Back during our issue on education, I wrote about a promising new program in New York City designed to pay parents and students who make an effort and invest in a child’s education:

The program’s wider aim is to eliminate poverty, but it uses a novel approach to do so. The city will pay small amounts of money to residents for certain behaviors, incentivizing things the government wants to promote. To fight poverty, adults will receive $150 a month for holding a full time job and $50 a month for having health care. New York is using the program to incentivize good educational behavior outside of school as well. They will pay parents to make sure their kids have better high school attendance and to attending parent-teacher conferences.

Recently, the program has been expanded to pay students for certain grades, as part of a more national effort that can involve giving kids things like pizza parties or gift certificates if certain achievement levels are reached.

I think this is a good idea, and well worth trying. While critics would say paying students for grades doesn’t instill in them the love of learning for learning’s sake, I argue that you must look at the reality of the situation these children are in as well. Virginia Connelly, the principal of Junior High School 123, in the Soundview section of the Bronx, agrees:

“We’re in competition with the streets,” Ms. Connelly said. “They can go out there and make $50 illegally any day of the week. We have to do something to compete with that.”

If inventivizing good grades keeps kids off the streets and learning, that’s a good thing. And it’s not like these kids aren’t gaining knowledge. To get a reward, children have to earn the grades, which presumably means they learned something in the process.

As I said, I’m all for this experiment. What do you think?

While the 22nd Amendment and bitter policy mistakes ensure that our sitting leader cannot run for a third presidential term, Bush seems to be running damage control. They may distance themselves from him, but few Republican candidates, if any, are immune to the economic failures of this administration. The ability of the Republican Party to get its footing in this volatile time will depend on how Bush 43 handles this downturn, and whether he does so with their core elements of conservatism.

So you can bet that Bush and congressional Republicans will fight like hell. And Democrats need to be cautious, because a number of his ideas, laid out in Monday’s State of the Union, and in a preceding agenda¹ are troublesome, dangerous initiatives.

As a liberal and someone involved in the field of education, I’ve always been bothered by the No Child Left Behind Act. Fundamentally, it targets underperforming schools and “solves” the problem by taking away the one resource that’s key to any sort of turnaround: funding.

But it goes further. The standards of underperformance that the program spells out seem to be ignorant of the education industry, and don’t address the real issues that public education struggles with, namely resources and recruitment.

While it is all well and good that a “very ruly crowd” of some 500 lawyers gathered yesterday outside the county courthouse in lower Manhattan for a brief rally to show solidarity with lawyers and judges jailed and persecuted since General Perves Musharraf declared martial law in Pakistan, I can’t help but wonder why a crisis abroad has them so hot and bothered.

After all, for more than six years now, the law has been under assault here at home. Where were the lawyers when the ironically named “USA Patriot Act” papered over or watered down about half of the Bill of Rights? Where were the lawyers when it was revealed that the Bush Administration had ignored the Fourth Amendment and the Foreign Intelligence Security Act and illegally spied on their fellow citizens? Where were they when the administration, and then the Republican Congress, eliminated Habeas rights for, well, for practically anyone that The Decider decides is an enemy? Where were they during the politicization of the entire federal justice system, from the US Attorneys, through the Courts of Appeals, all the way up to the Supreme Court? Where were they during the confirmation of Attorney General Ashcroft? Attorney General Gonzales? Attorney General Mukasey?

For that matter, where were they after Justices Scalia and Thomas refused to recuse themselves (because of blatant conflict of interest) in Bush v. Gore?

While some members of the bar in this country fight, and fight hard, every day for an end to torture, to rendition, and unlawful detention, while some fight, and fight hard, for a restoration of Habeas Corpus and FISA, and in defense of the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Amendments, far too many of those with direct experience and a detailed understanding of the laws of the land have chosen to go about their business as if nothing much has changed here in the United States. And while American jurists are far from the only citizens who have come up light on the outrage scale, I am hard-pressed to think of a group that is better positioned—in terms of education, employment, status, and first-hand knowledge—to make a less than joyful noise about what has happened to this country’s legal principles and protections.

The jurists of Pakistan have been out in the streets everyday, protesting in the face of beatings and mass arrests, so, by all means, stand in solidarity with them–they deserve your support. But beyond shouting “No more Musharraf,” beyond simply supporting the Pakistani lawyers, it might be good to learn from them, too. How about regular gatherings of American jurists to stand in solidarity with our Constitution? How about shouts against the myriad ways that our less than legitimately elected President has abused the law and its practitioners right here at home?

. . .

I heard the head of the New York Bar on the radio speaking in support of Pakistani lawyers because, he said, the Musharraf government had tortured some of them. Well, the American government is torturing people, probably every day, probably for some six years now—do they have to torture lawyers to get you to stage protests of your own government’s behavior?

(cross posted at capitoilette)

I’m going to piggyback a little bit off of J-Ro’s education article and continue to address the topic of the effectiveness of education alone. While his article focuses on the socioeconomic issues kids deal with and how to address them in family life, what I want to talk about is education and its role in social movements, activism, and what we’re doing now as the Netroots.

So let’s start right here: is education, by itself, an element of social change? Does it dramatically change the landscape of American society? No, no it does not. There is no saving grace inherent in education that allows one’s existence to be any different from the current state of affairs. The virtue of being educated does not absolve you or any others of existence that is, in many respects, divided and inequality-stricken. In fact, it may make you a bit more elitist and condescending to others while ignoring deep societal problems. I won’t deny that having an education makes you smarter, more perceptive, and possibly more critical, but all that stuff is for yourself.

This week we want to know if you think there will be any real progress towards solving the Israeli/Palestinian issue before Bush leaves office. But first, last week’s results:

The results of last week’s poll about the biggest problem with education were understandably scattered. With so many choices, no clear winner emerged. However, 25% of voters (the largest segment) felt that the culture or standardized testing left in the wake of the No Child Left Behind Act was the biggest obstacle facing public schools today. Many others pointed to funding issues (16%), management issues (17%), or untrained teachers (9%) and unmotivated students (11%). Only a few felt the teacher’s union was a major problem (11%) and almost none (1%) felt the privatization of America’s schools was the largest issue.

This week we ask you about the chances for restarting the Israeli/Palestinian peace process. Yesterday, Condi Rice called for an independent Palestine, saying, “Frankly, it’s time for the establishment of a Palestinian state.” She plans to restart peace talks and work towards a two-state solution as quickly as possible. The signs may not be in her favor, however, with the Israelis saying a document detailing a solution is not a prerequisite for having talks and Palestinians saying it is. On top of that, leaders in the larger Arab world, such as Ayatollah Khamenei of Iran, calling for a boycott of any talks.

So, do you think we will see real progress on the Israeli/Palestinian issue before George Bush leaves office? Voting begins in the sidebar at right. Feel free to leave your reasoning for your vote in the comments here.

…and why I hate/hated Mrs. Elzey.

I’m one of those rare people who had both a private school and a public school education, which was a real honor. The private school I went to for grades 6-8, where everyone called each other by their first names and there were only about 85 people, was quite political and is the single reason I’m as liberal as I am. Participating in Model UN was mandatory, field trips to science museums were constant, we had a school-wide bowling day and we had recess. Recess folks, and when the weather got nicer I don’t think we ever stayed inside for more than an hour.

Then I went to a public high school. The same high school as two other authors here at The Seminal, the same high school as both of my parents, my uncles, and of course my older brother. I even had some of the same teachers. Where do I start?

In preparation for this rant I emailed some friends from high school and asked them to compare the person I was then to who I am now. Many said that thinking back, they could see me doing what I do now, but they also pointed out that in high school I was far more interested in other things. My best friend is a doctor…I didn’t see that coming at all, and Mrs. Elzey, if you’re reading this I have a quick item for you: When you told me my junior year of high school that I wasn’t going to “amount to much because of my approach to life,” I want to thank you, because I think of you every time I cash my huge paychecks for giving advice to people who run the world. Thanks for giving me an F on the book report for the only book you made me read that I actually read and enjoyed (Slaughterhouse 5) because I wrote “more than required,” and yes, I did cheat on the Moby Dick test right before Christmas break. That book sucked, the movie with Jean Luc Picard sucked harder, and the only question I didn’t cheat on was “What saved Ishamael?” and the only reason I knew that was because it was a quote from a movie. The fact that I convinced you I didn’t should let you know my skills. You were truly a horrible person with a horrible tan. Oh yea, you marked that answer with ½ a point because I misspelled QueeQueg (which I probably did again). Am I saying I agree with the Columbine shooters? Or course not, it’s a horrible act. Are people like you the reason for this? You bet your ass, and why it didn’t happen at my high school during my tenure there is beyond me.

I also asked my mom to find one of those stupid things that I had to fill out my first day of high school and then was given back to me by the school when I got my diploma. It was this “what I want to do with my life” garbage that I didn’t take seriously then or now, but it’s kind of cute in a way to look back on what I wrote and realize how much I haven’t changed at my core:

“I’m saying I want to be a sports agent because I have to say something, but all I really want to be is happy doing something that a lot of other people don’t do. Some people just want to be like everyone else. I don’t. I want to be me.” (I’d still love to be a sports agent, but I’m not complaining.)

One highlight of high school, aside from the great times I had with my friends, was my freshman year social studies teacher telling the class he sent his daughter to another high school because that school was more likely to help her get into college. He later became a guidance counselor, go figure. Another highlight was the “goofy” math teacher jumping out the window and running as fast as possible during a routine fire drill, leaving all his students in the room. He, funny enough, was the same teacher that told me, as I was copying answers during a test, that if I did the work myself I’d learn more. I said, “Dude, I have no plans on using this in my life.” His reply? “Good enough for me.” Turns out I was right, and I got an A on that test. My dad was impressed with an A on a math test, and when I told him I cheated and talked my way out of it I think that impressed him more.

I agree with Ish completely that the major part of high school, and public education as a whole (especially at the piece of shit we went to), is designed to make people conform to society, not question authority, and just be happy working for the man and waiting to be forgotten. Luckily, I was just as big an asshole then as I am now, and I also had my parents to help me fill in the blanks. But I don’t think my high school education prepared me for anything at all, not even college.

What would you say if I told you America has one of the best public school systems in the world? Would you believe it, or would you say that I must be either joking, completely nuts, or possibly on some strong meds? You might say that I’ve missed the news about how bad our public schools have become, or that our graduates simply aren’t prepared to compete in the changing world economy. Or that our students consistently score below most of their counterparts from other developed nations on standardized tests. Or that our teachers are simply an extension of some wacko union that’s only concerned with self-preservation and the status quo. You’ve all heard the supposed facts that are used to bash our public schools.

Maybe you’d say that the only way to improve our failing public schools is to hit them where it hurts. You know, to take money directly away from them and give it to unproven, under-qualified, sometimes corrupt charter schools. Or maybe you think that our public dollars should be used to subsidize private schools, where teaching is viewed more as a charitable endeavor than a sustainable career. Whatever the fodder being used to disparage our nation’s public schools happens to be at any given moment, you can bet one thing is certain. The overwhelming majority of pubic school haters (PSHers) haven’t stepped foot in a public school in years.

Because if they had, they would see the public schools I’ve come to know after eight years of teaching in them. The same schools that take kids from the most diverse backgrounds in the history of mankind and mold them into productive, well prepared, and mostly, all around good Americans. Americans that go on to graduate from the best universities in the world. Americans that help to make up the second highest college graduation rate in the world—ahead of Japan, and far outpacing Germany and the United Kingdom.

Thise week, we want to know what you think is the biggest challenge facing American schools. But first, last week’s results:

Last week’s poll results was one of our most lopsided. 95% of respondents voted that companies like Blackwater USA have no business in Iraq and are a problem that should be eliminated or curtailed. Only 5% voted that mercenary companies are a necessary part of waging war. At least from Seminal readers the message is clear: Blackwater USA and other mercenaries shouldn’t be used by the U.S. to wage war.

This week, we want to know your thoughts about education. The topic is amazingly complex, and almost too hard to reduce into a multiple choice poll question, but we’ll try anyway. What do you think is the biggest challenge facing our national education system today? Vote for your top choice in the sidebar at right. If you don’t see your choice on the list, come back here and leave a comment and let us know what your vote is.

What’s wrong with litter and roadrage? What is the purpose of courtesy and respect when dealing with total strangers? Why is whistleblowing and samaritanism preferable to minding our own business? Why should we obey the law when we can get away with breaking it?

Hopefully most of us have ready answers to these questions. However, spend a few weeks in virtually any American city and you’ll learn that most Americans do not seem to have answers, or at least their answers differ significantly from mine. Public schools are the establishment best able to standardize our “learned” knowledge, beliefs, and behavior, and should therefore incorporate ethics into primary and secondary school curricula. Teaching ethics, either in distinct classes or by incorporating them into other areas of study, would provide schools and teachers with a forum for exposing, discussing, and applying “community ethics” — basic notions that we are all here and inherently equal, we are all members of a larger society, and we are all indeed in it together.

If the intellectual level of a debate is any indication of that issue’s importance to society, our nation’s children are in trouble. The changes to our educational system proposed by individuals with public influence are too often full of obvious holes, and there is rarely any attempt to anticipate the criticism or obstacles that will arise in realizing the changes. An October 2nd Op-Ed piece in the New York Times is illustrative of this phenomenon.

In the article, Op-Ed columnist Bob Herbert addressed education in the United States of America, calling for “a wholesale transformation of the public school system.” Herbert offers two suggestions on how to achieve this wholesale transformation:

1.) identifying and cultivating quality teachers, achieved through job performance assessments

2.) studying alternative schools that have a precedent of success. He mentions the Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) as an example worthy of study, citing its “extraordinary academic results from low-income students.”

Both of these points are sound, but suggesting we should get quality teachers and be open to ideas on how we can make improvements on our present system is not revelation. Furthermore, Herbert shies away from actually dealing with any of the issues that may arise in implementing these changes.

Herbert suggests that identifying and cultivating quality teachers can be accomplished by job performance assessments. Such a program would ensure that tenure and other performance-related incentives are granted to teachers that perform well, ie quality teachers. He fails, however, to mention the concerns that would inevitably arise within the teachers’ unions.

Generally, teachers are leery of tinkering with tenure, and specifically they object to concentration of power in the hands of the administration. By linking professional incentives to performance assessments, the school administration is given the only key. Herbert offers no guidelines for how these performance assessments should be conducted, and offers no means of ensuring that the power is not abused.

Discussion of his second solution also stops short. He rightly offers KIPP as a model, and may be correct in suggesting that their extended operating hours are the solution to our children’s educational shortcomings, but again he never makes it to the inevitable questions; how will you get unions to agree to longer work weeks? If the answer is additional compensation, where will this money come from?

In the end, the article offers nothing but two broad, hollow ideas. If this were an op-ed in a small-town paper, or a random blog entry, it would not be cause for concern. But this is the New York Times, an organization that takes pride in being the gold standard. The piece’s inclusion is a sad commentary on the level of debate on education.

Fortunately, there are some better ideas out there which deserve open discussion. The following examples are — surprise surprise — products of Washington.