When we launched the earliest version of Education News Colorado in the summer of 2007 (called HeadFirst Colorado at the time) it was a one-person (me) operation and its main feature was an opinion blog. The idea was to create a forum where people could vigorously yet politely debate education issues of the moment. A blog seemed an excellent platform, because it allowed for close to real-time give and take.
In those early days, I recruited a group of prominent education experts to write for the blog. I tried for an even distribution across the philosophical spectrum, but fell somewhat short of that. I wanted people to feel they could speak their minds, so in those early days I allowed everyone to use pseudonyms when posting. Over time, I decided that was a mistake. Most people were respectful, but some posts were snarky and without actual names attached, there was no accountability for the snark.
No one stopped blogging when I asked people to start using their real names. Some may have modulated their tone, but everyone kept writing. And over time I added bloggers, perhaps a bit more representative of the diversity of ideas about education reform.
Today the blog, now dwarfed by our news site, faces another transition point. Perhaps it’s just that school people are exhausted, their nerves frayed at semester’s end, but some recent exchanges have rubbed feelings raw. Three different bloggers or commenters have said they’ve had enough, and are withdrawing from the conversation.
Until now, I’ve taken a laissez-faire attitude toward blog posts and comments. I have erred on the side of running comments that are, shall we say, pointed in tone. Our published commenting policy prohibits ad hominem attacks, though I have discovered that what one person views as a spirited conversation might be viewed on the other side of that debate as an assault on integrity or character. The line between the two is not always as clear and bright as we might like to believe.
What has become clear to me is that some things about the blog have to change. I do not want people chased away because they feel hounded by critics. On the other hand, I do not want to stifle vigorous debate because someone’s feelings might get hurt. So I am going to spend some time during our one week hiatus between Christmas and New Year’s thinking about how to navigate those tricky waters and make changes to the blog.
Here is where you, as regular readers, can help. Imagine that the blog is starting from scratch. What would you like it to be? Do you prefer longer posts or very brief ones? Do you like posts that consist primarily of links to articles or posts from elsewhere? Or do you prefer original commentaries? Do you like a wide variety of bloggers who may not post frequently, or a smaller number who write once or more each week?
Should elected officials (school board members, for example) and school officials (superintendents and the like) be part of the mix, or should we bar them from blogging on the site? What kind of guidelines should there be for comments on blog posts? Should I err on the side of letting most comments run? Or should I play a more active role in setting the tone by sending the snarkier comments back for revisions?
Please send me your thoughts.
I’m also interested in any specific and constructive ideas readers might have about getting a wider variety of points of view on the blog. It’s an ongoing challenge to have a range of opinions equitably represented.
One problem, I think, is that some education policy folks have more time on their hands than do educators. Someone working on education policy from a foundation or non-profit advocacy organization spends a chunk of most days thinking and writing about education policy.
Teachers, meanwhile, are busy teaching, principals are occupied with running schools, etc. They come home tired and have limited time to write. As a result, the blog tends to get skewed toward the points of view of people who have the luxury of time to think and write about education rather than those actually doing the work every day.
Given that reality, how would you suggest we address this imbalance without muzzling anyone?
If you believe the blog is skewed toward the Obama/Duncan/Bloomberg/Democrats for Education Reform view of things, you’re right. It is. And, despite the fact that my personal sympathies for the most part reside in that camp, that’s not how I want the blog to be. So, if you subscribe to a different set of beliefs and like to write, consider becoming a regular contributor. I hear a fair number of complaints about the blog’s skewed perspective but I don’t get many people stepping forward and volunteering to help balance it.
Watch this space in early January for information about the new and improved EdNews blog.
Meanwhile, enjoy the holidays. Take a real break. That’s what we will be doing.
Popularity: 4% [?]
What I look for in any publication re education is factual information. I’m not interested in blogs because there is an excess of poorly informed opinion floating in this culture and hearing someone pontificate on issues is not of value to me. I have limited time to read professional work, so when I do, I want it to be research based, accurate, and unbiased.
I hope this helps.
Ditto.
As a traditional-schools advocate, I was startled to have initial comments met with “Jane, you ignorant slut” responses from editorial staff I thought should have no bias.
I also hope this helps.
Hi, Kathy,
Could you give some examples? That would be helpful.
Part of the problem is the fact that the non-collaborative reformers are dealing with specious data and they KNOW it…so they come out swinging. Many edu-policy contributors here are being paid to slather on a weak sales pitch, so it makes them testy. Hard to behave like ladies and gentlemen under those conditions, and it sure doesn’t make building bridges easy.
I think it would be helpful to hear what your own commitments toward fairness and balance and open-mindedness will be, Alan. I’m still waiting on this site’s reporting of my pushing the district to purchase Lutheran High School for West Denver Prep’s high school expansion plans. Where’s the opinion piece on the win-win for the kids?
I may one of the responders in a few the blog posts who often pointed and/or abrasive. “Polite discussion” or exchange is often euphemism for benign and reiteration of same old, worn, status-quo ideas that pose no threat to the existing order. It is disingenuous at best and dishonest at worst. Though I don’t want yet another version of the blather that takes place on news websites where “comments” are allowed – we don’t want more of the same one-sided talk of the kind that those of us who have been teaching for a while are all too familiar with at all too many staff meetings or staff-development sessions. If those who choose to withdraw their participation can’t handle the kind of candor that should come with the urgency of our work and profession – then so be it. I am Latino and our kids (among others obviously) suffer the brunt of the failings of our profession – so these discussions only have value – for me anyway – when they reflect this urgency. These ideas are personal and deserve more than what all too often amounts to the disinterested, “objective,” and polite-sounding pontifications of the relatively privileged who often dominate these discussions. If the “different tone” you speak of means that this forum will return to the safe top-down discussion that we’re all sick and tired of hearing – I’m out.
Thanks for the opportunity to give my feedback.
Alan,
Let me start by saying I think you have a great idea and form.
I would like to see perhaps one longer blog once every week or two. People do not like to read longer things most of the time, but I do not feel that there is not enough space in shorter pieces to really challenge false assumptions that lie at root of many of the debates. Also, I do not think that there are people who wish to devote the time and effort of a longer piece very often. So low frequency high content might be useful.
An open door policy might be helpful to bring in as much variety as possible.
I would like to see more of the hand of the gentle editor on the comments. While freedom of expression is useful, many ideas can be reformed and clarified for the readier, as well as, the writer, by removing the emotional content. So while it is frustrating to not to be able to immediately reply to an idiotic fool who does not give a rat’s ass about education, a more thoughtful, if longer, comment that identifies the idiotic elements and foolish concepts with positive alternatives with supporting data will form the basis for a real conversation.
Best wishes and thanks for your efforts.
Thank you for sharing your thinking about your blog and your sincere request for feedback. I have been a consistent reader for quite some time. I also have been a great sharer of your blog and news site to numerous educator friends in the field. I am a central office employee of a northern district. I must be judicious with my comments, but – that is what I do anyway
. I actually appreciate the demand for names and emails in the comment stream. Anonymous forums are fodder for cowards. Please don’t change your format in that way, even though it does make it difficult for folks to share wholly their ideas and thoughts. I do think the banter too often becomes vicious and ignorant.
It is true that practioners has less luxury time to “think”, but being on the ground floor makes their knowledge indispensable. There are quite a few prolific principal, teacher, administrator bloggers here in Colorado. Perhaps, you could link to their posts, or reach out to them to write as guest bloggers. That is a very common practice I’ve noticed.
To the point that your blog is/may be politically slanted – yes! That is what blogs are. They provide space for introspection and information sharing/positing. They present sides, opinions, editorials. I read anywhere from 10-16 education blogs a week on a regular basis. I use a variety of RSS feed tools to stream my feeds. I also read news articles and formal research, but I read those with a different purpose in mind. I read for different purposes. I don’t read your blog to find the next research-based literacy strategy- I read it to keep abreast of what’s going on in the Denver metro region – from your point of view. Living and working in the north, I am not involved with the happenings, but I know that what happens in Denver metro affects my work indirectly. So I read, lots.
Finally, I love the links you share at the end of the posts of the weekly subscriptions. It is the email streams I like best. I get so so much encapsulated quick and I get drawn in to a variety of posts on your site, and others ou suggest.
I hope I’ve validated your format. I really don’t think you should change it. I know i don’t often comment, perhaps I should more. But, I read it and share it. All the time.
I’d think it petty to cite examples when it seems agreed via other posts that a slant exists and may well be appropriate anyway. It’s not as though there’s any argument over the essential problem, so discourse over various options to fix it is needed and appreciated, no matter what.
I don’t like seeing school communities becoming fragments, and would have preferred (much) better admin analysis and development of the traditional model — while at the same time admitting I don’t like seeing resegregation due to neighborhood demographics, or educationally blighted areas that remain without options while reform is underway.
Here’s what I really hate: kids in 9th grade when I started reading your site should be just about to graduate, but the odds are still discouraging for many of them. As an ordinary (non-teacher) citizen, I’m about ready to snag a few and teach them myself.
I think it would be helpful if each person making a comment would also identify if they are an employee of a school system (wouldn’t have to identify which one) or if they are an employee of a Foundation, political party or advocacy group. That would help clarify perspective.
Also, I would appreciate help from any English expert on how to have pronoun agreement when you are using “person.” Thank you.
Finally, I would also urge that two words be defined whenever they are used. The first word is “community.” The second is “reform.”