A Des Moines Register article published on Sunday, July 10th provided a wide array of mendacious statements, delusional beliefs, questionable editorial decisions and misleading anecdotal analysis for the TruthHound to expose.
For the record, the article is entitled “Can Iowa schools regain luster?” by Lee Rood.
Let’s start off with the questionable “Journalism” and editorial decisions reflected in this article in order to understand its perspective. The piece is not categorized as an “editorial” or opinion piece. On their website, as a matter of fact, it is presented above the fold under the news pieces. Nevertheless, there is ample opinionating and editorializing in the piece.
Although the piece is specifically presented and written as a review of the circumstances and challenges facing Iowa and the nations schools, it starts out with the startling assertion from the writer..
“The last time Iowa was considered No. 1 overall in education, teachers faced fewer challenges in the classroom, students were more homogeneous and school districts required less of them to graduate.
That was 1992″
All of these assertions are subject to debate – not factual. They all require highly debatable assumptions – that the challenges of 1992 are less than today despite the rapid rise of technology and information availability; that students were more homogeneous despite the fact there is more to diversity than race or ethnicity (in other words excessive focus on differences rather than similarity..hmmm); that school districts required less of them to graduate despite the flat to declining standardized performance scores that Ms. Rood herself presents in the article (as if addressing the bottom percentiles while failing the vast majority is some sort of enhancement.).
There is also the implicit demographic assumption throughout her article that students are poorer than in 1992 even though Iowa’s poverty rate is lower today than in 1990 – after the greatest recession since the great depression. So much for the beleaguered educational establishment. This data, of course, compliments of the US Census Bureau.
Finally, everything has changed for every leader in every field of endeavor since 1992. Some have adapted and thrived while others have wallowed in the scrap heap of failure. Really, is it too much to expect from our educational leadership to adapt and change?
More troubling, however, is the following quote which is presented as indisputable fact from the writer..
“The summit comes as President Barack Obama and Education Secretary Arne Duncan, the event’s keynote speaker, have urged states to raise the bar on education.
And yet in Iowa and across the country, districts are being forced by economic necessity to gut programs, lay off teachers and trim school days.”
Forget the questionable conclusions that defy logic which we dissected earlier in our review of Senator Gronstal’s failure to address the real needs of Iowa’s Children in our post called “Does Michael Gronstal Really Care About Children?”. I am not going to bother to dissect that simply demagogic argument again. What is shocking is that it is being presented as fact with inflammatory language, “gut”, in a purported news piece. So much for the journalistic integrity the Register purports to possess – the Register does lots of purporting these days.
I will give credit to Ms. Rood for at least presenting a broad array of opinions in the article. Some of those opinions, however, leave one shaking their heads in frustration.
Starting with the erstwhile Micheal Gronstal, who was quoted, and presumably deduced (though the editorial work on the article leaves one wondering)…
“Gronstal said Branstad has tried to offer incentives for more teachers to pursue national board certification, but a very small fraction of teachers did so because of the cost and locations of the universities that train teachers.
The process costs more than $2,500. To date, only 663 of the state’s more than 33,000 teachers are board-certified; 19 received their certification in 2010-11.”
Once again, not knowing where the quoting begins and ends and the authors opinions begin and end, I will simply attribute the above to Mr. Gronstal. In a quick review of several districts in the state, it appears that teachers in many districts can earn an additional $1,000 to $2,500 per year for attaining Board Certification (admittedly, some districts offer paltry incentives). For those districts, that means the teachers’ payback on their investment in the additional cost of certification is 3 years or less. Governor Branstad’s program would pay an additional $10,000 per year to teachers getting that certification – quick, someone calculate that amazing return on investment and tell me what rational being would not take it, unless of course they want to try to get it without, well, doing the work.
Since we keep hearing about how underpaid teachers are, this seems like a boon to the profession. Of course, the paltry number pursuing the Certification in districts that already offer a substantial bonus, and solid to spectacular return on investment, indicates that maybe some want the state to “Gimme my money” without doing the work.
In criticizing Governor Branstad’s intention to use NEAP scores to measure performance, Mr. Gronstal ventures into irrelevant thinking once again…
“I used to do very well on the Iowa Tests of Basic Skills, but that doesn’t necessarily mean I’m smart or have skills for the modern workplace,” he quipped
Hmmm….Well, given the fact that most skill issues that employers have with finding qualified workers relates to basic skills, Mr. Gronstal’s comments sound more the the standard deflection from those who do not wish to measure the performance of our educational system (a link to resources regarding this issue is provided below under the “skills gap deflection” heading).
Mr. Gronstals’ delusion and deflection is shared by the following learned individual..
“Mark Grey, a professor of anthropology and director of the Iowa Center for Immigrant Leadership and Integration at the University of Northern Iowa, also cautioned that it will be increasingly difficult for state leaders to evaluate progress based on one-size-fits-all barometers.
“The problem is, there is no standard student anymore,” he said. “We have all these different kinds of folks coming into schools now, and their needs are very diverse. They are all starting in different places. It’s going to be a challenge if we base our success primarily on standardized test scores.” “
The problem, of course, is that if one does not measure it, it is likely not going to be accomplished as any organizational leader will tell one. The fact that admirable goals for our schools include imparting our culture, exposing our future citizens to broad ranges of educational opportunities, and providing access to alternative educational avenues does not dismiss the responsibility for schools to impart basic skills to our future population. The fact that there is so much focus on standardized test scores of basic skills is because our current educational establishment is so very abysmal at maintaining world standards in those areas – it is a priority. Once that is fixed, we can begin measuring other performance areas of our schools: In fact, why not measure those as well beginning now? Again, improvement in our educational system is not mutually exclusive or a zero sum game. Demagoging it as such (and I have no idea if Mr. Grey was trying to do that, but Ms. Rood presented it that way) is a misleading deflection intended to avoid responsibility.
Also, I hate to remind Mr. Grey that there was likely never any “standard student”. While I could have fun dissecting that straw-man (like, we have always had immigrants, even in Iowa), I think the reader can relate to my position.
One of those interviewed for the article, the Superintendent of Des Moines Schools, seemed to have the most balanced perspective. I will not repeat all of her quotes – direct, implied and otherwise – but she correctly points out that not all is wrong, there is a good base to build from, but the challenges are many. The most refreshing thing she said…
Sebring said she will attend the summit, but with a somewhat jaded suspicion that educators will be asked to try the next new things without clear goals in mind.
She and other superintendents would like to see a consensus reached at the summit on what the state’s definition of success should be. Like others, she hopes the NAEP test will not be the only measure.
What Sebring believes would help most: a longer school day and year.
“We can be successful, but it takes time,” she said. “It has always boggled my mind that high school and middle school students go home at 2:30 p.m.”
Focusing on goals, objectives, and indicating that more measurements, in addition to NEAP, are needed should provide parents in Des Moines with hope.
Ms. Sebring also mentioned the growing impact of the economic status of children in enhancing those challenges. We, similarly, have pointed that out in our aforementioned piece on Mssr. Gronstal.
In other words, the best thing we can do to enhance school performance of all children is to provide good jobs to their parents. The second best thing is to find out how to get a better ROI out of our education system without completely sucking an increased share of our wealth (and tax) generating capacity away from employers and employees.
———————
Skills Gap Deflection: Most employers think that basic skills are the defining challenge for educators. Mr. Gronstal and the rest of the educational establishment deny those ringing requests with their own idea, remarkably not listening to customers they are supposedly trying to serve when asking for more money (try telling your boss you need another $100 million to fulfill the requests of your major customers and then ignoring those requests). Attached are some links..
Skills Gap Is Big Concern of Employers Today - Employers Will Trains Specific Skills
What is clear is that employers are having problems finding people with the rudimentary communications and analytical skills amongst High School graduates sufficient to work in a modern factory. I personally would like to see civics, history and economic education measured and have goals attached to them, but it is clear that it is a struggle to get the agreement of the educational community that they need to measure anything and be accountable for it (and please, please let’s get competitive again to give everyone’s parent a job).
Loading ...
Pingback: Relevant News on Monday…Links to Important Stories | Polk County Republicans of Iowa