GothamSchools — daily independent reporting on NYC public schools

Diane Ravitch

Ravitch, the education historian, former Bush administration official (the elder Bush), and dean of the Joel Klein critic pool, offers a name for the nameless reformers at her Ed Week blog: Republicans.

She writes:

The Republican education experts and conservative think tanks have always wanted more accountability, more choice, merit pay, and a tough anti-union stance. Thus, it is one of the amusing ironies of our time that the people who now espouse this agenda call themselves “reformers” and are acclaimed as such by the national media. They are reformers indeed, but the reforms they are advocating and implementing come right out of the Republican playbook.

Update: An earlier version of this post suggested that Ravitch herself used to be a Republican. That’s not true; she was a Democrat when serving in the Bush administration and has been a registered Independent for the past 15 years.

The media watchdog's logo.

The media-watchdog group FAIR, a left-wing enterprise that refers to most major newspapers and magazines as the “corporate media,” says that mainstream publications deserve a “failing grade” for coverage of the fight to become Obama’s education secretary. FAIR says the press failed by characterizing just one side of the debate — those who disagree with teachers unions —  as being reform-minded.

It holds up a single exception in Sam Dillon of the New York Times, who on Sunday wrote:

Editorials and opinion articles in the New York Times, the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times have described the debate as pitting education reformers against those representing the educational establishment or the status quo. But who the reformers are depends on who is talking.

Hey, we’ve read that idea somewhere else. Where was it … ?

Score one for “idealocrats.” John at Teachable Moments just used that contest entry (originally scribed by a New York City principal who asked to be anonymous) in a sentence.

This gives me an opportunity to explain once again why I think this contest is important — not just a ring of fire that you should be terrified to wade into, as The New Republic’s Seyward Darby sort of suggested, but a good launchpad for serious debate.

For those not paying attention, the point of the contest is to find an adjective to put before “reformer” that could quickly and fairly and without bias describe a certain type of education activist. The group includes Wendy Kopp of Teach For America, Joel Klein of New York, and Michelle Rhee of D.C. It does not include another set of people who consider themselves education reformers, but object to Kopp, Klein, and Rhee’s methods.

And that’s why it matters, because as much as the Kopps and Rhees would like to own the reformer title, and as much as the mainstream media lets them get away with that, describing only one side of the debate as reformers is neither accurate nor fair nor conducive to robust debate. (more…)

Congressman George Miller

As the Education Secretary fight nears an end, everyone is trying to figure out how to describe the two sides of the battle for Barack Obama’s affection. But I don’t think any of the recent descriptions — from the Associated Press (“reform advocates”) to Newsweek’s Jonathan Alter (“bomb throwers”) to The New Republic (“Reform School”) — live up to the standards of my New York Sun editor, Ira Stoll, who declared that the word “reform” is hopelessly imprecise and banned it from my writing.

All the more reason to turn our name-those-reformers contest into its final bend. The newest entry is from George Miller, the chairman of the House’s education committee. Jonathan Alter reports:

Rep. George Miller, the leading voice on education in Congress, told me recently that “the debate is between incrementalists and disrupters, and I’m with the disrupters.” So is Bill Gates. The father of disruptive software is ready for another revolution.

The disrupters may not be a real word (or at least a word entered in my computer’s dictionary), but it is a neat proposal. It’s the same distinction Randi Weingarten makes between herself and Joel Klein. As she told the Times, her vision is “sustainable and incremental change.” Klein wants “radical reform.”

But I still have some concerns. (more…)

Newsweek reports:

“People don’t want to say anything publicly, because of the ‘No-Drama Obama’ stuff,” says one well-placed reformer with ties to the incoming administration. “But many of us were stunned that Linda Darling-Hammond is still as influential as she is. We see her as very symbolic of the ‘old school’ of reform.” Darling-Hammond responds, “The critiques of being ‘old school’ are particularly ironic since I have been fighting for a lot of reforms before they were recently on the national radar.”

And while Whitney Tilson on his blog yesterday asked people e-mailing him with worries to “CHILL THE [expletive] OUT,” he confessed to “sharing a bit of…nervousness” in his e-mail blast last night.

Sarah Reckhow, a grad student at UC Berkeley and a Teach For America alum, e-mailed me an idea for the naming contest: How about the Boardroom Progressives? The name comes from Reckhow’s dissertation (getting serious here!), which she excerpted for me:

A new cohort of “Boardroom Progressives”—officers in major national foundations, leaders of education nonprofits, corporate leaders engaged in education, and non-traditional urban superintendents—are leading a charge to reform public education. Much like the Progressives of the early 20th century, the Boardroom Progressive represent elite segments of society. They also share a suspicious view of the role of politics and interest groups, particularly teachers’ unions, in education policy. (more…)

A principal e-mailed me this idea for what to call the nameless reformers:

Idealocrats
(Idealistic Bureaucrats)

Idealistic:

• All schools, all children, all communities are salvagable by me (and my organization)
• I (we) can change the world

Bureaucrats:

• There needs to have a large, politically connected organization that I run
• Expansion and replication forever!

In case you were concerned, I have not forgotten about the name-those-reformers contest. I just don’t think there’s an answer yet.

For evidence of why this is a pressing problem, please see this post by Ben Smith of Politico, in which he tries to summarize my post about Democrats for Education Reform — but stumbles in the tricky business of finding a single adjective to describe what kind of Democrats they are.

I’ve been getting a lot of ideas for what to call the nameless movement personified by Jon Schnur. The good news is that I think the descriptions are getting a lot more precise. The consensus points I see emerging: This set of reformers puts a primacy on data; is obsessive about getting rid of bad teachers, and views the democratic political process as a barrier. They are also young and bratty.

We are getting closer, but I do not think we are there yet. I define “there” as the moment at which you the readers have delivered me a single adjective that I can slap before “reformer” without feeling a twinge of remorse.

So, please send more entries! As you brainstorm adjectives, the best of the suggestions so far, which I’ve compiled below and which include superstar entrants including Joel Klein and Diane Ravitch, may help. (more…)