This is from a comment on Democrats for Excellent Neighborhood School Education’s Facebook page. I would like to think it’s self-parody, but I’m afraid it’s straight-faced:
He (referring to education Reform Now’s Van Schoales) will NEVER convince me that his or any other Charter/Magnet school is what is right for this community or any other for that matter. I know that they are all in it for their deep pockets. I will NEVER say that Montbello is bad, it is a GREAT school.
As Sabrina would say: Wow. Just wow.
Popularity: 4% [?]
I suggest that others go to the Facebook page to get a sense of how these advocates operate.
http://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=172349466130181&id=156994707650500¬if_t=share_reply
It”s fairly bizarre for Defense, an organization supposedly committed to democracy to make statements like those below when I’ve called for meetings or discussions with them.
“What could we possibly gain by sitting down with you? Come to one of our widely-publicized meetings if you dare.”
While I still want to meet with Defense leadership (whoever they may be though it has become very clear) it made me wonder if I should bring one of my many ed reform bouncer friends, kidding.
It’s like the global warming debate. No matter that the scientific community overwhelmingly recognizes it is happening, places like Fox News insist that things are fine or at best the problems are not caused by humans. The evidence is overwhelming: the school is failing its students and the problems are caused by humans.
By the way, after my exchanges on Defense which I believe were polite, I was cut off form commenting on their site. In the course of one of the back and forth’s, Christopher Scott felt compelled to call me a “looser.” I googled it and found that Urban Dictionary said “A looser is a loser who can’t spell “loser”. Oh well, I’ll refrain on the name calling though it’s hard to not crack a smile when a discussion devolves to this level.
@ Alan– a few questions:
- When did this become a gossip site?
- Why do you assume that everyone in a large group shares the same opinion?
- Who’s included in the “we” you reference? You’ve argued in other places that this site represents a broad range of views; when did it become a private party?
- From the guidelines– “No ad hominem attacks. It is possible to disagree with another person without attacking him or her personally.”
How did your post, and especially Van’s comments, not violate that standard?
@ Mary– I’d be careful with the climate change comparison if I were you. In this discussion, your side is analogous to that of the climate change deniers. Your “research” consists mainly of think tank reports and poorly designed studies (same as theirs), your Data are cherry-picked to tell a certain story and divorced from the larger historical context that would help you fully understand the situation, or how to fix it (also similar), and the ultimate aim is to persuade uninformed people to accept a version of reality that benefits corporate interests.
@ Van– I don’t know anything about you being cut off “form” anything, but if you’re going to make fun of someone else’s spelling or grammar, make sure you proofread your own. (Barring that, can we all agree to focus on substance? If you know what the other person meant, there is no reason to pick apart the mechanics of the text.)
I saw the exchange, and you were being rude. You were dismissive of other people’s opinions, and you continue to uphold a double standard for union members. Whenever someone you associate with the union (whether they are or not) voices an opinion, you attempt to de-legitimize their views by saying they’re just trying to protect teachers’ jobs. Meanwhile, your own job depends on the existence of an organization that can only exist if people like you continue to erode the public’s confidence in public schools.
To all of you: Public schools in places like the Far Northeast absolutely face many difficulties, many of which stem from a history of systemic neglect for the schools themselves and social inequality within and outside of them. And each time paternalistic would-be heroes from outside the community have come in to “save” these schools without attempting to understand the larger issues or local concerns, they’ve succeeded only in creating disruption and ill will. Given the similar approach you’ve taken, and the disrespect you’ve shown here, are you really surprised that these people don’t trust you? Do you expect to be any more effective? (Are you really trying to help?)
I’ve reached the limit of my patience with you all. I’ll be taking a break from being your token attempt at inclusion. See you in a few weeks, or months, or whenever.
Sabrina:
- “When did this become a gossip site?” What? How is it gossip to quote, fully, what someone else said?
- “Why do you assume that everyone in a large group shares the same opinion?” I don’t even suggest that. I just point out where the comment was posted. Having said that, though, I believe it was Andrea who told Van you can’t be a Democrat unless you adhere to the party platform in all its particulars. Now THAT’s groupthink.
- “Who’s included in the “we” you reference? You’ve argued in other places that this site represents a broad range of views; when did it become a private party?” As the author, I am referring to myself and people who agree with me. Editorial license, please.
- “From the guidelines– “No ad hominem attacks. It is possible to disagree with another person without attacking him or her personally.” How did your post, and especially Van’s comments, not violate that standard?” How is it even remotely ad hominem to quote someone fully and disagree with the substance of that person’s assertions? I will grant you that Van may have crossed the line with the “looser” bit. Thank you for pointing that out. I will let him speak for himself on your other remarks. But really, accusing HIM of being rude on the DeFENSE Facebook page when you read the threaded discussions on the Facebook page is absurd, and surely you realize that. The tone of that entire discusion, including some of Van’s contributions, read like a middle school playground confrontation, not a substantive discussion.
Sabrina,
You are right about picking on Christopher Scott and I apologize to you, him and others. Christopher has a history of making these kinds of statements and I was frustrated. Often I’ve been the target.
I am curious what you mean by outsider. I don’t think it matters that much but I am as much as an insider as anyone on either side of the debate having taught for 8 years and being an administrator for 6 yrs (principal 4).
Gosh, Van, are still mad at me?
Good.
You know, I actually felt bad for calling you a loser. (I always laugh, too, at my misspellings. It might have been a Freudian slip, however.) Of course, I didn’t have to go look up the term on the Urban Dictionary website. No doubt when they taught that term, you were out playing with the swing set.
For your holiday reading list, Van, why not try Alan’s “Fight the pressure,” found at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-gottlieb/fight-the-pressure_b_793188.html? It will make you feel better about the world. After that, go read The Crucible and ask yourself, which side are you on?
Sabrina, Please do not leave. I find your comments refreshing and helpful. You summation of the situation in the Montbello community absolutely on target.
Sabrina, I concur. I much prefer the passion and insight you bring, even though we often disagree. There are few forums where this sort of dialogue occurs – it sometimes spills too far in one direction or another, but I’d much prefer to have you participate.
The schools are not the problem. Ergo, starting charter schools is not the solution. You are all “barking up the wrong tree”.
Without getting into a long thesis, and the content of one of my long-delayed book projects, I will simply point you in the right direction with a few points to consider:
1. The institution of “social advancement” and its deleterious effect on the quality of public school education;
2. The assessment of Andrew Carnegie that his greatest act of philanthropy was not the founding of schools, not even his “practical” Carnegie Tech, but the founding of public libraries.
3. If “standards” tests are such a good measure of the effectiveness of primary and secondary school education, and if the high school diploma is a certificate of that education, then why don’t we save our children’s time and let them start taking these tests from five years of age so they can get their diploma and move on?
Not to mention that this dialogue can’t happen on the Defense Facebook page.
After countless attacks on others for not being democratic (ie Nate at school board meetings) it is hypocritical that Andrea’s Defense creation is a closed dialogue. Ironic that those advocating for more democracy are not so inclusive in their own practices.
Can one’s name include the word Democrat, yet not foster democratic, group dialogue?
Actually, Van there are plenty of places where this dialogue does occur. In the neighborhoods is where you can find people who have the most to win/lose by the outcomes pushed by a minority elite.
The chats with Michelle Rhee, the industry dinners with political and foundation elites are but an echo chamber of this new “education industry”. But it’s with the grassroots that you find the genuine voice of the people.
This site is proof that you can say anything and because it’s online, people will believe it.
See, here’s the thing, everyone. This post was not created to inspire any kind of dialog. It was created to mock and disparage private citizen community members. It’s high irony that anyone would assume that any dialog can happen under those circumstances.
Some of you need to learn to have more respect for the honest, hardworking taxpayers that give us all something to wrangle over.
For shame.