Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Bracey's last report--trashing our educational assumptions

I got to the last page of the last icon-shattering piece Gerald W. Bracey will ever write, and felt sad and empty. As usual, he had skewered--with great erudition and insight--some of my fondest beliefs about how to improve schools. As a consequence, my thinking and writing about these issues will (I hope) be better next time. But who is going to do that for me in the future?

Jerry Bracey, the nation's leading critic of unexamined assumptions in education, died Oct. 20 at age 69, apparently in his sleep, in his new home in beautiful Port Townsend, Wash. This was a shock to everyone who knew him because, although he had prostate cancer, it did not seem to have slowed him down.

The last person to receive one of his infamous emails questioning the ancestry and sanity of the recipient should frame the thing and put it on a wall. I don't know anyone else in our community of education wonks who matched him in passion, honesty and wit. The 2009 edition of the Bracey Report on the Condition of Public Education proves it.

The annual Bracey report has been a big event the last 18 years for those of us fascinated by schools and by Bracey's refusal to buy into the buzz words that we drop into our own writing and speeches without thinking, like chocolate chips in the cookie batter. Phrases such as "high quality schools," "global challenge" and "widening achievement gap."

Fortunately, Jerry had finished a draft before he died, so his friends, author and blogger Susan Ohanian and Penn State education professor Pat Hinchey, applied the finishing touches with help from Jerry's wife, Iris.

You cannot get the full effect of Jerry's writing from a review like this. You have to read every word to catch the excitement of the master analyst/assassin laying out carefully what some unwary politician, like the president of the United States, has been saying, and then see Jerry pull his switchblade from some hidden pocket and cut the guy's reputation for smarts into cucumber slices.

The publishers of this latest report, the Education and the Public Interest Center at the University of Colorado at Boulder and the Education Policy Research Unit at Arizona State University, asked Jerry to focus on three particularly important--and flawed--assumptions of education policy makers: that high-quality schools could eliminate the achievement gap between whites and minorities; that mayoral control of public schools would improve performance; and that higher standards would elevate teaching in public schools.

This was different from the free-form approach that Jerry took in previous annual reports for the educational journal Phi Delta Kappan, but it worked for me. (The Kappan should get extra credit for the many years it used Jerry as its research columnist, and gave his fans a regular dose of Bracey's bracing thoughts.)

I am having trouble writing this. Whatever I say, Jerry's not going to be able to read it, and we won't have one of those electric telephone or email conversations about our differences that were often the best part of my day. But, okay, to sum up: Jerry leaves the first two assumptions, about high-quality schools and mayoral control, looking like road kill. He also scores points against the popular view, which I share, of higher standards affecting schools positively, but makes a couple of mistakes and fails to win that round.

Two out of three isn't bad, particularly when you are Jerry, always fighting for the underdog, the thoughtful teachers and analysts whose out-of-the-mainstream ideas keep them from being appointed to national blue ribbon panels.

On the first issue, high quality schools, I have long admired and agreed with Jerry's critique of our national obsession with the education threat from foreign countries that allegedly have better teachers than we do. In this report, he supplies new arguments for our side I hadn't seen before.

He notes that average U.S. scores don't look so good compared to other countries, but "if one examines the number of highest-scoring students in science, the United States has 25 percent of all high-scoring students in the world (at least in 'the world' as defined by the 58 nations taking part in the assessment. . .) Among nations with high average scores, Japan accounted for 13 percent of the highest scorers, Korea 5 percent, Taipei 3 percent, Finland 1 percent and Hong Kong 1 percent."

What of our supposed arch- rivals, the Chinese and the Indians? As Jerry has often pointed out, despite their alleged advances in science and math teaching, they have so far refused to participate in these international comparisons.

He also makes a powerful case for remembering that impoverished students are going to need more than just great teaching and longer school days to reach their academic potential. Their health and family problems also drag them down.

His victim in this part of the report---Jerry often does his best work when he is shooting at a living, breathing, well-known target--is New York Times columnist David Brooks. I am sure Brooks will never again make the mistake in his May 7, 2009, column, resting his argument for the superiority of tough-love, no-excuses inner-city schools on data for one year, one grade and one subject at the Harlem Promise Academy, and failing to give enough credit to the unusual medical and nutritional support that program provides.

Mayoral control of schools, the second issue, was a much easier target for Jerry. Nobody was ever better at sifting the data. His Ph.D. from Stanford, the birthplace of psychometrics, came in handy. He looks at the results from Chicago and New York City, the best-known examples of school systems run by mayors, and reveals that their test score jumps do not match the ones in the more reliable National Assessment of Educational Progress.

Only on standards, the third issue, does he falter. He is able here, as he has always been in the past, to point out the idiocy of what many important people have said about standards. He proves that American pundits have been complaining for more than a century about schools not having good targets to shoot for, but then he doesn't reach the logical conclusion because it undercuts his point.

"Higher standards as a curative for school ills have been actively promoted for over 100 years," he writes. "It seems to have had no effect, at least from the perspective of the public school critics."

Who, particularly Jerry, should care what public school critics say? Have standards of learning improved over the last 100 years? Yup. In the 19th century, most Americans did not even go to high school. Do our young people know more now than they did then? Without any doubt. We are a different country, much more literate, even if we haven't done as much as we hope to do.

His other slip stems from his surprising willingness, in one instance, to make assumptions about what is happening inside a school without actually spending time in it. Forgetting his usual skepticism about press agentry, he endorses a notion advanced by Seattle University professor emeritus David Marshak--another deft critic who usually knows better--that President Obama's daughters at the Sidwell Friends School are getting a deep and sophisticated education free of the test-pressure and grading standards that the president wants public schools to adopt.

Sidwell, Jerry says, "encourages a rich interdisciplinary curriculum designed to stimulate inquiry; the expression of artistic abilities; reflection; 'stewardship of the natural world'; service to others; scientific investigation; creative expression; group as well as individual learning; personalization of learning and education of the whole person."

Reading that bummed me out. I wanted to call Jerry and ask him, in great glee, what he of all people was doing resting his argument on something taken off the Sidwell Web site. Having had a child spend six years at that school, I could tell Jerry in great detail how driven by testing and grading standards that alleged temple of higher learning is.

But I won't get the chance. Jerry and I never discussed religion. I suspect we share doubts about its premises too. But if we see each other again, we will have a lot to talk about. His last report will inspire many lively conversations like the ones we used to have, the best memorial for a man who demonstrated we should never stop thinking carefully about what we are doing, or not doing, for our kids.

By Jay Mathews  | November 13, 2009; 7:00 AM ET
Categories:  Trends  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Arne answers your questions
Next: Sidwell Friends School as Rorschach test


What a great tribute!

Posted by: bravegirl01 | November 13, 2009 8:43 AM | Report abuse

You write: He also makes a powerful case for remembering that impoverished students are going to need more than just great teaching and longer school days to reach their academic potential. Their health and family problems also drag them down."

If I may ride by favorite hobby horse:

How many other schools in MoCo have such centers?

Posted by: bravegirl01 | November 13, 2009 8:46 AM | Report abuse

Sigh. Another pundit I probably ought to familiarize myself with.

At least with regard to testing and standard myself and Dr. Bracey disagree. My bumper sticker philosophy on testing and standards in education is that what you value you measure.

The tacit evidence of the lack of importance of education in the public education system is nowhere more clearly visible then in the bitter resistance of public education at every level to the measurement of the reason for the institution's existence.

Posted by: allenm1 | November 13, 2009 9:14 AM | Report abuse

My understanding of Sidwell Friends is similar to Bracey's. Isn't it true that they don't publish the test scores of individual students or the school as a whole? That in itself would be a huge difference. Almost all good schools are concerned about test scores but the way they are being used to drive "reform" in public schools is very detrimental to learning and forms the basis for much our our concern. There is also a lot of test "invalidation" that is going on in the public and charter schools. Do you think this happens at Sidwell?

Why don't you write an article on Sidwell? Are they different just because of the student population or do they actually offer a superior education? If so, what exactly do they do? Can their methods be applied to public schools? I'm sure your readers would be very interested in knowing more about this school.

Gerald Bracey was a strong advocate for our public schools and will be sorely missed by many of us.

Posted by: Linda/RetiredTeacher | November 13, 2009 11:30 AM | Report abuse

@allenm1: Bracey didn't object to testing per se; his criticism was of the uses to which testing is put and the misguided faith many put in testing as a panacea for all of education's ills. I encourage you to read his work- you won't always agree, but I do believe you'll respect his integrity and passion, as Jay and many others do.

Posted by: JEC5 | November 13, 2009 11:47 AM | Report abuse

For LindaRetiredTeacher: I would love to write an interesting story about Sidwell, but like most high profile private schools they refuse to release much of their data that would allow me to make intelligent, evidence-based conclusions about what they are doing. If I wrote one, it would probably be about the great difference between the sweetness and light web site language and the cutthroat academic competition which defines reality at all schools, public or private, that serve so many ambitious students. NO high schools publish individual student scores, that I know of, although there may be some very old fashioned schools, or military schools, of the British model that do. If anyone knows of any, let me know. Privates like Sidwell do not publish their SAT averages, usually, although it is easy to tell what they are--just check the average of the local public school that has a similar demographic. The Sidwell average SAT is likely within a few points of the Whitman High (Bethesda, Md.)average. There is plenty of cheating at schools like Sidwell and plenty of tests that would prove invalid if anyone had a chance to study them. They are pretty much the same as the public schools that teach the same kind of kids, but insist on implying that they are different. Jerry should have known better to buy into the advertising without getting inside the school.

Posted by: Jay Mathews | November 13, 2009 6:02 PM | Report abuse

Well JEC5, I guess Bracey and I would disagree then because the more I think about it the more self-serving the antipathy of the public education system towards testing seems. Passion and integrity in service of a bad idea might merit personal respect but no amount of passion and integrity makes a bad idea a good idea. Like I wrote above, what you value you measure. If measuring's difficult you find worthwhile approximations. If measuring's impossible you find useful proxies.

But failing to measure, arguing against trying to measure means that there's value in ignorance. If there's value there's a beneficiary and anyone who'd benefit from not understanding whether a child is receiving a good education is someone with whom I'd be unlikely to find common ground.

Posted by: allenm1 | November 13, 2009 9:37 PM | Report abuse

When you take into account population, the comparative shares of high achieving students don't look very good for the US. For example, although the US has slightly less than twice as many high achieving students as Japan, it has more than twice the population (304 million versus 128 million). Taipei has less than 100th the population of the US, but still manages 1% of the high achieving students as opposed to the US's 25%. None of the other comparisons are favorable to the US. I tried to find the source of these statistics to see how the US's 25% share of high performing students compares with it's share of the total population in the test, but there no citation for the data in Bracey's report.

Posted by: wgmccallum | November 14, 2009 11:27 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company