neologophilia

Another excellent Edublogs.org weblog

The Tale of Tebow

June 13, 2013 by · No Comments · Uncategorized

Once there was a  young man of devout faith who courageously led warriors to victory on Florida’s football fields.  For his feats he received the Trophy of Heisman. The scribes and songsters variously reported that the young man was an inspirational leader, a powerful runner and blocker, a mediocre passer, and an athlete with talent ill-suited to professional football.

The scribes marveled at the young man’s constant faith, his devotion to the needy, his confidence in his athletic prowess, and his determination to succeed as a leader of men.  They went out into the countryside and questioned every relative and acquaintance of the young man, known as Tebow, and reported everything in the outlets of media.

In short, young Tebow became a phenomenon.

The young man journeyed to the land of Denver where he acquitted himself heroically in some contests, but erratically in others. The sports prophets quarreled among themselves about Tebow’s potential in the kingdom of National Football.  The phenomenon grew to a mighty wind, but the Lord was not in the wind.

After a year’s sojourn in the west, Tebow ventured east to the land of Babel (also called “New York”), where the scribes and prophets and chroniclers were numerous.  They filled many pages and hours with stories and prophecies. The name of “Tebow” echoed in every field and temple, an earthquake of commentary. But the Lord was not in the earthquake.

God looked down on the Tebow phenomenon and said, “Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other” (Genesis 11:7). And it was so.  The priests and scribes, the captains and bowmen, the fathers and mothers, the daughters and sons were questioned about young Tebow. Is Tebow a good teammate?  Will Tebow replace the captain of eleven warriors? Will Tebow cause the downfall of the commander of 50? Will Tebow become a new part of speech? Their language became a raging firestorm. But the Lord was not in the fire.

In the din of Babel, the young man remained steadfast in his dream of leading professional warriors in battle. He spoke respectfully of his captain and commander and fellow warriors.  He visited the temple and continued to serve those in need. He perceived God was testing him.

In the fullness of time, Tebow encountered the High Priest Belichick of New England, who was wise in the ways of scribes and prophets and songsters.  Belichick often confounded the questions of the scribes with his empty words. Throughout the kingdom he was known for faithfully revealing nothing.  The high priest offered young Tebow  a lowly position among his regiment of 90, a great demotion for the former winner of the Trophy of Heisman.

But Tebow knew he had been called by the still, bland monotone of Belichick. He accepted the call to be clipboard-carrier for Brady, the vaunted prince of the forward pass. He retreated to the wilderness of  Foxboro, land of the inscrutable Patriots, solemn warriors who spoke only the cryptic language of the High Priest Belichick.

And  he sojourned there for a season.

 

 

Tags: ······

American Autumn

May 29, 2013 by · No Comments · Uncategorized

I remember laughing at this sign on a colleague’s desk when I began teaching in  1974:  “No Enemy Would Bomb this Place and End  this Confusion!”  It was hilarious, a sign that would have been at home on my desk, too. Today it seems less funny.

Bob Dole’s comments about today’s Republican Party remind us of a time when Congress was all business. There was plenty of politics and partisanship, but even during the Reagan Revolution there was a collegial effort to get things done. The Clinton administration managed to curtail Welfare and strengthen law enforcement, accomplishments that Republicans would take pride in. There were shared achievements despite the public invective about the President or the opposing party.

Today the federal government is so demonized in some parts of the country that Congress has devoted 37 votes to dismantling the Affordable Health Care Act just to please their angry constituents. The name of the President of the United States has been used to poison anything that right wing politicians want to denigrate. Appointments to Cabinet positions have been stalled for months, not even getting the courtesy of a vote on the Senate floor. Judge appointments languish for years of obstruction. In Senate investigations, Senators harass witnesses ruthlessly to show how tough they are.  There’s a sense that you can’t be too nasty when dealing within anyone who works for the federal government.

Most dismaying of all, the 2012 election did not change anything. The vote that affirmed President Obama and gained votes for the opposition party across the country also brought the most bitter and vituperative voices to Congress.  The stronger the mandate, the more savage the attack on government.

There are true political divides in Washington: you can’t expect Congress to agree on issues of principle, such as abortion, gun control, taxation or environmental regulation.  But even these issues have been managed through compromise, giving in order to get.  Even those who play hardball have to throw something into the strike zone eventually.  The new minority throw everything high inside or low outside. There is no game, only gamesmanship.

Richard Haas, a lifetime devotee of foreign service,  has recently pointed out that our greatest enemies are at home.  If we continue to turn fire on our own system, we will only destroy what others have fought and died for.  American voters need to send the message that government must operate in good faith and constructive purpose.

There is no virtue in dismantling a democracy, because it allows compromise in order to function. We have the sad example of the aborted Arab Spring to learn from.  We may be a more mature democracy, but we could also be a decaying democracy.  Voters should demand more collaboration from their representatives so we do not stagnate into the American Autumn.

 

 

 

Tags: ······

Kind Rather than Right

May 24, 2013 by · No Comments · Uncategorized

In Silver Linings Playbook (the novel, not the cinematic version) Pat Peoples therapeutically reminds himself that he is working on “being kind rather than right.” On Thursday the Boy Scouts of America adopted that same litany.

“This is not about what’s legal, but what’s compassionate, caring and kind,” said Wayne Brock, chief executive of the Boy Scouts, of its decision to accept openly gay young men into its organization.  The statement takes a radical position that compassion can be reconciled with principle within an institution that educates its members in ethical behavior.  For this courageous stand the Boy Scouts of America will be summarily punished by organizations that would rather be right than kind.

Whether it is right to discriminate against a class of young men or against the leaders of young men is another important matter, but BSA has put rigid principle aside in accepting homosexual young people into scouting.  Despite what conservative and liberal religious groups are saying, it has put itself on stronger moral footing by taking a stand on a contentious issue within its own organization.  It will endure unrelenting criticism for its commitment to doing what is kind rather than right.

It is ironic and sad that Christian churches and affiliated organizations will punish the Boy Scouts of America for taking a moral stand.  Jesus is on the record often for being kind rather than right.  He visited and honored those most offensive to Jewish society: tax collectors, Roman centurions, and Samaritans. To consort with the likes of these was to be branded “unclean” and irreligious.  Remarkably all of these encounters with social pariahs did not change the people in question from being tax collectors, centurions or Samaritans, but it transformed their generosity and faith.  Of the Roman centurion whose daughter was healed from a distance, Jesus said, ” I have not found such great faith, even in Israel” (Matt 7:9). The repentance of Zacchaeus, the tax collector and the adulterous Samaritan woman at the well also document how people were transformed by kindness, rather than sermons.

While Jesus had no commentary about homosexuality in the New Testament, his relationships prove over and over again that kindness is a higher principle than righteousness. Regardless of deep-seated convictions about homosexuality, Christians are exhorted to welcome and care for the outcast or the one who seems most unlike them.

Like Jesus, the Boy Scouts chose a path that will displease everyone in some way. They accepted gay scouts, but not gay leaders.  This is not to say that the acceptance of gay scout leaders should not be an ultimate goal, but the incremental change in Scouting is perhaps the most humane for all its members. One step at a time. Jesus did not ask the tax collector to stop collecting taxes, but to stop cheating the tax payers.  Nor could he ask a Samaritan to stop being a Samaritan. She was born that way.

So if religious leaders from both ends of the theological spectrum are critical of this courageous step taken by the Boy Scouts, they might consider the principle of “kind rather than right” and extend it to their vulnerable partner.  The Scouts are under siege now and deserve the support of churches, synagogues, and youth organizations.  A well-timed kindness may bring Scouting closer to what all its members can respect and honor.

 

 

Tags: ···

Forgiveness and the Career Politician

May 9, 2013 by · No Comments · Uncategorized

Celebrating his victory in the Congressional election in South Carolina Tuesday evening (May 7) Mark Sanford, the former governor, declared,

I want to acknowledge a God, not just of second chances, but third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth chances (“Guess Who’s Back!”  New York Times, May 9, 2013)

Invoking God’s endorsement on this remarkable comeback in politics seems like a presumption and a warning sign that Congressman Sanford’s public embarrassments may not have ended.  As columnist Gail Collins quipped, “Talk about the availability of eight chances seems to suggest the newly elected Congressman is leaving daylight for additional forgiveness opportunities in the future” (“Guess Who’s Back!,”  New York Times, May 9, 2013).

Alexander Pope famously said,”To err is human; to forgive divine.” No one should question whether God has forgiven anybody, because it is, after all, God’s prerogative.  It is God’s forgiveness that draws us to worship or love or serve in the name of God.  Even service in government might originate from gratitude for God’s forgiveness.

But success in politics or business or the Super Bowl is no indicator of God’s forgiveness.  Success is relative.  Success in politics is not success in marriage or success in piety. It is winning the majority of votes by whatever strategies work at the moment, even debating cardboard cutouts of Nancy Pelosi. To say that God endorses an electoral victory is overstating the meaning of “forgiveness” and “grace.”

And success is fleeting. Grieving about the success of the “wicked,” the Psalmist prayed to understand why they were given power to rule. In a moment of revelation he says,

Surely you place them on slippery ground; you cast them down to ruin.

How suddenly are they destroyed, completely swept away by terrors!

As a dream when one awakes, so when you arise, O Lord, you will despise them as fantasies. (Psalm 73:19-20)

“Slippery ground” describes the dangers of politics perfectly.  The longest runs of political success can end precipitously. Ask former Congressmen Dan Rostenkowski (D. Illinois) or Tom Delay (R. Texas), both power brokers who resigned abruptly amid scandal. Political success is so fleeting, God would likely consider it a cheap reward for the faithful. So achieving political office can hardly be attributed to God.

But more personally, should voters forgive politicians who betray their trust? Should the governor of a state be forgiven for adultery, vanishing from the state without contact information, ethics violations, and trespassing in the home of his estranged wife? “Forgiveness” seems like the wrong word to describe whether the bond of trust can be renewed after it has been repeatedly fractured.  Congressman Sanford’s wife might well forgive him his indiscretions, but that does not mean she should consent to be his campaign manager, as he had vainly implored her.

The Apostle Paul makes a good example of the dimensions of God’s forgiveness.  After gaining a reputation for persecuting and arresting Christians for their faith, he was converted in one of the most dramatic encounters with God reported in the Bible.  Blinded by a light from heaven, he was led to a house in Damascus, where he remained for three days “without sight, and neither ate nor drank.”  Ananias received the unenviable call to go and lay hands on the zealot Paul and restore his eyesight. Of course he balked,

Lord, I have heard from many about this man, how much evil he has done to your saints in Jerusalem ; and here he has the authority from the chief priests to bind all who invoke your name (Acts 9:13-14)

In his vision, Ananias is constrained to go and heal Paul because, “he is an instrument whom I have chosen to bring my name before Gentiles and kings and before the people of Israel” (15).  It is a testament to his faith in God’s forgiveness that Ananias went to Paul and prayed for his eyesight to be restored and for him to be “filled by the Holy Spirit.”

Thus began Paul’s career as Christianity’s greatest missionary–forgiveness for the most unlikely of people. The unsung hero in this story is Ananias, who took a mortal risk to approach Paul and invoke the forgiveness of God on a known enemy.

Paul never stopped telling the story of his past persecution of Christians to keep his evangelical success in perspective.  He understood that forgiveness was not a license to do what he pleased. He understood that God would not let forgiveness become indulgence. Later he wrote to the Galatians,

Do not be deceived: God can not be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life (Galatians 6: 7-8)

If forgiveness is available to Paul of Tarsus, it certainly is available to Mark of South Carolina. What Paul did with this forgiveness is instructive for Congressman Sanford, however. Paul never failed to mention his dark past, if it would keep his present success in perspective.

Remember the slippery ground, Congressman, remember the slippery ground.

Tags: ···········

An Inconvenience too Far

April 30, 2013 by · No Comments · budget-cutting, Deficit, school funding, Taxes, the deficit

More than usual, Congress has flamed with hypocrisy over the past two weeks. With decisive votes they have demonstrated that austerity is something you inflict on others, not something you and your kind should endure.  The notion that the nation shares equally in the pain of budget cuts has been utterly incinerated.

First there was the catastrophe of eliminating Saturday postal deliveries. The bankrupted U.S. Postal Service was driven to desperation in proposing that Saturday delivery would be eliminated as a necessary step toward preserving its viability.  It was clearly an unpopular move that would affect most every citizen adversely.

But we know U.S. citizens will suffer whatever hardship is necessary to avoid deficits, don’t we?  We realize that we can’t spend money we don’t have, or so the deficit hawks remind us.  But no, this was an inconvenience too far! Rural voters were outraged by this threat to their six-day-mail-delivery way of life. Congress heard their cry and thwarted the economy measure proposed by the Postal Service.  Saturday mail delivery must stand, deficits or no!

Then there were the air traffic controller furloughs forced by the dreaded sequester. Suddenly the lack of substitute controllers was slowing down air traffic. The nation was experiencing flight delays. Business traffic was impeded, and citizens who could afford regular air travel were inconvenienced.

Turns out it was a problem easily solved by voting to allow money to be transferred from one account to another. Congress was happy to oblige before departing for a well-earned Spring Break.  Voters were mollified to see their representatives respond quickly to their needs.

Of course we know that this is just the beginning of crises engendered by the mindless sequester, budget slashing on the mere principle of promoting austerity.  We know that programs for education and health care are threatened. But who will speak for those who benefit from these programs and who will listen?  Is pre-school education as important as timely air traffic flow or Saturday mail delivery?

It goes back to the biblical principle, “Where your treasure is, there your heart will be also” (Matt 6:21). We have seen how our treasured six-day-mail-delivery and timely air travel can move Congress to action. What can we expect for services to the poor and the unemployed? Can we afford services that help a minority of citizens, even a substantial minority?  Or will we return to the tarnished principle of not spending what we don’t have?

The deficit mantra is sounding more and more hollow, as Congress springs to action to provide for those that provide for them.  The notion of what the federal budget can afford is driven entirely by the self-interest of the budget-makers.  Those who can not afford the lobbyists or lack electoral potency will suffer on the false principle of austerity.

What treasure we have in this country has been devoted to an extra day of mail delivery and the conviction that our flights must leave on time.

Tags: ····

Desperation: Not a Winning Strategy

April 18, 2013 by · No Comments · Uncategorized

When a teenager reacts to a new curfew accusing parents of being “Nazi dictators,” parents smile at the comparison. Sometimes kids have a hyperbolic way of arguing that reflects their desperation to have it their way. That same desperate voice comes from many gun rights activists. But on Wednesday the parents, uh rather the U.S. Senate, caved on the curfew, uh rather the background checks for gun buyers.

Every law passed in this land could be defeated if legislators listened to arguments about extreme outcomes, the so-called “slippery slope.”  Background checks lead to a gun registry. A gun registry leads to confiscation. Confiscation leads to law-abiding citizens being attacked in their own homes. Suddenly the mere screening of gun buyers has created a reign of terror in America, with innocent citizens threatened.  Why aren’t we smiling at these nightmare scenarios, instead of taking them seriously?

Somehow the scenario of millions of desperate gun owners sitting at home, ready to blow away anyone who touches their weapons scares me more than background checks.  Certainly there are plenty of gun owners who do not stay up at night worrying about someone coming to their house to take their weapons, and many of those pressed for background checks this past month. But there are apparently too many who live with their guns cocked and ready for action, those who shoot first and ask questions later.

In fact, background checks would probably allow most of the hair-trigger gun owners to keep their guns at the ready to defend their rights or perceived intrusion on their rights.  They will still have the power to intimidate anyone who suggests they are the least bit paranoid. They still have the right to threaten their elected representatives with loss of funding or support.  Background checks would not change any of that.

Extreme defensiveness and unwillingness to compromise are not the hallmarks of survival in this country. Notice the fate of Prohibition, which gripped our country for a less than a decade.  Learn a lesson from the labor movement, which became too greedy in the latter twentieth century.  Or watch what happens to politicians who have fought immigration reform in the twenty-first century. Those who “evolved” lived to fight another battle.  Those who made a Constitutional issue over the slightest gesture of reform have become irrelevant.

So today a desperate minority has been allowed to make the rules or rather, to dismiss the rules.  But adult restraint is coming, and those who shout for their rights, will soon be grounded or at least put on a curfew. Because shouting “Nazi dictator” does not make it so.

 

Tags: ···

Politicians Behaving Well

April 15, 2013 by · No Comments · Uncategorized

The peril of the “Background Checks” gun bill is featured in the New York Times, today, April 15.  While the uncertain passage of the bill alarms reformers laying siege to the Capital, the “deep divisions” within both parties deserves an historical footnote in this debate.  U.S. Senators are planning to vote for a bill on its merits.

Probably it would be overstating to say that all  of the U.S. Senators are voting their convictions or even to fairly represent their constituents.  Many remain beholden or in craven fear of the National Rifle Association and will do what it takes to maintain their sacred NRA rating.  These are not the politicians behaving well.

But the mere evidence of shattered party loyalty proves that the ruthless anti-Obama coalition or even the Democratic majority are not dictating how Senators vote on this bill. We are witnessing a debate on the merits of gun control in this bill, a debate that reflects real divisions among regions and interests in the country.

Some Senators are responding to the groundswell of public opinion and the heart-rending stories of the Newton parents. Susan Collins and John McCain have already spoken in favor of the bill despite the strong opposition they face in their home states.  Both Senators are not known for slavish party loyalty, but both deserve credit for bucking a strong pro-gun voting bloc in their states.  Their early commitment to the bill could cost them their re-election.

Other Senators take their representation of a gun rights constituency seriously, such as Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieux.  She frankly admits her vote will be dictated by a strong majority in her state. Although voting your conscience has a little more glamor, the vote to represent those who elected you is a credible motive.  We like to think our representatives will express our values in Congress even to the subordination of their own.

Regardless of which side of the aisle you cross from, the crossing involves a moral choice, a choice dictated by conviction of the merits of the bill under consideration, not the pressure of lobbies or of party fidelity.  It is an inspiring trend, even if it is fleeting.

Regardless on which side of the issue you stand, you have to enjoy this moment, this historical interlude when Washington is bristling with real debate instead of horse-trading and political threats.  These are the “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington” moments we learned about in U.S. History, the struggle for consensus amid honest differences.

Eventually there will be arm-twisting and surreptitious trading of gun votes for immigration votes.  The old sausage grinder will turn out the final votes for passage or defeat.  The winners will crow and losers will carp and the parties will position themselves for the next vote.

Let’s not forget this fine moment when Senators behaved as our elected representatives and cracked the dubious coalitions forged by their parties.  Like a wayward child, the Senate should be praised for the moments it takes its responsibilities seriously and votes with conviction. What a country!

 

Tags: ······

The NRA: Defensive and Distraught

April 8, 2013 by · No Comments · Uncategorized

There’s something scary about armed citizens who will not negotiate.  Even armies occasionally meet in the middle of a battlefield to consider their losses and make treaties.  This has never been the NRA’s way. It has always been “Taking my gun from my cold dead hands,” as Charlton Heston famously declared.

Rhetorically struggling, the NRA continues to hold its ground in Washington.  Even the once-favored universal background check  is losing currency in Congress.  How is this possible, when NRA’s  public defense of Second Amendment rights has declined to an adolescent protest that we can’t enforce the gun control laws we want to pass?

Is this really a legitimate argument against passing a law: that crimes will still be committed and enforcement will be problematic?  Isn’t this an argument against laws enforcing seat belt use, or proscribing pornography or marijuana? You can’t control it, so why bother making laws against it?  It’s almost like wishing the offenders of the law “good luck,” because we don’t like the law either.

Desperate times call for desperate measures. The NRA is losing the public battle against reasonable gun control legislation, so its Congressional attack dogs, like Texas Senator Ted Cruz and Oklahoma Senator Darrel Imhof labor over the enforcement issue. Criminals will continue to find guns. Straw purchases will continue.  God-fearing gun owners will face confiscation.  What proposed law would take guns from legitimate gun owners? It is not these laws, but any laws that the NRA resists.

This is why the NRA can not earn my respect. Every gun control law comes down to whether you can defend your home against lawlessness or government intrusion. Every gun control law trespasses on the Second Amendment.  Every law compromises your freedom.  In the realm of gun control, the NRA is no different than anarchists.

The NRA’s rhetorical stand against gun control legislation has lost its potency. Public polling continues to favor universal background checks and limits on gun magazines.  The proscription of certain assault weapons lag a little behind in the polling. But gun control advocates would still bring it all to a vote. Let’s see who will go on record against these measures.

Sunday night Sixty Minutes brought seven victimized families from Newtown, CT back into the public spotlight. They showed them passing out literature prior to the Connecticut’s passing of the country’s strictest gun control law. They documented the grim resolve of each family to make this cause a life commitment.  The victimized mothers and fathers argued persuasively that a smaller gun magazine would have saved some children’s lives on December 14, 2012.  None of them asserted radical positions on gun control. Some even defended the legality of some assault weapons.

That is the difference between the NRA and its opponents. The NRA does not know the meaning of “concession” or “compromise.”  It fights behind a battle front that never moves or regroups.

Eventually this rhetorical strategy will stumble, because the United States is not a “take-no-prisoners” society.  Battle fronts in Congress move every month on matters like immigration and education.  Gun control will be no different. The whimper and the bluster will eventually give way to reason, because we will not forget Rep. Gabby Giffords, Aurora or Newtown.  The rhetorical battle is already won, and the political battle is ripe for negotiation.

 

Tags: ····

Stifling Conscience

April 4, 2013 by · No Comments · public schools, school funding

The firing of Rutgers’ basketball coach Mike Rice for his verbal and physical abuse of the players has overshadowed the university’s prior offense of firing the whistle blower Eric Murdock, who made the incriminating video of the abuse last summer.  It is questionable what is more egregious: the bullying of college athletes or the vindictive firing of the director of player personnel, without whom the abuse might have gone unchecked.

Perhaps there were extenuating circumstances that merited the firing of Murdock, but it usually turns out that whistle blowers have a tenacious and  independent streak that make them less than model employees.  Regardless of Mr. Murdock’s personnel record, the fact that his firing assisted the cover-up of Rice’s abuse of student athletes shows the depravity of college administrators when large sums of money are at stake.

The large sums of money would have resulted from Rutgers being invited to join the Big Ten, the nation’s most prestigious athletic conference. Murdock’s sacrifice on the altar of academic greed exposes a contempt for ethics and casts a dark shadow on public university administration.

The public university deserves the reputation of bringing first generation college students into the middle and upper-middle class through affordable tuition, financial aid, and flexible academic policies.  Arguably it is one of the most potent democratizing forces in the United States, and it has struggled in this millenium from depletion of state support.  It has done more with less better than many well-toned corporations.

But the pressure to compete with its peers and the temptation of the media gravy train may compromise the mission of the public university.  In Rutger’s case the seeds of corruption were already sown with the hiring of Tim Pernetti, a former TV executive with no athletic credentials, as the athletic administrator. In retrospect this looks like enlisting the fox to guard the chicken coop.

Clearly this fox did not have the psychological health of undergraduates among his priorities. Pernetti’s decision to keep the video from the university president or any public exposure and to fire the video-maker, Eric Murdock, shows his contempt for student athletes.  The ultimate firing of Coach Rice after the video went viral proves that the cover-up through the firing of Murdock was the only reason the coach was allowed to keep his job.

Greed in public education is reprehensible, but more appalling is the stifling of conscience.  We can understand the economic pressures that compromise the mission of the public university, but to deliberately suppress an ethical stand against such abuse shows a callous cynicism  that has no place in any university, public or otherwise.

The roles of the athletic director and the university president in the firing of Eric Murdock should be carefully scrutinized to determine what was intentionally stifled– the bad publicity or the voice of conscience.  It is too late to salvage reputation, but the right to speak against abuse on a college campus can still be defended.

Tags: ·····

Possessed

March 30, 2013 by · No Comments · public schools, school reform, Uncategorized

The announcement of racketeering and conspiracy charges against the former Superintendent of the Atlanta Public Schools and thirty-five of her principals  and teachers demonstrates the power of the demon “success -through-testing” and the willingness of the business community to accept superficial and suspect evidence to defend their educational agenda.

While no one has yet been convicted of these charges, and they should not be used to indict urban educators in general, the preponderance of the evidence and the complicity of the Atlanta business community in this scandal should be an admonition to those who have allowed standardized testing to possess the wills of school administrators and teachers.

“Live by the test, die by the test” was the spirit in Atlanta and both school administrators and the business community staked their reputations on a lie: the falsification of answers on the lowest-scoring tests by surreptitious erasing and re-writing of multiple choice responses.  Not only did the conspirators defraud the state assessment program by institutionalizing cheating, they directly harmed the weakest students by depriving them of state assistance for remediation. As reported in the New York Times (March 30, 2013)

The falsified test scores were so high that Parks Middle School was no longer classified as a school in need of improvement and, as a result, lost $750,000 in state and federal aid, according to investigators. The money could have been used to give struggling children academic support. Stacey Johnson, a Parks teacher, told investigators that she had students in her class who had scored proficient on state tests in previous years but were actually reading on the first grade level. Cheating masked the deficiencies and skewed the diagnosis.

Very likely educators who comply with testing fraud or teaching-to-the test never expect to harm students, because that is their bottom line: do no harm to students.  Here is specific evidence of harm, and this isolated example reflects the malignancy of the testing demon.  When raising test scores becomes the ultimate end of education, the lowest performers in the classroom are most harmed.  They learn only what is believed to be on the test and any positive results on their test scores masks the deficiencies they have brought to the classroom, because no one cares about anything except the raising of scores.  Instead of learning to read, they are learning to eliminate the likely wrong answers in a multiple choice question.

The bureaucratic mentality that asserts that quality can be evaluated by a single number is anathema to schools. The members of the business community that advocate the comprehensive evaluation of students, schools and teachers by standardized tests should consider this a wake-up call.   The role of Atlanta businesses in propping up and protecting the school superintendent, Dr. Beverly Hall, makes them complicit in the scandal.  Former Governor Sonny Perdue, who pushed back against the business community to follow-through on the investigation, is quoted in today’s Times article:

“I was dumbfounded that the business community would not want the truth,” he said. “These would be the next generation of employees, and companies would be looking at them and wondering why they had graduated and could not do simple skills. Business was insisting on accountability, but they didn’t want real accountability.”

The unshakeable belief that test scores were irrefutable evidence of quality in education distorted what were likely good intentions for improving urban education.  The extent to which prominent business owners were willing to defend these scores against the Governor himself indicates how reckless was their faith in bureaucratic reform.  Observing the adjudication of the evidence in the months to come should awaken them to the mindless demon they energized by allowing the superintendent her reign of terror on Atlanta’s teachers.

Dr. Hall was known to rule by fear. She gave principals three years to meet their testing goals. Few did; in her decade as superintendent, she replaced 90 per cent of the principals.

When an entire city is possessed by the testing demon, you have to consider the power of a culture, rather than the moral depravity of its employees.  Earnest educators lost their jobs and many nights’ sleep in the grip of the demon.  The demon had powerful allies, but mostly it had bullied victims.  It stalked the city in plain sight because its victims were silenced by those mindful of their own careers more than the welfare of Atlanta’s students.

As the case of Dr. Beverly Hall and her associates unfolds, we should recognize the power behind the scandal as well as the defendants themselves.  The mindless faith in the authority of standardized test scores possessed a city to support a demagogue and her agenda.  No regime could survive so many years without the implicit belief that rising scores were conclusive evidence of success in the public schools.  Lies can masquerade as truth only when we have given the demon power to deceive us.

 

 

Tags: ······