Times Guest Column on STEM Education

There was a guest column in the Seattle Times by Bonnie Dunbar, the president and CEO of The Museum of Flight and a former astronaut, encouraging the community to support STEM education efforts.

The column itself was the usual pointless pablum that we typically see in these guest columns. Lots of goals with no action plan. The interesting bit, as usual, comes in the reader comments in which members of the community writes that we DON'T need more engineers because there are lots of them standing in unemployment lines and that engineering jobs are being outsourced to India and China or to people from India and China who come to the U.S. on guest worker visas.

This article is also written completely without reference to the ineffective math education methods adopted over the past ten years.

Good News Club comes to SPS

A group called The Child Evangelism Fellowship has established after-school Bible clubs in two Seattle elementary schools, Loyal Heights and Whittier. See this story in the Seattle Times.

I know how this could be a hot-button issue. Believe me, I know. Personally, I'm not a Christian and I'm sensitive to evangelical efforts. That said, I am devoted to fairness and transparency. The same rules should apply to everyone equally - evangelical groups, the military, corporations, whatever. I'm not alone in this view. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled this way. The District can set some rules. They could, for example, set a rule that any after-school group must be non-discriminatory in their admission policy. That would prohibit the Boy Scouts thanks to their anti-gay policy. It doesn't apply to this group because they welcome participation from non-Christians - that's what the evangelical effort is all about: getting new people to join.

So people could get all worked up over this, but there's no cause for it.

Hey, if you want to start a free-thinkers group, an atheist group or a pagan group, go ahead and you'll get the same opportunity from the District as they have extended to this group. And let's remember that participation is completely by choice. No children are being required to attend. If you don't want your child to go, then don't let them go.

As an activist in the District I sometimes get some flak for having a louder voice than other people, but I'm not taking any opportunities that aren't available to everyone. Likewise this group isn't exploiting any favoritism; an equal opportunity is open to everyone.

Enjoy Your Break

I just want to say Happy Holidays to all the readers and writers of this blog. I plan on using the next two weeks to rest and plan for the rest of the school year.

I know that many of you feel that the SPS is a very disfunctional district and I am hard pressed to disagree with that assessment. Please know that inspite of this, real learning is taking place in most classrooms everyday and students are learning (even when they don't really want to). The teachers in the SPS are passionate and dedicated to the education of your children.

I am proud to be a teacher and I love what I do. I think most of the teachers in the SPS would say the same thing if you asked them.

Transition Plan (Part 2)

Tracy had 75 slides. Holy cow! She was very careful to try to cover every situation and it showed.

Okay, what do we suppose is one the barriers to our NSAP and the transition? Yes, it's the VAX. Mr. Kennedy says they are making progress but it's still a problem and yes, they will be using it for assignments (hopefully) one last time. (Sherry really gave them an out by saying, "You'll let us - the Board - know if we bumps into any VAX issues in our questioning." I mean, you could blame the VAX for almost anything. Handy.)

Slide 6 reflects "We are unable to support additional scope (scope creep). Coding is currently underway and changes would result in project failure and our inability to support Open Enrollment."

Slide 8 started the discussion of the Transition Plan and I find it somewhat vague. This is for one year only and there will be subsequent transition steps in years to follow. How they follow depends on the enrollment patterns. They might move faster if people tend to follow their attendance area assignments.

Highlights

• "All current students and all new students who register early will get an assignment letter at the end of February before Open Enrollment starts." This is pretty big as I didn't think you would get an assignment letter early as well. Open Enrollment has been extended to Jan. 15th.
• Assignment letters for Open Enrollment assignments will be mailed at the end of May 2010.
  
• Waitlists stay active until September 30th and you can apply to attend or change your assignment if available space at that school through then.
• Assignments for available space are first come, first serve through September 30th and tiebreakers do NOT apply
• Harium pointed out that the parent survey only asked for sibs for one year and that it seemed shortsighted. (He was listening to us, folks.) Tracy kind of waffled that the logic was that it wouldn't be useful data because people move around. (Really? that's the answer?) So Kay asked if in the future they would do it and Tracy said yes, they would add sib questions to the registration form to capture data and use it.
• Open Choice seats for High School are starting at 10% for only the 9th grade target enrollment size. DeBell asked if this was a staff recommendation and Tracy said yes, for the first year but not necessarily for full implementation. She said that they would not fill every empty seat, though.
  
• They are going to maintain the Barnhart/Waldman amendment for processing this time. That means (and this is important), that for this enrollment year, that if you put down a second choice and don't get your first choice, you will be assigned to that second choice as if you put it first. This amendment allowed parents to take a chance on a school that might be harder to get into without losing a more stable choice. The new plan will be to "process all first choices first, then second choices, etc.".
  
• The new plan will have a "keep siblings together" option to have them at the same school. This is only good for Open Enrollment (not after). Now, this doesn't mean you will necessarily get the school you want for both but that they will keep them together somewhere.
• The new plan will automatically put you on the waitlist for your first choice and no other. However, don't forget, for 2010-2011 enrollment, the Barnhart-Waldman amendment applies so you can pick a different waitlist from your first choice.
• I was confused over the "students who move" slide #37. Could someone who attended help me out?
  

Gifts (I'm calling them this because they are a big change from the old system)

• New students to the district after September 30th are assigned to their attendance area school (or linked school) only. Now this is gift because newcomers to the district normally had to take a seat at whereever there space. Obviously this means that most schools will not be entirely full. Keep that in mind. However, it was clarified that it also means no newcomer to the district after September 30th can apply to an Option school even if there is space. (Tracy says it is a VAX problem and that after it is cleared, they can consider that kind of assignment for a newcomer.)
• Early entrance to kindergarten applicants will be processed at the same time as any other kindergarten applicant.
• Spectrum/APP seats. Students can test in fall/winter with results back in time for enrollment. That isn't new. However, newcomers to the district can come in and if they were attending a school with a similar program, the Advanced Learning department can grant them entrance to Spectrum or APP. Naturally, this is fraught with some issues (like can they show they did test into their school's program even if the program itself wasn't similar to Spectrum or APP?) but this is new.
• No geographic zones for Option schools for 2010-2011. Huge gift. See below.
  

Tiebreakers for 2010-2011

• for elementary attendance area - after sibling, it is "lives in attendance area/grandfathering at another school" and then lottery. Same for middle and high school.
  
• NO GEOGRAPHIC ZONE FOR OPTION SCHOOLS. This is huge. The reason? They ran out of time and couldn't have them done in time for tours at Option Schools. That means it's a free for all and if you want a certain Option school, now's the time. That also means your other children will now be able to come to that school as well under the sibling tiebreaker (or very likely). They won't be saving on transportation costs here.
  
• there are different tiebreakers for Montessori, Spectrum and APP. Refer to the presentation.

Grandfathering

I hesitate to write on this as I was gone when this was discussed. It seems clear that on the one hand they want to do right:

"Accommodate non-attendance area K students in older siblings' schools to the greatest reasonable extent."
"Assure families that elementary school siblings will not be required to attend different schools."

There were slides about surge capacity strategies (including putting office space in RV's, no kidding). If these strategies don't work, there are 2 Transition Rules.

Rule #1. It seems they are putting some onus on parents. Slide 49 is about parents needing to make a request to be assigned to the younger sibling's attendance area school. A key word here is "just". It sounds like if you apply for the incoming K student "just" at the older sib's school during Open Enrollment but get assigned to the attendance area school, the older sib will be assigned to the attenance area school of the younger "upon request". "This would be done only if specifically requested by the family after Open Enrollment. The family could choose to exercise this option any time after Open Enrollment through September 30th."

Rule#2. If you apply for several schools during Open Choice and get assigned different ones, staff would (upon request) identify at least one school in the service area where families would be offered space for sibs. You could do this any time AFTER Open Enrollment through September 30th.

That certainly puts a lot of pressure on parents to (1) have this knowledge in mind and (2) remember to follow-thru. I think there should be a parent at every school who can explain this to their PTA/Community group. I wouldn't trust principals to take this all on.

I am not going to go through Transportation as I haven't read through it enough. Could someone who attended help me out here?

A lot to mull and muddle through.

Please read the Budget thread as well as it has implications for the NSAP and our entire district. I know, it's a lot. Read it at your leisure but please read it.

Budget and Transition Plan (Part 1)

I attended the Budget/Transition Board Work Session yesterday (well, 4 hours of it before I left). I had seen they were going to discuss the Budget and, as usual, the Board bit off more than it could chew in one sitting. The budget portion went long and the Transition Plan got started late. I regret I couldn't stay for all the Transition Plan (and yes, grandfathering was at the end). However, I saw several familiar faces there and I know they will fill in.

As it turns out, it was good to hear about the upcoming budget issues because my belief is that the budget and the new SAP are on a collision course. We are headed for a huge budget crisis of proportions we haven't seen since the Olchefske era. We are losing almost $24M from state money alone. The gap as of yesterday was $35M BUT, if they want to enact the new SAP, it could rise to nearly $45M between the new SAP and what is called Budget Enhancements. They are likely to dip into reserves again. This is going to last probably for at least 2 years. Something's gotta give and here's what it is.

Entire programs may be cut. Get ready because we may see that or at least a freeze on certain activities.

(Peter Maier suggested that they could not get the budget balanced without it. Given the numbers they are talking about and what they want/believe they can get done, I'm not sure what else could happen.) As Director Patu said at the Board meeting, in her charmingly blunt manner, when there is no new money, the district takes money from one thing to serve another. There is NO new money.

We are in real trouble. And, there is not going to be any real public engagement about it. What Dr. Goodloe-Johnson said would happen is that each principal would go to his or her community, via their PTA, and let them know that tough choices are coming. There would be no regional meetings about this issue.

What she forgets is that not all principals have the follow-thru nor does every school have a PTA. You, yes YOU, must go to your PTA and your principal and have the school's budget on the agenda in January. All the parents at every single school need to know what this means to their community.

Mr. Kennedy handed out a couple of things and I would suppose the Powerpoint will be at the website at some point but there was also a document called "Framing Seattle Public Schools' Budget" which was chock-a-block full of all sorts of data. (I need Meg Diaz to read this thing because I'm not sure I get all of it.) There was an interesting chart showing enrollment and budgeted staff that Mr. Kennedy said showed that as enrollment had been decreasing, staffing had been steady or increasing. He said with higher enrollment figures this is now reversing (but you have to wonder why this happened at all).

Budget Highlights:

NSAP -
This is costed out at about $5,575,794 (this does not include the capital costs of reopening the 5 schools which is roughly $50M to come from BTA III). The first year is about $855,000 for new libraries at some schools, technology and opening costs for 5 new schools. Also linked to this first year - and this is fairly big - is that TOPS and Salmon Bay would go to the Tier 1 transportation time like all other K-8s. They made the claim that leaving them in Tier 2 times would cost even more next year. Michael said this seemed to be less about the new SAP and more a continuation of what they started in adjusting transportation times earlier this year. (Interestingly, this was noted in the Transition Plan that it could be a temporary 2-year change for TOPS and Salmon Bay but not noted here. I wasn't there for that part of the Transition Plan - anyone? What did Tracy say?)

Then there is a category called "Academic Assurances" at $3.1M which includes Advanced Learning (both for professional development, curriculum, backfill from state reductions, Special Ed FTE, CTE FTE, ELL resource room and music enhancements at middle and high school.

Dr. Enfield said these things are crucial to fulfilling the promise of good schools everywhere. She said that ALO will expand to 5 new sites and Spectrum to 4 new sites (with every middle school having it). She said that the professional development was necessary because she constantly heard that "Spectrum isn't Spectrum isn't Spectrum" from school to school. Also interesting is the directive that all high schools would have at least one AP or IB course "offered in each core content area in all comprehensive high schools (English, Math, Science and History). (Note: this does not mean ONLY 4 but they have to have at least one in each core area. Currently, for example, Roosevelt's LA department won't teach a stand-alone AP English course and Hale's History department won't teach a stand-alone AP History course. I would suspect that having it as an add-on won't fulfill this requirement but I'll have to ask Dr. Enfield.)

The music thing is great to hear because they want to "strengthen existing programs while creating greater equity and access across schools". Foundational courses would include concert, marching and jazz, orchestra and choir.

They also put numbers to costs for some programs. Montessori costs $74,500 to start up and International School costs are $115,000 in planning for year 1 and $75,000 implementation for year 2.

Also under NSAP costs is STEM at $1.5M (note that is a start-up cost although oddly they said it was for computers which is under Technology in BTA III).

They left the Transition Costs a blank but Sherry Carr (and then Michael) were not having it. Sherry wanted a placeholder number for that category. Mr. Kennedy agreed to do so.

Budget Enhancements

This was a third cost that adds to the shortfall. It includes textbooks for high school Social Studies and Science and K-5 music. It also includes professional leadership development, misc. program enhancements (at $250,000 that Mr. Kennedy zoomed right through but I didn't miss his speed so I'm a little suspicious at what this is), adoption committee work and more textbooks for the new schools. This pot sits at just under $5M.

Solutions (early stage work from staff)

• furloughs for non-school staff
• central reductions of staff
• WSS cuts
• freeze on purchases and contracts
• shifts to grant funding
• translation efficiencies (this at $1M)
• non-essential hiring freeze
• increased revenue ($2M - I assume from enrollment)
• other cost savings (to be gone over with the Finance Committee)
• elimination of programs

There was then a couple of pages that I assume were because of Meg Diaz' work. One was about the budgeted coaching positions at 116.5 FTE (full-time employee) and a cost of $11M. It was pointed out it wasn't just for coaches but for STAR and consulting teachers as well. Michael said that he thought they were trying to fund all the coaches from grant dollars and not baseline. I don't think Mr. Kennedy liked that statement. Additionally, there was a Central Administration costs comparsion from '09 to '10. It shows it is down by 12%.

My Notes:

• there was a somewhat large sum under Board of $2.3M which Michael asked them to explain as the Board has nothing like that to spend. It turned out to be for the Board office, election costs, contractual/legal services and state auditor costs. The Board has little to do with most of this spending.
• Betty asked the most charmingly naive questions throughout both presentations. I am trying to be generous here but she seems over her head. Her first question was why we spend so much on transportation. It was explained that we had a choice system that made us have to transport many students far from home but the new plan would, hopefully, bring them closer.
• Peter Maier asked about bus times and the head of Transportation couldn't even tell him correctly off the top of his head which I thought was odd.
• When discussing Special Ed and inclusion, Betty questioned the wisdom of putting some kids with behavior problems in classrooms but Susan Enfield said that they had supports in place.
  
• Betty asked the rest of the Board, "Well, what are we going to do about this deficit?" It was quite odd as they were getting to discussing options. She seemingly couldn't quite follow along with the conversation. (That said, this was the first time any of them were seeing this so trying to read and listen and comprehend is tough.)
• there was talk of prioritizing text adoptions because of the costs

Board suggestions for cuts

• district travel
• elementary counselors
• security
• see if overlap between translation services and bilingual IAs does exist
• standardizing of costs for full-day K charges
• furloughs for central staff
• salary freezes/reductions
• delay in textbook adoptions

Dr. Goodloe-Johnson did say something interesting at one point about costs for Montessori and International schools, saying Options schools have costs. But, international schools aren't Option schools so was that a slip of the tongue?

All the directors seem firmly against any teacher cuts. Kay encouraged early retirement offers, online texts and a freeze on travel. She also worried over fresh food at schools but that train is way gone.

Michael, as usual, had the broad picture. He said we were the best funded district in the state and yet we spend a lot. We spend more on teaching costs and professional development. (I thought about a freeze on professional development for a couple of years but one person told me they thought it was contractual. Well, the teachers have a new contract coming up - why not freeze it for a couple of years if it serves everyone's interests?) He also noted that we have a line item of $31M for supervision of teachers that is not principals. (He's right - way too much money.) He also said that Washington State has one of the most progressive job share laws in the country and we should use this as an opportunity to restructure.

Betty ended the discussion with asking if we could postpone the new SAP in light of the deficit.

All of this is absolutely scary. But you don't find $35-45M in a cookie jar or under a mattress. Hard times indeed.

Feedback from Alt Meeting?

Anyone attend?

This was from Gavroche on Dr. Goodloe-Johnson on the subject of blogs:

"Btw, about 70 people showed up for the meeting last night. And Supt. Goodloe-Johnson says she doesn't read the blogs.

"No, I don't. There's no way."

Ha ha ha.

Maybe she doesn't, but someone in the District does and you can bet that G-J knows what the unwashed masses (that would be us) are talking and concerned about.

Actually, I found it pretty disdainful and dismissive of her to say that (multiple times and emphatically, I might add). There is a lot of valuable, genuine and informed discussion that goes on in the blogs -- that the District would be better for if it acknowledged and heeded."

I'm interested in why blogs would come up multiple times and not because I'd care if she read them or not. Rather, if the district is challenging any information put out here, I'd like to know. Charlie and I take pains to try to get it right and if we are not accurate, I'd like to know.

But yes, I'm sure a couple of someones from the district check in here a couple of times a day.

But to the subject of the meeting - what was said?

Murder Mystery Theater...in MIddle School?

Okay, so maybe because it is the season of cheer, giving and, for some, the celebration of someone's birth but I saw this in this month's School Beat and I had to shake my head.

McClure Middle School is putting on an fundraiser that is a "true audience interactive murder mystery with dinner" called Three Doors to Death or...The Choice is Yours. I saw the script and it's not bloody and the corpse even talks. But if you want to put on a play, why a murder mystery? (And corpses don't talk unless you are talking about the forensic evidence on their bodies.) There are so many good plays and musicals I just wonder at this choice.

Maybe I just feel melancholy for the deaths of the 5 polices officers in one month. Maybe it's because I listened to "This American Life" and the subject was about how the murder of a loved one can change how you view murder (no watching Law and Order, no murder mystery theater, no Clue). The way one person put it, "Substitute rapist for murderer in a murder mystery theater. Tell people one person was raped and one person is the rapist and we're going to figure out who the rapist is. Not so fun."

I'm probably just a Scrooge.

Seattle Weekly's STEM Article

Great article in the Seattle Weekly about STEM. What is most amazing is that (1) she got teachers to talk to her (as I said to her in an e-mail, I would have thought they would be muzzled) and (2) they were quite frank in their comments. Here's what they had to say:

David Fisher, teacher
"I've been here for 15 years and every other year we do this," says math teacher David Fisher, referring to a long string of ballyhooed overhauls that the Beacon Hill school has embarked on at the behest of the district."

Glenn Bafia, SEA/Susan Enfield, CAO
The staff probably won't change much. The district's contract with the teachers union allows it to move people out, according to Glenn Bafia, executive director of Seattle Education Association. But, in a meeting last week with Cleveland staff, district Chief Academic Officer Susan Enfield downplayed that and instead asked people "to look deep in their souls and decide if they want to stay," recounts Bafia.

Eddie Reed, teacher
And the just-designed STEM curriculum sounds an awful lot like the failed Gates-funded plan. According to Cleveland history teacher Eddie Reed, a member of the staff committee working on the plan, the reinvented school will revolve around two "academies," one focused on engineering and design, the other on life sciences. (The Gates model had a "health science academy," among others.)

"Reed, however, asserts that there's buy-in to this plan because "it was designed by staff" rather than "handed to us" by the Gates Foundation. He maintains that a bigger problem will be attracting students despite negative perceptions about Cleveland--designated an "option school" under the new assignment plan, which means that only students who choose the school will go there. He nevertheless voices optimism that this challenge can be overcome "by showing good work."

Mr. Fisher likely speaks for many teachers who have seen plans, projects, transformations, etc. come and go. Frankly, I'll bet it's very tiring to have to gear up for the next big thing. However, I'm sure that all the Cleveland teachers want Cleveland to succeed.

I liked that "look into your soul" quote from Dr. Enfield. Are they going into battle? Maybe she thinks it is that big of a personal challenge (and it probably will require a lot of personal buy-in from each teacher). Question is, if they don't buy in, who replaces them? Will they take the best math and science teachers from other high schools to make STEM work?

I give Mr. Reed points for both honesty and optimism. I'm not sure I believe that "designed by staff" is the answer that will pull this effort through (but I'm also not sure if he means Cleveland staff or district staff and if it is district staff, how much did they include Cleveland staff?).

Meeting Tomorrow Night for Alternative Schools

Alternative Schools Coalition Meeting with Seattle Public Schools Superintendent Maria Goodloe-Johnson and Chief Academic Officer Susan Enfield.

This will be an informational meeting explaining the unique challenges alternative schools face and a moderated questions and answer session. If you have concerns about the role of Alternative Schools in Seattle Public Schools is here is your chance to show your support.

TOPS K-8 SCHOOL
2500 FRANKLIN AV E
Seattle, WA 98102
7:00 p.m.

(I can't attend but I hope those who do will please let us know how it goes. I'll be interested to hear if it is a real Q&A or you all write questions and they pick which ones to answer.)

This Week's Meetings

(Update: Reader Dana let us know this meeting is not happening. See her post for details.) Monday the 14th - Eckstein's PTSA Parent Forum about inclusion in Spectrum classes.
I will have to check if this is still going on; there is no information at the Eckstein website except the date. I'll probably pop up there to check it out if it is happening.

Tuesday, the 15th, Board Curriculum and Instruction Committee meeting, 4:30-6:00 p.m.
No details on the discussion here.

Wednesday, the 16th, Steve Sundquist is having his Community Meeting from 10-11:30 am.
I'm not sure where. Anyone?

Also on Wednesday, the long-awaited Board Work Session on the Transition Plan from 4:30 -8:00 p.m.
(It also says it is about the budget). I did write the Board and ask them to press for clarification on this "one-year transition rules" and what it means. Here's what I wrote:

"Is the transition plan to be just for one year or is it a multi-year transition plan with a review of the rules at the end of each year? I have to say that either way it sure leaves families twisting in the wind not knowing if the rules will change at the end of the year or not. That may work for staff but it doesn't work well for families who want the predictability promised by this new SAP."

Thursday, the 17th, there is a Board Operations Committee meeting from 4-6 p.m. Also, there is the Public Hearing on the MOU between the City and the District on the issue of Memorial Stadium at 5:30 p.m.
I'll be testifying at the latter one. You do not have to sign up in advance to testify as for previous public hearings on the SAP and levies. (I had to press the district on this - they had no information posted on the front page of the News and Calendar section on this nor did they give information about testifying.)

Harvard Steps Up for Educational Leadership

Interesting news from Harvard via a column by Bob Herbert of the NY Times: they are, for the first time in 74 years, offering a new degree...and it's free.

"It’s in that atmosphere that the Harvard Graduate School of Education is creating a new doctoral degree to be focused on leadership in education. It’s the first new degree offered by the school in 74 years. The three-year course will be tuition-free and conducted in collaboration with faculty members from the Harvard Business School and the Harvard Kennedy School of Government. The idea is to develop dynamic new leaders who will offer the creativity, intellectual rigor and professionalism that is needed to help transform public education in the U.S.

This transformation is a job the U.S. absolutely has to get done, and it won’t get done right without the proper leadership. Kathleen McCartney, the graduate school’s dean, explained one of the dilemmas that has hampered reform. “If you look at people who are running districts,” she said, “some come from traditional schools of education, and they understand the core business of education but perhaps are a little weak on the management side. And then you’ve got the M.B.A.-types who understand operations, let’s say, but not so much teaching and learning.”

The degree to be offered (initially to just 25 candidates) is a doctorate in education leadership (Ed.L.D.). The fact that the program is tuition-free, thanks in large part to an extraordinary grant by the Wallace Foundation, is important. Harvard is trying to reach out to the broadest possible field of potential candidates. “We can’t do that unless we remove all the barriers to studying here,” said Dean McCartney."

And in the third year:

Students will spend the third year of the doctoral leadership program in a “field placement” at some organization or agency — say, a large urban school district or educational advocacy group — to gain practical experience. School officials likened this aspect of the program to a medical residency. Instead of doing a dissertation, the students will lead an education reform project in that third year.

(This was interesting to me because Dr. Goodloe-Johnson, who has a PhD in Educational Administration, Supervision, Curriculum and Instruction from the University of Colorado at Denver was part of the Broad Residency program to develop superintendents for urban school districts which is somewhat like the proposed last year of the Harvard program.)

The comments after this story were not especially encouraging. It ranged from criticizing Harvard for NOT allowing more people in to Harvard Business School ruining the American economy to saying it's too little. Maybe people have little faith in the education of the educators or maybe it's too little.

There was also this:

Hog Wash!! When will the left stop hiding from the truth! There are two factors in Education that no Harvard Degree will solve:

1. Single parent households(fatherless)
2. Teachers Unions

This is not about ethnicity or race! When Black and Hispanic children go to private schools - and even suburban public schools - they do much better!

So is the above true? Would public education do better if we addressed single parent family issues and got rid of or lessened the power of teachers unions? (Although one commenter pointed out, "Unions are not perfect but it is interesting to note that South Carolina that prohibits unions has 38 of the worst 100 schools in the nation.")

And this (somewhat edited for length):

When I was teaching on the college level, I saw two problems with the graduates of America's high schools. The first was the tremendous variation among the backgrounds of college freshmen. Some came from wealthy suburbs or college towns, where the parents rode herd on the school board and demanded a strong academic curriculum. Others came from inner cities or poor rural areas. Their parents were either unable or unwilling to make demands of the school board. They were the people who were too overworked and stressed to oversee their children's education, had a poor educational background themselves, or were downright anti-intellectual. Unless these students were tremendously self-motivated, they had basic literacy skills and not much else. Sometimes their schools didn't even offer a foreign language or math beyond Algebra II. One small town in Oregon even dropped all its art and music classes in order to save its football team.

The much-vaunted principle of local control may therefore produce excellence, or it may produce criminally poor schools. Mostly it produces mediocrity, thanks to the second problem, the basic anti-intellectualism of American culture.

It has never been cool to be intellectually gifted in America's high schools, unless you can redeem yourself by being a good athlete. Unfortunately, our mass media reinforce this attitude more than ever, first of all by dumbing down their content and second by treating all opinions as equally valid. How can teachers create and maintain interest in science when media pundits are telling their audiences that global climate change and evolution are just matters of opinion? How can our young people be motivated to learn when radio personalities rail against "intellectual elites"?

People who have mastered educational gobbledygook or MBA numerical obsession are the LAST things we need in American education. We have too much testing, too many faddish theories, and too many numerical performance standards.

Instead, we need to create basic, broadly stated national guidelines (e.g. fourth graders should learn the history and geography of their home state, sixth graders should know how to do all kinds of basic arithmetic, seventh graders should begin the study of a foreign language), hire creative, dedicated teachers, and turn them loose to educate the children in their own unique way. Schools should work with parents to help them help their children learn. The mass media should stop dumbing themselves down and increase the sophistication of their content."

On that last point, I was watching the Daily Show and there was a piece about how one the Fox commentators, Gretchen Carlson, seems to play dumb ("I didn't know what a czar was so I Googled it.") and yet, she graduated from Stanford, studied at Oxford and was Miss America (where you actually do have to have some smarts as it is a scholarship program). Maybe it makes those viewers feel better when the commentators act like what Obama is talking about is a mystery but it's really no help at all.

So would back to basics, vaulting of education upwards in this country and less local control turn the tide? I have to say that seeing Sarah Palin in action and knowing that a segment of this country would even consider her qualified to be vice-president (or now, president) stuns and mystifies me (especially since there are indeed bright conservative women).