A guide to the factions fighting our education wars

by Paul Slobodian, education consultant, published in News and Observer, July 26, 2014.

Factional warfare such as the Common Core debate in the field of education is nothing new and can be seen throughout the 1900s. It is important to understand the factions as each tries to convince parents and legislators of the superiority of its position.

The stakes are high – not just in terms of the welfare of the children we entrust to the educators but also in terms of the power, career advancement and especially control over the huge public money expended in education. Today’s’ “Big Education” players are fully engaged: philanthropies, teachers unions, textbook publishers, testing firms and consultants.

There are four main factions at war: two on the progressive side (anti-capitalists and psychologists) and two on the conservative/traditionalist side (core knowledge advocates and structuralists).

Here is a brief guide to the Education Wars.

Anti-capitalists: advocates for social justice

Anti-capitalists have their roots in the 1960s counterculture and hold Howard Zinn as their favorite author. Zinn, a Boston University professor, wrote “A People’s History,” an anti-capitalist, socialist/communist perspective on how the U.S. system is based on exploitation and neo-colonialism. Their current incarnations include Occupy Wall Street. Multiculturalists believe European traditions are overemphasized, view minorities as victims and advocate social justice and redistributionist tax policies in close allegiance with anti-capitalists. Many educators are influenced by the social justice/anti-capitalists. The influence of this faction is very wide, even if it is not very deep: Most educators shy from the more radical aspects of this perspective, even as they hold some sympathy for its positions.

Psychologists: also known as the human potential movement

It is easiest to understand this faction by what it is against: memorization, drill, rote learning, structure, discipline and routine. They advocate a “child-centered” education in which the teacher is more a facilitator than instructor. The innovations of this group include the self-esteem movement, the open classroom, activities and group exercises over instruction. They are the continuing advocates for constructivism best-known for the failures of whole language reading programs and new math but whose philosophy still is influential. Perhaps the most influential book in this faction was “Summerhill School” by Alexander Sutherland Neill, published in 1960 and documenting a school where all structure was abolished and kids were left totally free to do whatever they wanted whenever they wanted without adult intervention (unless requested by the child).

Traditionalists: also known as “back to basics”

Traditionalists emphasize all the things psychologists dislike: teaching kids reading through phonics and using flashcards to aid memorization of multiplication tables. They think it is important for children to understand the foundations of Western civilization by the study of history and classical literature. Teachers are instructors (not facilitators) and are to ensure discipline in the classroom. E.D Hirsch is a notable traditionalist, and he advocates what he calls “core knowledge” to teach “the basic information to thrive in the modern world.”

Structuralists: advocates of school choice in all its forms

This group holds that monopoly systems do not perform well over time. The main prescription is school choice and other policies that support choice: charter schools, vouchers, public school choice and tuition tax credits. The most influential advocate is MIT-trained economist Caroline Hoxby, who is now at the Stanford University Hoover Institute and was formerly on the faculty of Harvard. Her research on school performance has been carefully designed and implemented (though subjected to vigorous criticism from other factions) and has spanned 20 years. The godfather of this movement is deceased economist Milton Friedman from the University of Chicago.

The boundaries between groups are often flexible: Anti-capitalists often embrace the psychologist “child-centered” school structure, some of the psychology faction adherents recognize some value in phonics and there are opponents and supporters of Common Core State Standards in all four factions. Supporters in each faction understand that if they can control Common Core, they will be able to disseminate over time (overtly or subtly) their favored perspective across the nation.

As we engage in debate across North Carolina and the nation, it is important to be aware of the factions involved. It is especially important to keep in mind that “in the usual way of American education ... enthusiasm often outstrips evidence and fads tend to have a long shelf life” (Diane Ravitch in “Left Back: A Century of Failed School Reforms,” 2000).

Educational experts will often argue that they understand things and that the public just needs to leave it to them. Given the tattered history of reform movements in American education, we need to reject these pleas and stay fully involved.

Paul Slobodian, Ed.D, of New Bern is a consultant with experience working with public schools, nonprofits and corporate clients.

http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/07/26/4030233/common-core-a-guide-to-the-factions.html