Ravitch vs. Kopp Part II

Follow garyrubinstein on Twitter

Click to read Part I first

Part 1 ended with Wendy Kopp misquoting an already exaggerated claim by a charter network as her proof that “it” is happening all over. Ravitch was surely skeptical of this claim, but without time to research it and refute it, she had to let it go. That was certainly a problem with debates before the digital age. There would be all kinds of things that you would wish you had said, in retrospect. But now, I hope that post-debate analyses like mine can help these debates continue and filter out all the misinformation and exaggerations that often are a part of them.

Round 3

The moderator asks Ravitch “Is there a crisis?” and “Have we learned anything from the charter movement?” To the “is there a crisis?” question, Ravitch responds that the crisis is one of poverty. Some ‘reformers’ like to jump on this answer, saying that she is suggesting there is nothing we can do to help close the achievement gap until poverty is eliminated. They frame her argument as a cop out. But here she gets a chance to explain it a little more. Babies in poverty are often born prematurely and 1/3 of premature babies grow up with learning disabilities, for example. There are many good articles, including this one, that go more into detail about HOW poverty is the real issue, and why we can’t just ignore it and say “poverty is not an excuse.”

Then she turns to the charter question.  The big issue with charters, not everyone knows, is that their success is sometimes inflated in various ways.  At issue is whether or not charters serve the same populations as the public schools they compete against, co-locate with, or replace.  The schools claim to be open-enrollment with selection by lottery, so to the casual observer it seems pretty fair.  But some schools have a complicated process to enter the lottery which excludes families that aren’t capable of navigating the system.  There are also schools that cheat, as reported recently in The New York Times, by removing applicants from the lottery.  The other way some charters inflate their scores is through attrition.  By expelling, counseling out, or otherwise eliminating the lowest performing kids, their scores go up that way.  Until recently, this wasn’t reported widely, but recently we are seeing a lot about this.  I believe it will be bigger than the Atlanta cheating scandal when enough evidence finally surfaces.

Ravitch says something a bit unusual in her answer.  She says “I’d love to see a high performing network like KIPP take over an entire district.”  The moderator gasps, asking if she really has that much confidence in KIPP.  Rather than say that she is really just offering a dare (which is what she was doing, because I asked her to clarify for me), she answers that this would be good way to find out if they really have the ability to serve all kids.  Again, she says, “If that school district was willing I’d love to see them try it.”  As much as I revere Ravitch, I think that she was a bit too subtle on this answer.  Many in the audience may have believed that she felt it was possible for KIPP to take over a city like Detroit and turn it around.  It is documented that KIPP once tried to take over a single school in Denver and failed miserably with it.

Wendy didn’t pick up on the sarcasm, which was why she began her response with “Maybe we are making progress.”  Then Wendy gives an empty monologue, void of any substance.  “We know how to do it,”  “We know how to replicate it.”  Scaling up, though, she admits is a problem.  She says that there is ‘depressing’ news, which is that “in aggregate we have not moved the needle” much, and also ‘interesting’ news that “some systems have moved the needle.”  Is it me, or is does the expression ‘move the needle’ make it very clear how little the success is that she’s bragging about.

The successful schools are “on a mission.”  “They set out to change kids trajectories.”  They do this by having a strong team, they recruit and develop talent over time (is 2 years ‘over time’?), they build ‘a culture of acheivement’, they do ‘whatever it takes.’  Then she mentions a few specifics like having a longer school day, offering health services, and mental health services.

To scale the problem, leaders need to be ’empowered’ and given the ‘flexibility’ they need.  This ‘flexibility,’ I think is the power to fire teachers more easily, though she doesn’t explicitly say that here.

Round 4

The moderator asks Ravitch how can we get accountability without standardized testing?  Ravitch is strongest in this seven minute answer which I won’t even summarize here since everyone must click on the video and watch it for themselves.  Even Wendy starts to applaud in the middle of it, and when Ravitch finishes, she gets a round of applause from the crowd.

Then when it is Wendy’s turn, she defends testing with the most lame justification I have ever heard:  “Giving our teachers, you know, good assessments is like giving them like something from Heaven.  You know, it’s like awesome.”  She says we should not go back to the days when we didn’t know how they were doing, as if that is what Ravitch is advocating for.  We need better tests, though.  This gets Wendy her own round of applause, for some reason.

Wendy does not touch Ravitch’s big point that when we attach bonuses and firings to test scores, it leads to gaming the system in different ways.  I would have liked to hear where Wendy stands on whether or not teacher evaluations should be based, in part, on standardized test scores.

To be continued …

This entry was posted in Debate Analysis. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Ravitch vs. Kopp Part II

  1. Christy says:

    Should we blame Wendy’s english teachers for her incorrect grammar?

    You know, like, it’s all of their fault.

    Sorry for the sarcasm.

  2. SMH says:

    To be fair, Wendy doesn’t say better tests. She said better measures. I’m probably splitting hairs though.

    If Wendy truly means “better measures”, then sure, why not? What teacher wouldn’t like to have better ways of ensuring that his/her kids are developing as learners?

    If she means “better tests”, as you interrupted it Gary, then she’s asking for more system gaming. Better tests usually means harder or with an “open-ended” component. You will inevitably find some really desperate administrator/teacher/insert school personnel who will read the questions and share. These will become “practice” and voila! Your kids have “learned”.

    I’ve worked with kids caught in the middle of a cheating scandal, and they know it. They question whether their scores are because of their efforts or the efforts of unscrupulous people who work with them. It’s saddening, and it’s something that doesn’t have to happen as along as we stay away from trading PASSING test scores for a bonus, or worse, keeping a job.

  3. 2010TFAAnnon says:

    I felt like Frasier and Marty watching Antiques Roadshow except instead of drinking for “veneer” it was “transformation!”

  4. Pamela says:

    I’m a big follower of Diane Ravitch. But there are moments when she appears to kowtow to Queen Wendy. The empress has no clothes, and Diane Ravitch knows this — so why the excessive politeness? It made the debate absolutely unwatchable at times. I’m tired of the spirit of compromise in the debate on education. TFA is gutting public education — this is not a time for sucking up.

  5. Anon says:

    Ravitch says something a bit unusual in her answer. She says “I’d love to see a high performing network like KIPP take over an entire district.” The moderator gasps, asking if she really has that much confidence in KIPP. Rather than say that she is really just offering a dare (which is what she was doing, because I asked her to clarify for me), she answers that this would be good way to find out if they really have the ability to serve all kids.

    Exactly. She’s such a stupid ideological hack these days that she can’t even admit that KIPP is doing alright without having to taunt KIPP with an impossible task (as if any school board would ever hand over an entire district to KIPP anyway).

    • E. Rat says:

      It’s interesting how the pundits on one’s own side are always principled scholars, but those on the other are “ideological hacks”, no?

      KIPP isn’t doing alright – at least, it sure isn’t for the children it expels or counsels out, and for the schools to which it hands those children off. KIPP wasn’t able to even successfully take over one public school when it tried. It’s a model that works well under some very idealized circumstances that have very little to do with the real world. The task isn’t impossible because successful school districts are impossible: it’s something that KIPP cannot do.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s