went to decent suburban schools far away from the judicially decreed mess.

  19. @education realist
    I'll repost my comments here:

    The courts have been the biggest bane of public education. It supported the progressive educators, or in many cases created rights that not even progressive educators had dreamed up. Progressive educators, who wouldn't have been able to get a foot in anywhere were it not for this reality.

    So while I'll read the book, but if it doesn't mention the tremendous damage the courts have done, then that book still needs to be written.

    The courts don't care about reality or expenses. When the federal government dreamed up the unfunded mandate of special education, the courts were there to expand and increase the costs to the states and school. The courts declared that kids who don't speak English deserve an education too, which the federal government then expanded to mean that anyone who isn't "academically proficient" in English and speaks a language other than English is coded as an English Language Learner. Which means that over 50% of the kids coded ELL were born here and think of English as their native language. A significant chunk of ELL kids are *third* generation citizens. And of course, the courts declared that, even though states have no say in federal immigration policy, they can be forced to educate all non-citizens.

    The federal government has done nothing but create absurd mandates for forty years, beginning with the original ESEA. Both progressives and conservatives have done much to increase the demands on schools, both determined to ignore reality.

    And with all that, scores are still up substantially in elementary and middle school. Despite keeping more kids in school, our high school scores haven't (yet) dropped.
    Yes, we could be doing better. But what's amazing is despite the determination of the courts and the federal government of all political persuasions to ignore reality and implement "progressive" education, the schools aren't terrible.

    It depends which schools. Many of the public high schools in Philadelphia are abysmal . Take for example Benjamin Franklin High School (Franklin is rolling over in his grave): http://www.greatschools.org/pennsylvania/philadelphia/2101-Franklin-Benjamin-High-School/quality/

    where 1% of the students are rated “proficient” in science.

    • Replies: @Hubbub
    I dunno, Jack. One percent sounds kinda high.
    , @Big Bill
    I used to get angry when black activists demanded that "Thomas Jefferson" high school or "George Washington" high school change their names to "Kwame Nkrumah" high school or "Malcolm X" high school.

    Not any more.

    When a high school like "Benjamin Franklin" goes full retard, the Anglo-Saxon community should have the right to remove the names of its forbears from the face of the school. You have to earn the right to use our founders' names. Letting them keep "Benjamin Franklin" on their high school is nothing less than racist cultural appropriation and false advertising.
    , @Linden Arden
    I notice the 1% science proficient correlates to the 1% white populace in the school? Coincidence?
  20. @education realist
    A few other comments:


    Much of that is because the much maligned teachers pretty much ignore the mandates, and can get away with it.

    ******************

    I would quibble with it being the "first narrative account" of education reform, with or without the "make sense of". Larry Cuban, Diana Ravitch, Rick Hess, have all written accounts of education reform that explain what actually happens, if not always explaining why.


    I don't think you're right about Common Core, which is much more progressive than traditional, and makes no mention of content. It can't, really. Content is the purview of history and science, not math and English. English is mostly about reading texts, and to the extent that "content" is about familiarity with classic texts, then Common Core's emphasis on non-fiction is the opposite. Moreover, the new history and science stds trying to gain acceptance are all skills, no content.

    I've written quite a bit about Hirsch over the years, including Hirsch's main intellectual (as opposed to political) detractor, Grant Wiggins. He and his supporters do a bit of a bait and switch. They start by saying "reading without content knowledge is IMPOSSIBLE" and then you say wait--why can't you gain knowledge through reading?" and they say well, sure, you can, but it's a lot harder.

    In other words, high IQ people consume books to gain knowledge, but that's harder to do with less intelligence. So the content needs to be taught explicitly. He never says this, of course.

    But then there's a big problem with content knowledge teaching, which I am certainly not opposed to in theory: the kids forget the content. It's as if they were never taught. I just taught a history class last year, and slowed down instruction considerably, teaching less and less, and doing less through direct lecture, because the kids just don't remember. Part of this is, I suspect, what we discussed before in the Flynn thread. But part of this is that we are demanding too much be taught. And part of it is that our goals about what is taught are just idiotic.

    Seventy years ago, much of geometry instruction was nothing more than memorization of formulas. That would have been very, very boring. Our kids today wouldn't tolerate it, and our kids back then, who often valued the opportunity of school, didn't always learn it. We didn't blame the teachers when they didn't.

    This may also explain the problem with Success for All fadeout. Decoding is fine, but if they can't absorb and remember content, learning will slow way down.

    Humans have terrific capacity for memorization. Before writing existed (which was most of human history) the only way knowledge could be passed on was thru memorization and so we developed a strong capacity for it. Probably when we were still apes we needed to memorize which trees had the best bananas or something, so memory existed even before words. In Islamic countries, there are children who memorize the entire Koran. None of your students, probably even the dumbest ones, have no problem reciting the words to the latest rap tunes – they probably know dozens of them. So if they can’t remember what you are teaching in class, it’s because they just don’t care. If they really wanted to remember this stuff, if they had a desire to remember it in order to impress their friends and find mates, etc. , they would be memorizing the hell out of it, but they just don’t care.

    • Replies: @rod1963
    Quite true, kids have a amazing ability to remember all sorts of things. The thing is most have tuned out schooling and stopped caring.

    Now if there we ha a culture that valued reciting stories, songs, famous sayings, etc. You'd see more memorization.

    Still another thing is in play today: Google. Why bother memorizing anything when you can just google it? Seriously, kids are ruining their memories by relying on google for everything. It's not good at all for their cognitive development.
    , @ben tillman

    If they really wanted to remember this stuff, if they had a desire to remember it in order to impress their friends and find mates, etc. , they would be memorizing the hell out of it, but they just don’t care.
     
    It's funny how you hear about Black QB's who can't read defenses, but you never hear about Black players who can't memorize the playbook.
  21. My high school 12th grade nearly ground to a halt in 1969. The effects of drug use were epic. It wasn’t open drug use but people wearing pajamas and house shoes to school. If I missed class I would write the word excuse on a piece of paper and sign it Daffy Duck and my home room teacher had to accept it. Girls giving circle BJ’s behind the exercise field at lunch. We didn’t give a damn, we just wanted to have fun. My Class of 69 has never had a reunion. Everybody has disappeared. I quit drugs in my mid 20’s because the feeling of eternal intrinsic hopelessness was too depressing for me to function. Everyday some ideal was exposed as a falsehood and paraded in the news, after a while it was all a joke. There was a retired teacher in my previous neighborhood, he was a veteran and people would go to him for advice. I was too young but it was always a comfort when I looked at his house to know he was there. A few years later I would laugh at that. The old ideals may be false but they served a purpose: they were someplace to hang your soul so you could get something done with your life. In 70 the rich kids became hippies and wiped us out. They would go to New York and buy stuff that would raise the bar so that we were immediately uncool. My parents weren’t poor but they weren’t wealthy. A few years later the Vietnam vets were killing people over drug debts. That Aquarius was never going to be because the human race was too superficial. I didn’t think in these terms in those days but it was always a feeling that life was a joke. I always thought drugs supercharged the “God is Dead” thing. I get a little bit of pleasure from the things going on today. I know what the libbers are going to feel when they roll into their paradise.

  22. @Jack D
    There's no need to read this book. It can be dismissed out of hand, regardless of its merits or truthfulness. The SPLC lists its publisher, Washington Summit Publishers as a white nationalist group. Wolters can forget about this book being reviewed in any "respectable" publication. As far as the mainstream is concerned, he might as well march around with his buddies in KKK robes carrying a swastika and a burning cross.

    Compare with the new movie about Dan Rather, the modestly titled "Truth". Because Rather was fighting for a good cause (the defeat of George Bush) it was OK for him to use fake evidence. I heard Rather just this morning say on the radio that even though the documents "might" have been fake (and he had no other real evidence), they portrayed the truth and the truth was more important than a few fake documents.

    So you have to understand "truth" as existing independently of any evidence - if the evidence disagrees with the "truth" we disregard the evidence - the truth is a bedrock which cannot be disturbed by mere evidence. If you understand leftism as a religion and substitute "faith" for "truth" then this all makes perfect sense.

    So, Wolters might as well have written a book denying the existence of God - he will convince the true believers of the religion of equality as much with all his facts and figures as he could convince the religious with evidence of the non-existence of God.

    There’s no need to read this book. It can be dismissed out of hand, regardless of its merits or truthfulness. The SPLC lists its publisher, Washington Summit Publishers as a white nationalist group.

    Perhaps that’s why there are presently no copies to be had through Amazon:

    http://www.amazon.com/Long-Crusade-Profiles-Education-1967-2014/dp/1593680414

    • Replies: @SFG
    Yeah, I went there, and thought, 'OK, so how do I actually get the book'?
  23. This is a hard book to find apparently. I couldn’t locate it using a direct search of the author’s name and had to use the link…

    Where it’s out of print.

  24. I have a comment that seems to be stuck in a spam trap.

  25. To Steve Sailer: when someone calls you a sarcastic bastard with a deplorable tone, there’s only one response:

    “Why, thank you!”

    • Replies: @Harold
    Yes, but he said it of himself. So that’s just bragging?
  26. More needs to be made of the fact that when compared to their counterparts overseas (or south of the border) every demographic group in America does quite well. Or so I have seen it reported. If true, doesn’t this mean that American teachers in reality are doing a relatively good job? Maybe it would help if those who care about the state of our public schools started talking about “demography” instead of “race and ethnicity.”

    Of course this still leaves open what is the most appropriate education for thus less academically inclined. Maybe one way to remove the stigma of vocational education would be to require all students, regardless of aptitude, to take some vocational ed. How can a person consider him- or herself truly educated if he has no first-hand experience of what hard physical labor actually feels like? Masonry would be a good place to start. And feminists might get on board with the idea that every male as well as female learn the rudiments of cooking. (I wish I had.) Emerson has some good things to say on the subject of manual labor.

    I also like the idea of super-large regional high schools on the community-college model with a large cafeteria-syle curriculum. Except for a few basics — arithmetic, American history, and manual arts — every student should be the final arbiter in deciding what subjects to study.

    • Replies: @John Derbyshire
    From my review:

    This being the case, why do we need education reform? If our students do better than those of the same race almost anywhere else, what grounds are there for thinking that there is anything wrong with our schools?
     
    Education reform is its own rationale. It's there because it's there. Blaise Pascal
    nailed it.
    , @D. K.
    Or, we could do away with both public schools (K-12) and mandatory school attendance, altogether, and let parents decide what is best for their own respective children, until those children become old enough to decide what is best for their own respective selves!?!
    , @Steve Sailer
    The Waldorf schools do a lot of vocational ed for upper middle class kids.
  27. What good is testing for IQ or for that matter, educational performance, if you cannot track the students? The two big problems we have are what do we do with the smart ones and what do we do with the the dumb ones? It is clear that for many of the slower or unmotivated students is that we really should not be educating them beyond about 16. At that point all they do is cause trouble. 16 is plenty old enough to pick cotton or carry a rifle.

    • Replies: @Olorin
    If my experience in the public schools of a Rust Belt 70% black city in the 1960s and 1970s is any guide, the black kids--who mature faster than white kids in every respect up till about 18--did so on this count as well. They mostly became ineducable around 13.

    By then the great big HBD experiment of incentivizing black dysfunctional families (reproduction) was already bearing ample fruit. In my sixth grade class, which was only 45% black because I was bused to a better school with the blacks, all but one of the black kids should not have been there and dragged everyone down.

    My fifth grade class was only 40% black, but the teacher was a Cheyney State grad. She dragged everyone down.

  28. @Jack D
    Humans have terrific capacity for memorization. Before writing existed (which was most of human history) the only way knowledge could be passed on was thru memorization and so we developed a strong capacity for it. Probably when we were still apes we needed to memorize which trees had the best bananas or something, so memory existed even before words. In Islamic countries, there are children who memorize the entire Koran. None of your students, probably even the dumbest ones, have no problem reciting the words to the latest rap tunes - they probably know dozens of them. So if they can't remember what you are teaching in class, it's because they just don't care. If they really wanted to remember this stuff, if they had a desire to remember it in order to impress their friends and find mates, etc. , they would be memorizing the hell out of it, but they just don't care.

    Quite true, kids have a amazing ability to remember all sorts of things. The thing is most have tuned out schooling and stopped caring.

    Now if there we ha a culture that valued reciting stories, songs, famous sayings, etc. You’d see more memorization.

    Still another thing is in play today: Google. Why bother memorizing anything when you can just google it? Seriously, kids are ruining their memories by relying on google for everything. It’s not good at all for their cognitive development.

  29. @Luke Lea
    More needs to be made of the fact that when compared to their counterparts overseas (or south of the border) every demographic group in America does quite well. Or so I have seen it reported. If true, doesn't this mean that American teachers in reality are doing a relatively good job? Maybe it would help if those who care about the state of our public schools started talking about "demography" instead of "race and ethnicity."

    Of course this still leaves open what is the most appropriate education for thus less academically inclined. Maybe one way to remove the stigma of vocational education would be to require all students, regardless of aptitude, to take some vocational ed. How can a person consider him- or herself truly educated if he has no first-hand experience of what hard physical labor actually feels like? Masonry would be a good place to start. And feminists might get on board with the idea that every male as well as female learn the rudiments of cooking. (I wish I had.) Emerson has some good things to say on the subject of manual labor.

    I also like the idea of super-large regional high schools on the community-college model with a large cafeteria-syle curriculum. Except for a few basics -- arithmetic, American history, and manual arts -- every student should be the final arbiter in deciding what subjects to study.

    From my review:

    This being the case, why do we need education reform? If our students do better than those of the same race almost anywhere else, what grounds are there for thinking that there is anything wrong with our schools?

    Education reform is its own rationale. It’s there because it’s there. Blaise Pascal
    nailed it.

    • Replies: @njguy73
    Derb, big fan. Loved your 2010 piece "Race To Nowhere."

    http://johnderbyshire.com/Opinions/Culture/racetothetop.html
    , @Harold
    Tangential to the point at hand, but a whole lot of misery, particularly in Japan, is caused by the ability to sit in a quiet room alone.
    , @Olorin
    And part of the reason it is there is that manufacturing and other real-material-world jobs dried up in the 1970s, while a dollar's worth of wages was massively slashed. At least that's what I observed in the US industrial Northeast.

    This left a sudden contraction in opportunities, and with the financialization and globalization of the 1980s, what else could be expected but expansion of the Ed Biz and Dolt Wrangling Industry? I.e., the demos replacing meritocracy. It's why I became a quant analyst and policy wonk rather than a shipbuilder (as my family had been for over 300 years in the same valley).

    Smart white kids had to find jobs, and many ended up following Bolshie "activists" and academics into Diversitopian expansion of and worship in the classroom. After all, the proper type of ed reform, funded at the proper levels, and administered with the proper cheerful kumbaya, was going to magically allow all those bazillions of low-IQ, low-impulse-control carbon units to access their inner genius.

    It was of course career-bustingly heretical to observe that we didn't have enough for the existing smart kids to do as it was, and spent more on the dolts with no measurable results.

  30. @John Derbyshire
    From my review:

    This being the case, why do we need education reform? If our students do better than those of the same race almost anywhere else, what grounds are there for thinking that there is anything wrong with our schools?
     
    Education reform is its own rationale. It's there because it's there. Blaise Pascal
    nailed it.

    Derb, big fan. Loved your 2010 piece “Race To Nowhere.”

    http://johnderbyshire.com/Opinions/Culture/racetothetop.html

  31. @Jack D
    It depends which schools. Many of the public high schools in Philadelphia are abysmal . Take for example Benjamin Franklin High School (Franklin is rolling over in his grave): http://www.greatschools.org/pennsylvania/philadelphia/2101-Franklin-Benjamin-High-School/quality/

    where 1% of the students are rated "proficient" in science.

    I dunno, Jack. One percent sounds kinda high.

  32. @education realist
    I'll repost my comments here:

    The courts have been the biggest bane of public education. It supported the progressive educators, or in many cases created rights that not even progressive educators had dreamed up. Progressive educators, who wouldn't have been able to get a foot in anywhere were it not for this reality.

    So while I'll read the book, but if it doesn't mention the tremendous damage the courts have done, then that book still needs to be written.

    The courts don't care about reality or expenses. When the federal government dreamed up the unfunded mandate of special education, the courts were there to expand and increase the costs to the states and school. The courts declared that kids who don't speak English deserve an education too, which the federal government then expanded to mean that anyone who isn't "academically proficient" in English and speaks a language other than English is coded as an English Language Learner. Which means that over 50% of the kids coded ELL were born here and think of English as their native language. A significant chunk of ELL kids are *third* generation citizens. And of course, the courts declared that, even though states have no say in federal immigration policy, they can be forced to educate all non-citizens.

    The federal government has done nothing but create absurd mandates for forty years, beginning with the original ESEA. Both progressives and conservatives have done much to increase the demands on schools, both determined to ignore reality.

    And with all that, scores are still up substantially in elementary and middle school. Despite keeping more kids in school, our high school scores haven't (yet) dropped.
    Yes, we could be doing better. But what's amazing is despite the determination of the courts and the federal government of all political persuasions to ignore reality and implement "progressive" education, the schools aren't terrible.

    One of the most destructive things did was to rule that students had rights. When I was in school, the principal could suspend or expel anybody on his own authority. Now it’s quasi-judicial, and the trouble makers know it. The inability of the school to discipline these morons makes learning difficult to impossible for those of their classmates that want to learn.

    Staggered 10 year terms for the Supreme Court!

  33. “Kozol’s preferred remedies—mandatory racial busing and higher taxes—have gone in and out of fashion, but in his old age a new version of his social engineering has come to be favored by the Obama administration with its Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing plan.”

    Ok, here’s a relevant point. As Donald Trump has made his fortune in real estate, its a safe bet that he is well familiar with the Fair Housing Act and all the politics that it entails. Question is: If Trump were elected president, who’s to say that Obama’s Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing plan might be nixed, scraped, or at least widely reformed so that it doesn’t resemble anything close to the goals of the current administration?

    This is a fair point because aside from immigration, housing affects everyone directly. Trump is well familiar with housing policies (especially from his early work with his father) so the question remains: maybe we shouldn’t be surprised if a President Trump decides to revise, shuts down, axes/nixes or just rolls back to the status quo US official housing policy regarding Fair Housing and the AFFH that Obama is rabidly pursuing?

    Its not like the voters would punish a President Trump for revising the AFFH during his administration. Might actually help him get re-elected, along with delivering on immigration.

  34. @Percy Gryce

    There’s no need to read this book. It can be dismissed out of hand, regardless of its merits or truthfulness. The SPLC lists its publisher, Washington Summit Publishers as a white nationalist group.
     
    Perhaps that's why there are presently no copies to be had through Amazon:

    http://www.amazon.com/Long-Crusade-Profiles-Education-1967-2014/dp/1593680414

    Yeah, I went there, and thought, ‘OK, so how do I actually get the book’?

  35. (By the way, seeing myself quoted alongside more respectable figures, I have to admit that I really do come across as a sarcastic bastard.)

    Couldn’t that be rephrased “ironic adoptee”?

  36. @Jack D
    It depends which schools. Many of the public high schools in Philadelphia are abysmal . Take for example Benjamin Franklin High School (Franklin is rolling over in his grave): http://www.greatschools.org/pennsylvania/philadelphia/2101-Franklin-Benjamin-High-School/quality/

    where 1% of the students are rated "proficient" in science.

    I used to get angry when black activists demanded that “Thomas Jefferson” high school or “George Washington” high school change their names to “Kwame Nkrumah” high school or “Malcolm X” high school.

    Not any more.

    When a high school like “Benjamin Franklin” goes full retard, the Anglo-Saxon community should have the right to remove the names of its forbears from the face of the school. You have to earn the right to use our founders’ names. Letting them keep “Benjamin Franklin” on their high school is nothing less than racist cultural appropriation and false advertising.

  37. @John Derbyshire
    From my review:

    This being the case, why do we need education reform? If our students do better than those of the same race almost anywhere else, what grounds are there for thinking that there is anything wrong with our schools?
     
    Education reform is its own rationale. It's there because it's there. Blaise Pascal
    nailed it.

    Tangential to the point at hand, but a whole lot of misery, particularly in Japan, is caused by the ability to sit in a quiet room alone.

  38. @Luke Lea
    More needs to be made of the fact that when compared to their counterparts overseas (or south of the border) every demographic group in America does quite well. Or so I have seen it reported. If true, doesn't this mean that American teachers in reality are doing a relatively good job? Maybe it would help if those who care about the state of our public schools started talking about "demography" instead of "race and ethnicity."

    Of course this still leaves open what is the most appropriate education for thus less academically inclined. Maybe one way to remove the stigma of vocational education would be to require all students, regardless of aptitude, to take some vocational ed. How can a person consider him- or herself truly educated if he has no first-hand experience of what hard physical labor actually feels like? Masonry would be a good place to start. And feminists might get on board with the idea that every male as well as female learn the rudiments of cooking. (I wish I had.) Emerson has some good things to say on the subject of manual labor.

    I also like the idea of super-large regional high schools on the community-college model with a large cafeteria-syle curriculum. Except for a few basics -- arithmetic, American history, and manual arts -- every student should be the final arbiter in deciding what subjects to study.

    Or, we could do away with both public schools (K-12) and mandatory school attendance, altogether, and let parents decide what is best for their own respective children, until those children become old enough to decide what is best for their own respective selves!?!

  39. …I really do come across as a sarcastic bastard.

    You were adopted at birth so you are a bastard. Same for me, just so you know I am not othering you. We’re only a month apart in age too. Aside from the 20 point IQ difference in your behalf we do seem to have a common experience.

    It’s personal, so I don’t mind if you don’t answer. Do you think being adopted at birth has given you a perspective that most people don’t have? Not better or worse, but different. I remember puzzling over this in Catechism class as a child. The reason I am Catholic, live in this town, and have the parents I do (they were excellent) is the result of a spin of the wheel at the adoption bureaucracy.

    • Replies: @D. K.
    I hear you; but, then again, all of life is essentially a genetic crap shoot, to begin with, as to which sperm ends up with which egg, at any given time. I am only here, today, because my mother had a miscarriage, six decades ago this month, a couple of months before I was conceived. Even there and then, in early 1956, the chances that my particular sperm would be the one to lead to a live birth, the following October, were mighty remote. When I read Richard Dawkins' book trying to "disprove" the existence of God, essentially stating how unlikely it was to be true, I just thought: "Does this genius even realize what the odds were against everything being as we now find it, at the moment of the Big Bang? Yet, here we all are!"
  40. @njguy73
    To Steve Sailer: when someone calls you a sarcastic bastard with a deplorable tone, there's only one response:

    "Why, thank you!"

    Yes, but he said it of himself. So that’s just bragging?

    • Replies: @njguy73
    I was making the point that Sailer seemed embarrassed at how he came across in the book, and the author was apologizing for him at times. Sailer should be proud to be considered sarcastic, and should own it when people are upset at what he says.

    I was inspired by the clip I saw on YouTube of Alice Cooper on the Muppet Show.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQZooJhBG_E
  41. The New Castle County (Del) Library system carries Prof. Wolter’s books from 1975-2008. No account for his latest.

    http://dlc.lib.de.us/client/default/search/results?qu=wolters%2C+raymond&rt=false%7C%7C%7CAUTHOR%7C%7C%7CAuthor

  42. OT:

    Ron Unz has created the absolute best comments function of any website/blog I’ve seen or used.

    The pop up boxes to see responses and previous comments is wonderful and cuts out scrolling through endless pages to find responses.

    He could sell it and make (another) fortune.

  43. @jJay
    ...I really do come across as a sarcastic bastard.

    You were adopted at birth so you are a bastard. Same for me, just so you know I am not othering you. We're only a month apart in age too. Aside from the 20 point IQ difference in your behalf we do seem to have a common experience.

    It's personal, so I don't mind if you don't answer. Do you think being adopted at birth has given you a perspective that most people don't have? Not better or worse, but different. I remember puzzling over this in Catechism class as a child. The reason I am Catholic, live in this town, and have the parents I do (they were excellent) is the result of a spin of the wheel at the adoption bureaucracy.

    I hear you; but, then again, all of life is essentially a genetic crap shoot, to begin with, as to which sperm ends up with which egg, at any given time. I am only here, today, because my mother had a miscarriage, six decades ago this month, a couple of months before I was conceived. Even there and then, in early 1956, the chances that my particular sperm would be the one to lead to a live birth, the following October, were mighty remote. When I read Richard Dawkins’ book trying to “disprove” the existence of God, essentially stating how unlikely it was to be true, I just thought: “Does this genius even realize what the odds were against everything being as we now find it, at the moment of the Big Bang? Yet, here we all are!”

    • Replies: @jJay
    But it's not a genetic crap shoot in aggregate. Studies of identical twin, separated at birth, and the more nuanced studies of siblings separated and raised in different homes is the corner stone of HBD.
  44. @Harold
    Yes, but he said it of himself. So that’s just bragging?

    I was making the point that Sailer seemed embarrassed at how he came across in the book, and the author was apologizing for him at times. Sailer should be proud to be considered sarcastic, and should own it when people are upset at what he says.

    I was inspired by the clip I saw on YouTube of Alice Cooper on the Muppet Show.

  45. @D. K.
    I hear you; but, then again, all of life is essentially a genetic crap shoot, to begin with, as to which sperm ends up with which egg, at any given time. I am only here, today, because my mother had a miscarriage, six decades ago this month, a couple of months before I was conceived. Even there and then, in early 1956, the chances that my particular sperm would be the one to lead to a live birth, the following October, were mighty remote. When I read Richard Dawkins' book trying to "disprove" the existence of God, essentially stating how unlikely it was to be true, I just thought: "Does this genius even realize what the odds were against everything being as we now find it, at the moment of the Big Bang? Yet, here we all are!"

    But it’s not a genetic crap shoot in aggregate. Studies of identical twin, separated at birth, and the more nuanced studies of siblings separated and raised in different homes is the corner stone of HBD.

    • Replies: @D. K.
    It is a crapshoot as to which sperm wins the race. If another sperm had won the race, in January 1956, another person would have been born, in my place, even assuming that the same egg would have been fertilized. But for my mother's miscarriage, both the sperm and the egg that produced me, in January 1956, would have gone by the boards-- as the vast majority of my mother's eggs, and almost all of my father's sperm, eventually did. I look at my eight siblings, and I know what a wide variety of traits two parents can produce, even judging from "just" us nine data points. That is nothing that parents can control, qualitatively, absent medical intervention.
  46. @Jack D
    Humans have terrific capacity for memorization. Before writing existed (which was most of human history) the only way knowledge could be passed on was thru memorization and so we developed a strong capacity for it. Probably when we were still apes we needed to memorize which trees had the best bananas or something, so memory existed even before words. In Islamic countries, there are children who memorize the entire Koran. None of your students, probably even the dumbest ones, have no problem reciting the words to the latest rap tunes - they probably know dozens of them. So if they can't remember what you are teaching in class, it's because they just don't care. If they really wanted to remember this stuff, if they had a desire to remember it in order to impress their friends and find mates, etc. , they would be memorizing the hell out of it, but they just don't care.

    If they really wanted to remember this stuff, if they had a desire to remember it in order to impress their friends and find mates, etc. , they would be memorizing the hell out of it, but they just don’t care.

    It’s funny how you hear about Black QB’s who can’t read defenses, but you never hear about Black players who can’t memorize the playbook.

  47. @Luke Lea
    More needs to be made of the fact that when compared to their counterparts overseas (or south of the border) every demographic group in America does quite well. Or so I have seen it reported. If true, doesn't this mean that American teachers in reality are doing a relatively good job? Maybe it would help if those who care about the state of our public schools started talking about "demography" instead of "race and ethnicity."

    Of course this still leaves open what is the most appropriate education for thus less academically inclined. Maybe one way to remove the stigma of vocational education would be to require all students, regardless of aptitude, to take some vocational ed. How can a person consider him- or herself truly educated if he has no first-hand experience of what hard physical labor actually feels like? Masonry would be a good place to start. And feminists might get on board with the idea that every male as well as female learn the rudiments of cooking. (I wish I had.) Emerson has some good things to say on the subject of manual labor.

    I also like the idea of super-large regional high schools on the community-college model with a large cafeteria-syle curriculum. Except for a few basics -- arithmetic, American history, and manual arts -- every student should be the final arbiter in deciding what subjects to study.

    The Waldorf schools do a lot of vocational ed for upper middle class kids.

    • Replies: @Luke Lea
    Long-term memory is a major component of higher intelligence. It's called learning. Imagine a successful mathematician who hasn't mastered with ready recall all the relevant results in branches of his subject relevant to the area he is working in. The same goes for physics.
  48. @jJay
    But it's not a genetic crap shoot in aggregate. Studies of identical twin, separated at birth, and the more nuanced studies of siblings separated and raised in different homes is the corner stone of HBD.

    It is a crapshoot as to which sperm wins the race. If another sperm had won the race, in January 1956, another person would have been born, in my place, even assuming that the same egg would have been fertilized. But for my mother’s miscarriage, both the sperm and the egg that produced me, in January 1956, would have gone by the boards– as the vast majority of my mother’s eggs, and almost all of my father’s sperm, eventually did. I look at my eight siblings, and I know what a wide variety of traits two parents can produce, even judging from “just” us nine data points. That is nothing that parents can control, qualitatively, absent medical intervention.

    • Replies: @jJay
    Thanks for repeating yourself. So among your eight siblings there is an exotic dancer, a physicist, a crack dealer, a Mullah, a surfer, an accountant, a skinhead, and a welfare queen because of the Brownian motion with which sperm use to fertilize eggs. DNA has nothing to do with the less the eclectic outcome I assume you have witnessed ?

    But hey, if that's what you see (and it is possible) I won't argue further.

  49. @education realist
    A few other comments:


    Much of that is because the much maligned teachers pretty much ignore the mandates, and can get away with it.

    ******************

    I would quibble with it being the "first narrative account" of education reform, with or without the "make sense of". Larry Cuban, Diana Ravitch, Rick Hess, have all written accounts of education reform that explain what actually happens, if not always explaining why.


    I don't think you're right about Common Core, which is much more progressive than traditional, and makes no mention of content. It can't, really. Content is the purview of history and science, not math and English. English is mostly about reading texts, and to the extent that "content" is about familiarity with classic texts, then Common Core's emphasis on non-fiction is the opposite. Moreover, the new history and science stds trying to gain acceptance are all skills, no content.

    I've written quite a bit about Hirsch over the years, including Hirsch's main intellectual (as opposed to political) detractor, Grant Wiggins. He and his supporters do a bit of a bait and switch. They start by saying "reading without content knowledge is IMPOSSIBLE" and then you say wait--why can't you gain knowledge through reading?" and they say well, sure, you can, but it's a lot harder.

    In other words, high IQ people consume books to gain knowledge, but that's harder to do with less intelligence. So the content needs to be taught explicitly. He never says this, of course.

    But then there's a big problem with content knowledge teaching, which I am certainly not opposed to in theory: the kids forget the content. It's as if they were never taught. I just taught a history class last year, and slowed down instruction considerably, teaching less and less, and doing less through direct lecture, because the kids just don't remember. Part of this is, I suspect, what we discussed before in the Flynn thread. But part of this is that we are demanding too much be taught. And part of it is that our goals about what is taught are just idiotic.

    Seventy years ago, much of geometry instruction was nothing more than memorization of formulas. That would have been very, very boring. Our kids today wouldn't tolerate it, and our kids back then, who often valued the opportunity of school, didn't always learn it. We didn't blame the teachers when they didn't.

    This may also explain the problem with Success for All fadeout. Decoding is fine, but if they can't absorb and remember content, learning will slow way down.

    The ability to remember content longterm varies terrifically among individuals and among subjects within individuals.

  50. @Foreign Expert
    Seems like educational reformers tend to come from elite schools.

    exactly! Finally, someone sees this fact. And, the worst part is: these “reformers” grew up in wealth (relative; none of them come from old families with multi m/b). They were probably lucky enough to go to private schools (NYC elites/boarding schools in New England/schools like BS, Stuy/ HM) so they don’t have a god-given clue about ANY other schools….and, I mean, nada, non, zilch, nothing. I have been around these people forever…and, I didn’t get a chance to drown them in The Pond. But, none of them know how to deal with the education of students and environments of which they have never experienced. Why is this so hard for everyone to understand? Why do we trust that anyone who says they are a reformer really is a reformer? I want evidence. At this point, after 50 years of trying to close the “achievement gap,” I want evidence that someone knows something i don’t know, something new.

  51. @Hippopotamusdrome
    OT.


    Teaching Fat Studies
    ... Oregon State University ...
    The emergent, interdisciplinary field of Fat Studies (FS) has at its core the identification and elimination of bias based on body weight, shape, and size. Akin to Women’s Studies(WS), Queer Studies, and scholarly fields of inquiry based on race and ethnicity, FS evolved from grassroots activism and a strengthening po litical movement to resist discrimination and promote body acceptance as well as health for people of all sizes

     

    Nuke it from orbit, son.

  52. @D. K.
    It is a crapshoot as to which sperm wins the race. If another sperm had won the race, in January 1956, another person would have been born, in my place, even assuming that the same egg would have been fertilized. But for my mother's miscarriage, both the sperm and the egg that produced me, in January 1956, would have gone by the boards-- as the vast majority of my mother's eggs, and almost all of my father's sperm, eventually did. I look at my eight siblings, and I know what a wide variety of traits two parents can produce, even judging from "just" us nine data points. That is nothing that parents can control, qualitatively, absent medical intervention.

    Thanks for repeating yourself. So among your eight siblings there is an exotic dancer, a physicist, a crack dealer, a Mullah, a surfer, an accountant, a skinhead, and a welfare queen because of the Brownian motion with which sperm use to fertilize eggs. DNA has nothing to do with the less the eclectic outcome I assume you have witnessed ?

    But hey, if that’s what you see (and it is possible) I won’t argue further.

    • Replies: @D. K.
    DNA has everything to do with the variety amongst us nine; that was my whole point. Billions of base pairs can be mixed up a lot of different ways. I am not saying that we are as different from one another as a random Eskimo is from a random Zulu. I am saying that we are different from each other in very obvious ways, despite our being created and raised by the same two parents, mostly in the same small house. My eldest brother even shows up, on 23andMe.com, as being a half-sibling, when he is not. I only have to repeat myself for the obvious reason....
  53. Whoever asked me about good ed history/reform books:

    a) Ravitch wrote two books I highly recommend. The first is The Troubled Crusade, which goes through major reform periods post war (as well as some earlier eras). Particularly impressive were the chapters on Brown and then the subsequent chapter on integration, also the chapter on the 1960s reforms. Less interesting were the college escapades of the 60s. Her most famous book is her first, The Great School Wars, which is very interesting but more as history than school reform. It’s far superior to the unobjectionable but vanilla Goldstein book, and Ravitch should probably excerpt the Oceansville Brownsville chapters–they’re stupendous reading.

    Both these books inadvertently reveal something that’s been completely lost in the past 40 years: Catholic schools vs. public schools. I vaguely remember this being an issue with Gerry Ferraro in the 1984 debate, because she supported vouchers. At the time, vouchers were solely an issue for Catholic parents. These days, that issue’s dead. When Ravitch was writing in the 70s and 80s, it still dominated public school debate. Many school funding issues couldn’t get traction because Catholic politicians simply refused to fund schools if their schools didn’t take part in it.

    b) Larry Cuban and Doug Tyack’s Tinkering Towards Utopia is a classic in the field. Cuban also is the go-to guy for examining the actual implementation of technology in the classroom, and management theories in education. Cuban is, for my money, the best progressive out there: skeptical, more pro-charter than I am (that is, I’m not pro-charter, he’s vaguely so). I’m less familiar with Tyack, but he’s highly regarded. (Disclosure: I consider Larry Cuban a friend.)

    c) David Labaree’s The Trouble with Ed Schools is a really good read, although some of it is a bit esoteric for the layman. But the early chapters are excellent, I thought.

    d) Rick Hess is a quick read and a good insight into what I’d call the typical reformer. He’s also become increasingly skeptical of reform efforts–a contrarian. I have The Same Thing Over and Over again. (I can’t be specific about a disclosure, but I have a disclosure. Yes. Humor.) He’s the least academic of these recommendations, very much a consultant type.

    e) On curriculum reform, Hirsch is considered the guy to read. As I mentioned, I’m skeptical of Hirsch. Tom Loveless is excellent; his books on tracking and math reform are great reads. I like Grant Wiggins a lot, but he doesn’t so much write about reform as try to reform. He’s more for practitioners.

    I’m probably forgetting some, but it’s a good start.

    • Replies: @jJay
    Both these books inadvertently reveal something that’s been completely lost in the past 40 years: Catholic schools vs. public schools. I vaguely remember this being an issue with Gerry Ferraro in the 1984 debate, because she supported vouchers.

    I recall the issue of vouchers arising in the early 1970s. I grew up in a Philadelphia suburb where a good 25% on the kids (to take a rough estimate) attended parochial schools operated by the Archdioceses, myself included. My apolitical parents even showed up at township meeting in support of some sort of mercy from paying for both the public and private schools.

    A compromise was reached where the public school district would provide transportation to and from school for parochial students. It didn't work out all that well. The public schools only had so many yellow buses. The parochial students would have to be at the corner a 5:30 for the ride. This left time for bus driver to pick up the public school kids at 7:30.
    , @keypusher
    Ed, thanks for responding. I'd like to repeat my suggestion that you write this up as a list and post it as a permanent link on your blog.
  54. @Prof. Woland
    What good is testing for IQ or for that matter, educational performance, if you cannot track the students? The two big problems we have are what do we do with the smart ones and what do we do with the the dumb ones? It is clear that for many of the slower or unmotivated students is that we really should not be educating them beyond about 16. At that point all they do is cause trouble. 16 is plenty old enough to pick cotton or carry a rifle.

    If my experience in the public schools of a Rust Belt 70% black city in the 1960s and 1970s is any guide, the black kids–who mature faster than white kids in every respect up till about 18–did so on this count as well. They mostly became ineducable around 13.

    By then the great big HBD experiment of incentivizing black dysfunctional families (reproduction) was already bearing ample fruit. In my sixth grade class, which was only 45% black because I was bused to a better school with the blacks, all but one of the black kids should not have been there and dragged everyone down.

    My fifth grade class was only 40% black, but the teacher was a Cheyney State grad. She dragged everyone down.

    • Replies: @JackOH
    My wake-up call from Rust Belt schools similar to yours was when I attended a selective college. There I was among academically bright, well-socialized students who, I suppose, trusted the education system. I didn't, but couldn't articulate the idea I'd been a chump for some other guy's social engineering project. Had to work like a sum'bitch playing catch-up. (I can still conjure up the weird smothering feeling of being in a school where schoolwork didn't seem to matter.)

    My local open-admissions Podunk Tech has six-year graduation rates for minorities at about 12%. The overall rate is triple that. The local school system where it's located is mostly minority, has among the highest per-pupil costs in the state, and, after years of academic watch, is slated to be taken over under a state mandate.

    My solution? Cut education. But, you'd run into a political chain saw of teachers' unions and race lobbyists.
  55. @jJay
    Thanks for repeating yourself. So among your eight siblings there is an exotic dancer, a physicist, a crack dealer, a Mullah, a surfer, an accountant, a skinhead, and a welfare queen because of the Brownian motion with which sperm use to fertilize eggs. DNA has nothing to do with the less the eclectic outcome I assume you have witnessed ?

    But hey, if that's what you see (and it is possible) I won't argue further.

    DNA has everything to do with the variety amongst us nine; that was my whole point. Billions of base pairs can be mixed up a lot of different ways. I am not saying that we are as different from one another as a random Eskimo is from a random Zulu. I am saying that we are different from each other in very obvious ways, despite our being created and raised by the same two parents, mostly in the same small house. My eldest brother even shows up, on 23andMe.com, as being a half-sibling, when he is not. I only have to repeat myself for the obvious reason….

  56. @John Derbyshire
    From my review:

    This being the case, why do we need education reform? If our students do better than those of the same race almost anywhere else, what grounds are there for thinking that there is anything wrong with our schools?
     
    Education reform is its own rationale. It's there because it's there. Blaise Pascal
    nailed it.

    And part of the reason it is there is that manufacturing and other real-material-world jobs dried up in the 1970s, while a dollar’s worth of wages was massively slashed. At least that’s what I observed in the US industrial Northeast.

    This left a sudden contraction in opportunities, and with the financialization and globalization of the 1980s, what else could be expected but expansion of the Ed Biz and Dolt Wrangling Industry? I.e., the demos replacing meritocracy. It’s why I became a quant analyst and policy wonk rather than a shipbuilder (as my family had been for over 300 years in the same valley).

    Smart white kids had to find jobs, and many ended up following Bolshie “activists” and academics into Diversitopian expansion of and worship in the classroom. After all, the proper type of ed reform, funded at the proper levels, and administered with the proper cheerful kumbaya, was going to magically allow all those bazillions of low-IQ, low-impulse-control carbon units to access their inner genius.

    It was of course career-bustingly heretical to observe that we didn’t have enough for the existing smart kids to do as it was, and spent more on the dolts with no measurable results.

    • Replies: @Immigrant from former USSR
    Hello, Mr. Olorin.
    I share your nostalgia over family profession.
    My middle child (son) dropped the traditional occupation
    of about 30 his predecessors, parents (us) including,
    and went into "Science of computer operating systems",
    if there is such a science.
    Alas!
  57. @education realist
    Whoever asked me about good ed history/reform books:

    a) Ravitch wrote two books I highly recommend. The first is The Troubled Crusade, which goes through major reform periods post war (as well as some earlier eras). Particularly impressive were the chapters on Brown and then the subsequent chapter on integration, also the chapter on the 1960s reforms. Less interesting were the college escapades of the 60s. Her most famous book is her first, The Great School Wars, which is very interesting but more as history than school reform. It's far superior to the unobjectionable but vanilla Goldstein book, and Ravitch should probably excerpt the Oceansville Brownsville chapters--they're stupendous reading.

    Both these books inadvertently reveal something that's been completely lost in the past 40 years: Catholic schools vs. public schools. I vaguely remember this being an issue with Gerry Ferraro in the 1984 debate, because she supported vouchers. At the time, vouchers were solely an issue for Catholic parents. These days, that issue's dead. When Ravitch was writing in the 70s and 80s, it still dominated public school debate. Many school funding issues couldn't get traction because Catholic politicians simply refused to fund schools if their schools didn't take part in it.

    b) Larry Cuban and Doug Tyack's Tinkering Towards Utopia is a classic in the field. Cuban also is the go-to guy for examining the actual implementation of technology in the classroom, and management theories in education. Cuban is, for my money, the best progressive out there: skeptical, more pro-charter than I am (that is, I'm not pro-charter, he's vaguely so). I'm less familiar with Tyack, but he's highly regarded. (Disclosure: I consider Larry Cuban a friend.)

    c) David Labaree's The Trouble with Ed Schools is a really good read, although some of it is a bit esoteric for the layman. But the early chapters are excellent, I thought.

    d) Rick Hess is a quick read and a good insight into what I'd call the typical reformer. He's also become increasingly skeptical of reform efforts--a contrarian. I have The Same Thing Over and Over again. (I can't be specific about a disclosure, but I have a disclosure. Yes. Humor.) He's the least academic of these recommendations, very much a consultant type.

    e) On curriculum reform, Hirsch is considered the guy to read. As I mentioned, I'm skeptical of Hirsch. Tom Loveless is excellent; his books on tracking and math reform are great reads. I like Grant Wiggins a lot, but he doesn't so much write about reform as try to reform. He's more for practitioners.


    I'm probably forgetting some, but it's a good start.

    Both these books inadvertently reveal something that’s been completely lost in the past 40 years: Catholic schools vs. public schools. I vaguely remember this being an issue with Gerry Ferraro in the 1984 debate, because she supported vouchers.

    I recall the issue of vouchers arising in the early 1970s. I grew up in a Philadelphia suburb where a good 25% on the kids (to take a rough estimate) attended parochial schools operated by the Archdioceses, myself included. My apolitical parents even showed up at township meeting in support of some sort of mercy from paying for both the public and private schools.

    A compromise was reached where the public school district would provide transportation to and from school for parochial students. It didn’t work out all that well. The public schools only had so many yellow buses. The parochial students would have to be at the corner a 5:30 for the ride. This left time for bus driver to pick up the public school kids at 7:30.

  58. My old friend Raymond Wolters

    Well, I guess his career is over now…

    Seriously,
    This column makes me agree with the other commenter who suggested you make an Amazon account so you can link to books. I would buy books through you.

  59. @Olorin
    And part of the reason it is there is that manufacturing and other real-material-world jobs dried up in the 1970s, while a dollar's worth of wages was massively slashed. At least that's what I observed in the US industrial Northeast.

    This left a sudden contraction in opportunities, and with the financialization and globalization of the 1980s, what else could be expected but expansion of the Ed Biz and Dolt Wrangling Industry? I.e., the demos replacing meritocracy. It's why I became a quant analyst and policy wonk rather than a shipbuilder (as my family had been for over 300 years in the same valley).

    Smart white kids had to find jobs, and many ended up following Bolshie "activists" and academics into Diversitopian expansion of and worship in the classroom. After all, the proper type of ed reform, funded at the proper levels, and administered with the proper cheerful kumbaya, was going to magically allow all those bazillions of low-IQ, low-impulse-control carbon units to access their inner genius.

    It was of course career-bustingly heretical to observe that we didn't have enough for the existing smart kids to do as it was, and spent more on the dolts with no measurable results.

    Hello, Mr. Olorin.
    I share your nostalgia over family profession.
    My middle child (son) dropped the traditional occupation
    of about 30 his predecessors, parents (us) including,
    and went into “Science of computer operating systems”,
    if there is such a science.
    Alas!

    • Replies: @SFG
    Actually, that's a real living nowadays, and one of the few places a white male can still do well (at least until recently).
  60. @dearieme
    "a sarcastic bastard": just one of nature's Britons, cast on a foreign shore.

    I actually think that about myself sometimes, and it doesn’t even make genetic sense. Or perhaps a Frenchman. This American ‘positive thinking’ stuff just doesn’t come naturally.

  61. @Immigrant from former USSR
    Hello, Mr. Olorin.
    I share your nostalgia over family profession.
    My middle child (son) dropped the traditional occupation
    of about 30 his predecessors, parents (us) including,
    and went into "Science of computer operating systems",
    if there is such a science.
    Alas!

    Actually, that’s a real living nowadays, and one of the few places a white male can still do well (at least until recently).

  62. @Olorin
    If my experience in the public schools of a Rust Belt 70% black city in the 1960s and 1970s is any guide, the black kids--who mature faster than white kids in every respect up till about 18--did so on this count as well. They mostly became ineducable around 13.

    By then the great big HBD experiment of incentivizing black dysfunctional families (reproduction) was already bearing ample fruit. In my sixth grade class, which was only 45% black because I was bused to a better school with the blacks, all but one of the black kids should not have been there and dragged everyone down.

    My fifth grade class was only 40% black, but the teacher was a Cheyney State grad. She dragged everyone down.

    My wake-up call from Rust Belt schools similar to yours was when I attended a selective college. There I was among academically bright, well-socialized students who, I suppose, trusted the education system. I didn’t, but couldn’t articulate the idea I’d been a chump for some other guy’s social engineering project. Had to work like a sum’bitch playing catch-up. (I can still conjure up the weird smothering feeling of being in a school where schoolwork didn’t seem to matter.)

    My local open-admissions Podunk Tech has six-year graduation rates for minorities at about 12%. The overall rate is triple that. The local school system where it’s located is mostly minority, has among the highest per-pupil costs in the state, and, after years of academic watch, is slated to be taken over under a state mandate.

    My solution? Cut education. But, you’d run into a political chain saw of teachers’ unions and race lobbyists.

  63. @Jack D
    It depends which schools. Many of the public high schools in Philadelphia are abysmal . Take for example Benjamin Franklin High School (Franklin is rolling over in his grave): http://www.greatschools.org/pennsylvania/philadelphia/2101-Franklin-Benjamin-High-School/quality/

    where 1% of the students are rated "proficient" in science.

    I notice the 1% science proficient correlates to the 1% white populace in the school? Coincidence?

    • Replies: @Jack D
    I can't imagine being a white person attending a school that was 99% minority. I'm guessing that they are not really white - either blacks who checked the white box by mistake or Latinos who categorized themselves as white or something. I don't think an actual white kid could physically survive in a 99% minority school or would want to.
  64. “The ability to remember content longterm varies terrifically among individuals and among subjects within individuals.”

    Oh, I know. But is that long term memory episodic or semantic? I wrote about that here: Memory Castle for Thee, but Not for Me. I wonder if much of Asian cramming is creating brief episodic recall that fades over time, as opposed to semantic memory. Memorizing song lyrics is definitely semantic memory, in that most people can remember the lyrics years later without effort, but it’s also something that happens “naturally”, for the most part. People don’t set out to memorize them.

    So if you set out to memorize something that doesn’t really interest you, it may be that you are cramming it into your episodic memory long enough for the test, so you have a memory of learning it–but not the actual knowledge.

    And what I was saying is that in the past, there was more of a history of cramming data into your semantic memory as a part of education, that people who wanted to achieve in education were highly motivated to treat memorizing of education facts like song lyrics. Today, that willingness isn’t there, even if the cognitive ability to stuff data into semantic memory is.

    This gets conflated a bit with intelligence–and they are, of course, related.

    It’s also complicated, because many progressive complain about “simple memorization” as opposed to “actual learning” and then the response is “but memorization is useful!” I’m making a different point: the people saying “memorization is useful” are assuming that the memorization is semantic. If so, I agree. But what about the memorization that’s not semantic? Which, in my view, is practically all of Asian cramming (that which isn’t cheating). Non-Asians, too (often girls) who “study for tests” are just putting the information into episodic memory, where it fades over time. They have a memory of studying, not a memory of the data.

    So most teachers and others heavily involved with education will dismiss memorization because in *their* experience, it’s all episodic memory that fades. They are right. Episodic memory, cramming for tests, is not only pretty useless, it’s potentially misleading. (It also explains why the Chinese think effort matters more than brains. Motivation is a big deal.)

    I’ve also mentioned I’m familiar with kids who have incredible math fact recall, but can’t do anything abstractly. I’ve wondered if this is in fact implicit memory (task based recall) rather than semantic, and again, if that is what other people were doing in the past, rather than semantic.

    My general point: in the past, due to a lack of ready access to information, education in this country involved more memorization. I’m not sure if the memorization was semantic or implicit, but the people who memorized did so because they had a high degree of motivation. They were also probably capable of doing so, because the people who weren’t dropped out. But I don’t think this has to be high IQ so much as motivation and reasonable capacity.

    Today, we are educating far more people with far less motivation. In order to accommodate the different populations, we are relying less on memory because the will simply doesn’t exist. This is probably hurting the mid-tier kids a bit, who might do a bit better if they were forced to use either their semantic or implicit memory ability more. However, the only memorization rewarded today is the least useful, educationally speaking, the episodic.

    Sez a non-memory expert yammering from limited knowledge.

  65. @Steve Sailer
    The Waldorf schools do a lot of vocational ed for upper middle class kids.

    Long-term memory is a major component of higher intelligence. It’s called learning. Imagine a successful mathematician who hasn’t mastered with ready recall all the relevant results in branches of his subject relevant to the area he is working in. The same goes for physics.

  66. @education realist
    Whoever asked me about good ed history/reform books:

    a) Ravitch wrote two books I highly recommend. The first is The Troubled Crusade, which goes through major reform periods post war (as well as some earlier eras). Particularly impressive were the chapters on Brown and then the subsequent chapter on integration, also the chapter on the 1960s reforms. Less interesting were the college escapades of the 60s. Her most famous book is her first, The Great School Wars, which is very interesting but more as history than school reform. It's far superior to the unobjectionable but vanilla Goldstein book, and Ravitch should probably excerpt the Oceansville Brownsville chapters--they're stupendous reading.

    Both these books inadvertently reveal something that's been completely lost in the past 40 years: Catholic schools vs. public schools. I vaguely remember this being an issue with Gerry Ferraro in the 1984 debate, because she supported vouchers. At the time, vouchers were solely an issue for Catholic parents. These days, that issue's dead. When Ravitch was writing in the 70s and 80s, it still dominated public school debate. Many school funding issues couldn't get traction because Catholic politicians simply refused to fund schools if their schools didn't take part in it.

    b) Larry Cuban and Doug Tyack's Tinkering Towards Utopia is a classic in the field. Cuban also is the go-to guy for examining the actual implementation of technology in the classroom, and management theories in education. Cuban is, for my money, the best progressive out there: skeptical, more pro-charter than I am (that is, I'm not pro-charter, he's vaguely so). I'm less familiar with Tyack, but he's highly regarded. (Disclosure: I consider Larry Cuban a friend.)

    c) David Labaree's The Trouble with Ed Schools is a really good read, although some of it is a bit esoteric for the layman. But the early chapters are excellent, I thought.

    d) Rick Hess is a quick read and a good insight into what I'd call the typical reformer. He's also become increasingly skeptical of reform efforts--a contrarian. I have The Same Thing Over and Over again. (I can't be specific about a disclosure, but I have a disclosure. Yes. Humor.) He's the least academic of these recommendations, very much a consultant type.

    e) On curriculum reform, Hirsch is considered the guy to read. As I mentioned, I'm skeptical of Hirsch. Tom Loveless is excellent; his books on tracking and math reform are great reads. I like Grant Wiggins a lot, but he doesn't so much write about reform as try to reform. He's more for practitioners.


    I'm probably forgetting some, but it's a good start.

    Ed, thanks for responding. I’d like to repeat my suggestion that you write this up as a list and post it as a permanent link on your blog.

  67. @Linden Arden
    I notice the 1% science proficient correlates to the 1% white populace in the school? Coincidence?

    I can’t imagine being a white person attending a school that was 99% minority. I’m guessing that they are not really white – either blacks who checked the white box by mistake or Latinos who categorized themselves as white or something. I don’t think an actual white kid could physically survive in a 99% minority school or would want to.

  68. Black underclass kids are educable up until about puberty or thereabouts,which means that they should be capable of honest, 1950’s-back, sixth grade education for the most part. I would say they are more commonly at first to third grade level.

    I figure 40% of blacks can go to eighth grade level, 30% to tenth and 20% all the way to high school graduate again using old time white standards. Of course, since only that many _whites_ are fit for true college education by the old standards, with blacks it’s less than five percent that should get true college education.

    Which means that there is a big delta between what is attainable and what we are getting. But like a truck trying to climb a high grade in top gear, we cannot make progress until we downshift. And that is unpalatable in the extreme to the social justice warriors.

  69. @Hippopotamusdrome
    OT.


    Teaching Fat Studies
    ... Oregon State University ...
    The emergent, interdisciplinary field of Fat Studies (FS) has at its core the identification and elimination of bias based on body weight, shape, and size. Akin to Women’s Studies(WS), Queer Studies, and scholarly fields of inquiry based on race and ethnicity, FS evolved from grassroots activism and a strengthening po litical movement to resist discrimination and promote body acceptance as well as health for people of all sizes

     

    How dare you to omit the queen bee’s labour of love, cited at the bottom of:
    http://oregonstate.edu/ctl/fat-studies-teaching-about-weightism-social-justice-issue

    “Reflections on Fat Acceptance: Lessons Learned from Privilege” by, wait for it–*Linda Bacon*, PhD.

    That’s her: http://www.lindabacon.org/media-images-2
    She’s more, say, feeble than fat–what does that lady smoke?

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
Our Reigning Political Puppets, Dancing to Invisible Strings