if i were going to see waiting for superman, i think i would need to see it alone. my reaction is likely to be severe, and no one i know even vaguely agrees with any of my positions on these things. everyone operates from within the same set of assumptions. barack and bush's positions on education are identical. it's perfectly legitimate to infer from this that their position is absurd. i believe quite sincerely that the current approach to education in a technocracy entirely justifies armed insurrection. i want you to come back from that movie and tell me it's not simply an argument for totalitarianism.
typepad's indent, font, and quote functions are completely unusable, but what follows is a quote from gail collins: "I’m still haunted by a debate I stumbled across in the Texas Legislature a decade ago in which conservatives repelled any attempt to impose accountability standards on the state’s charter schools, even after only 37 percent of the charter students passed state academic achievement tests, compared with 80 percent of the public schoolchildren. There’s something about an unfettered school that lifts the hearts of the Born Free crowd."
all i can say is that puts y'all on the other side: the born enslaved crowd, the aficionados of fetters: and standardized pre-k will soon be followed by standardized gestation. the constant resort to the terms "standards" and "accountability" pretends that the standardized testing regime measures antecedent facts. what it does is deploy culture-wide a model of knowledge (ridiculously wrong), impose a national curriculum, and institute new, elaborate, and thorough authority, wielded over everyone in the entire system. if michelle rhee or arne duncan think they are in the business of measuring facts, they are living in a world of hallucinations; they are doing all day every day the opposite of what they claim to be doing: they are not measuring anything; they are manufacturing facts. that they are accumulating for themselves an insane level of power over everyone's children is obvious.
if you are sitting here with tom friedman actually worrying that our kids have lower standardized test scores than the finns or something, i say you have floated outside the realm of actual human beings or real children or anything relevant to learning. really is this an education program, or is it a project for world conquest? these people give you the impression of each nation's children as a kind of army, in a war with all the other nations' children to dominate the future. try to become aware of how fantastical and optional that is as a way of representing reality. but try to be aware too of what a picture like that entails about how we actually treat children.
seriously the people running education are pod people. they have ceased to be human in any dimension, and they insist on manufacturing a population in their own image. for them, truth is automatism. what amazes me is that the whole culture seems to be proceeding on their assumptions. except maybe the "born free crowd." waitin for kryptonite, bitch.
helpin janie with her homework last night; she was working on the mason-dixon line, which more or less runs through my house (well a couple miles south). but the procedure was simply mechanical. the first sentence re-states the question. re-state this, fuckhead. the next three give details from the text, in support (of your restatement of the question?). she didn't actually get to compose a single sentence, much less express some sort of independent response. it has to be mechanical to be measurable: the tests seek to create their takers in their own image. illiteracy is preferable, or this just is a new form of illiteracy.
by the time i'm teaching them as freshmen, they just want to be told what procedures to follow to get their 'A.' they really are often disappointed that i don't tell them how to compose each sentence. ( a few weirdos still slip through, of course.)