Orwell Award Announcement SusanOhanian.Org Home


Arne Duncan responds to Krashen questions, sort of


Ohanian Comment: Note Duncan's non-answer to Stephen Krashen's pointed question about poverty: Despite those very real obstacles, with long-term support and guidance and real education opportunity, people go on to do extraordinarily well.

Some individuals, mired in abject poverty, do "manage to do extraordinarily well." Indeed. Abraham Lincoln was raised in a log cabin. What about the millions of others? What is our government doing to reduce the obscene gap between the filthy rich and the abysmally poor? Stephen Krashen inserts critical analysis below.

I would also like to point out that this national feature of Stephen Krashen's questions is not accidental. Stephen Krashen is the inveterate analyst, posting his brief, pointed, research-based analysis of corporate politicos pronouncements on education in news outlets ranging from the Sacramento Bee to the Rochester Democrat & Chronicle to Ebony to . . . . You name it: Krashen is there. And we could all learn from the way he does it. Check out the Letters section on this site. Subscribe to Stephen Krashen's newsletter here. Follow him on Twitter here.



by Stephen Krashen

Wolf Blitzer asks Arne Duncan about my criticisms of his Washington Post article. Duncan responds, sort of. My comments are included.

You can find Duncan Washington Post article here.

My criticisms are here

Both are available here.

Transcript: THE SITUATION ROOM: Interview With Education Secretary Arne Duncan Aired January 4, 2011


BLITZER: All right. Let's talk about this article you wrote in "The Washington Post," because you suggested that there was an opportunity to improve education by dealing with poverty, which is the huge source.

There was criticism of your article coming in from Professor Stephen Krashen of the University of Southern California, saying, "Duncan gives the impression that overcoming poverty happens all the time under his administration. There is no real evidence that it happens at all."

Is there any evidence that you are overcoming this?

DUNCAN: Wolf, that's one of the biggest challenge our country is still -- folks to believe, that somehow poverty is destiny. I spent my whole life working in the inner city in a desperately poor community. I know those challenges as well or better than anyone.

Bright stars and young people from very poor communities, very tough family situations, lots of violence in the neighborhood. Despite those very real obstacles, with long-term support and guidance and real education opportunity, people go on to do extraordinarily well.

BLITZER: Is there any, like, real scientific evidence of that other than anecdotal evidence?

DUNCAN: There's evidence all over the country. You look at what Geoffrey Canada is doing to the Harlem Children's Zone, where they're basically closing the achievement gap. We've never had more high- performing, high-poverty schools around the country. That's why I'm so hopeful.

[SK COMMENT: (1) Duncan simply repeats his assertion that the evidence is there. It isn't. (2) In my response to Duncan, I specifically mentioned the Harvard Promise Academy of the Harvard Children's Zone, and Bracey's conclusion that the "success" was due to one grade, one subject and for one year. Bracey presents a through analysis of the research on this school. (3) There is no published analysis that I know of that supports Duncan's statement "We've never had more high- performing, high-poverty schools around the country." What we do know is that the number of high-performing high-poverty schools claimed to exist has been exaggerated. See the references in my commentary.]

The challenge, Wolf, is those kinds of opportunities aren't at scale yet. We have to invest in those best practices, we have to create more of those opportunities. Great principals, great teachers make a huge difference in students' lives.

BLITZER: The other criticism, he says, more of this testing is a disaster. He says, "We are about to make a mistake that will cost billions and make school life even more miserable for millions of teachers and students. The only ones who will profit are the testing companies. We should be talking about reducing testing, not increasing it."

DUNCAN: We need better evaluations. And right now, in part thanks to Race to the Top, we have 44 states working together and two consortia coming up with the next generation assessments.

Teachers, parents, students want real information. They need to know, are students learning? Where are they improving? Where are they not? Where do they need more help?

Those next generation of assessments are going to help us to get there. That leadership is being provided at the local level, not by us in Washington.

[SK: His answer: We need new tests! Teachers, parents and students already have real information. This real information is being discarded in favor of more tests imposed by outsiders.]

Those next generation of assessments are going to help us to get there. That leadership is being provided at the local level, not by us in Washington.

[SK: Duncan does not mention that the next generation of assessments will mean more testing that we have ever done before. According to the Department of Education Blueprint, it will include summative (end of year) testing, interim testing, and will encourage testing more subjects. Since the Blueprint also calls for value-added testing, we can also expect pre-tests at the start of the school year. And this "leadership" comes from Washington, from the Department of Education, not for the local level. ]

— Stephen Krashen, Arne Duncan, Wolf Blizer
CNN: The Situation Room

2011-01-04

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1101/04/sitroom.01.html

na


MORE OUTRAGES


FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of education issues vital to a democracy. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information click here. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.