mr. clapper yo clap

At one point, the Inqy would allow you to link to Auth’s work; no longer. But this cartoon of readin’, writin’ and ‘rithmetic was brilliant.

Article here…quote I liked:

Dewey had a great deal to say about the relation of the intellectual to this emergent public. The pursuit of truth and the practice of politics, for him, are both unfinished projects, always unfinished, and both are forms of finding better and better truths for living together in society and democratic polity. The intellectual, academic or otherwise, he argued was a part of whatever public emerges. The focus of intellectuals, Dewey argued, was provided by common life, those animating matters of concern given voice in the public realm. The scholar, for Dewey, does not approach the public as an expert, but rather as one of the public, a member with special access to a fund of knowledge and rigorous forms of thought that he or she can bring to matters of concern. But after exploring the esoteric knowledge available to him or her, the scholar must bring that knowledge back to the public in the language of the public without claiming the authority of expertise, but rather relying upon persuasion in the public sphere.

Amidst all the bureaucratic shuffle going on at 440, it’s important to remember how well paid all of these individuals are. Phil Goldsmith’s dispassionate analysis here is very helpful. I do think, though, that he’s forgotten some districts where superintendents as making much more than Philly’s superintendent.

Three days ago on KYW, one of the stories in heavy rotation described the arrival of 1600 slot machines at the new casino. Yesterday, there was an article in the Times about Oakland’s decision to allow industrial size marijuana farms.

I’d love to see an academic study comparing the impact of these two attempts to re-negotiate urban work. You could claim both are bringing poison, both present security problems, and both build upon potentially addictive behavior.

On the other hand, folks are going to smoke (see Philadelphia Magazine this month) and Atlantic City demonstrates that they’re going to travel to gamble. May as well as make some profit from it.

Other things being equal, the more economically, ethnically and religiously heterogenous the membership of an association is, the greater its capacity to cultivate the kind of public discouse and deliberation that is conducive to democratic citizenship.

From Introduction
Amy Gutmann, ed, Freedom of Association (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998).

Reading this extended essay on the significance of checklists in medicine, and I’m struck by how education policy makers seem to have completely misunderstood Gawande’s message.

The real lesson is that under conditions of true complexity–where the knowledge required exceeds that of any individual and unpredictability reigns–efforts to dictate every step from the center will fail. People need room to act and adapt. (p.79)

Most educational reform these days is about stripping away the power from teachers and individuals, as if the situations they face in their classrooms can be simplified to a checklist. But…Gawande continues:

Yet they cannot succeed as isolated individuals either–that is anarchy. Instead, they require a seemingly contradictory mix of freedom and expectation–expectation to coordinate, for example, and also to measure progress toward common goals.

This is where empowering teachers (or at least acknowledging that they’re not interchangeable) becomes so important. Teachers cannot do it alone, but that does not mean that each move ought to be scripted…

At a school today, watching a day unfold, and got to thinking:

which is worse, back to basics, where kids are skilled and drilled, where scripted lessons ensure a scary homogeneity, where imagination and creativity are irrelevant? Or empty progressive pedagogy, where kids are given freedom to choose, projects to do, things to play with, but without any follow-up, such that they’re just messing around and not learning anything?

A few years ago I might’ve argued for the latter — choice and creativity trump scripts — but now I’m not so sure. Turning kids lose, even kids getting a ton of help from home, completely undermines what school should be about. And it sets up all sorts of problems for later — you’ve played but you haven’t learned — which will undermine your next academic experience from the beginning.

I like this editorial and I like this approach: let’s build a system so that in five years, every child will have a viable public option.

I particularly respect the honesty necessary to write this paragraph:

If faith and commitment had nothing to do with our Catholic-school choice, we still would have gone that way because, above all, we have no confidence in the district’s ability to deal with the kids that it must educate who would be negatively affecting our child’s learning.

“One of the insidious lessons about TV is the meta-lesson that you’re dumb. This is all you can do. This is easy, and you’re the sort of person who really just wants to sit in a chair and have it easy.”

Review of David Lipsky’s book here.