Education would be on the road to improvement if Linda had been named Sec. of Education. I saw her debate when she was Obama's advisor and she presented a totally different focus than is now happening. It's as though President Obama paid no attention to his own advisor.
Too bad teachers don't get to appoint the Sec of Ed.

Linda will make a great sec of educ. Its very unfortunate that deserving people like her are usually the least to be considered compared to the other group. She has my vote toooo.

I probably should have said: Since NCLB there is some question as to whether public schools are optimizing or wasting an educational opportunity. As Linda Darling-Hammond's video stated, our schools have scored lower internationally and the curriculum has narrowed since NCLB. Also, as a teacher for 35 years and a preparer of teachers, things HAVE gotten worse all around since NCLB. Professional morale is not high. Back to Basics has narrowed the curriculum dramatically in Title I schools.

IQ tests are a norm-referenced measure of intelligence and yield a score based on a norm/mean of 100, so using them as an indicator of educational success is invalid. They are not increasing nor significantly alterable from an educational perspective. However, IQ scores do demonstrate and important truth in education--children have varied capacities for learning--they are not all equal. 20% (those falling below the 20th percentile) will always struggle to master what comes easily to others.

In the end, the problem is not education, teachers, or students; the problem is poverty.

That makes the assumption there is no education or some kind of weird black hole in school systems. It also posits that there *was* education at one time. But since the general trend of IQ is upward and testing IQ is testing education, how can we say that we are "taking away" education when it is manifestly superior today in many respects?

If anyone gets education in only math and reading (highly doubtful) it is arguable that in the old days these persons would not have gotten anything at all and would constitute a permanent peon class. How can this be a social good?

I agree here. Leadership has been in full retreat upward to state and federal levels where goals are mandated.

We have the salutary example of Minnesota, thank goodness. Minnesota has strong local control with little of their improvement attributable to micromanagement and most to improving curriculum, standards, and professional development.

Making education reform a national crisis when it is a local event is very odd. Very anti-technological or even anti-science thinking if you don't mind me saying so. It's like visiting old villages in France and assuming the whole country is a crumbling ruin. In order to do it, one must cast a villain and the villain will probably be the teachers and their evil overlords in the union hall.

Since NCLB there is some question as to whether public schools are giving or taking away an education. Is an education in only reading and math a blessing or a curse? Restoring education to the public means empowering the capacities, talents, and passions of all students in all disciplines.

The stakeholders: Individuals, parents, family, community, state, nation, and world--in that order. The wrong people are making the big decisions. Federal demands should come just before France's. Another way to look at it is who invests the most in education--families, communities, states, and nation. Pay to play.

It's time for change.

The Cato Institute released a verbal blast directed toward the Common Standards a couple of days ago. I think that it bodes well for the Common Standards movement's utility. *grin*

I think Hirsch's condemnation of testing stems from his understanding that current tests embed cultural knowledge that not all communities possess. The key to common standards testing is ensuring all relevant background knowledge is embedded in the curriculum.

Since this will help those who are invested in high stakes testing, they will support a common core framework.

The involvement of business is an historic fact we can't escape. It shapes the way public education is understood, so business leaders are de facto education leaders in this sense.

What we need are business leaders who understand that post facto storytelling isn't science. It's funny that post-modernist attitudes toward cultural and religious value implicitly support the status quo of "common sense" reforms that conflate myriad variables. This makes education particularly vulnerable.

Businesses whose livelihood depends on scientific inquiry are on the rise, but businesses that depend on social influence will always be with us. The Walton Foundation represents a brute force industrial model. The Gates Foundation represents a model of militaristic tactical thinking. How can these modes of thinking help education?

Yes, I think she is talking about what might have been, not what really is happening. And I think her ideas did not fit with the Billionaire Boys Club mentality and the Business Round Table mentality that are shaping education today, or should I say shaping the destruction of public education today. That's why she isn't Sec. of Education. She has what they don't want.

I am very concerned that the newly released Common Core Standards include the NCLB focus on minute reading skills as foundational to reading. That part is way too specific to fit Linda's call for broad standards. I'm sure no country with inquiry based curriculum wastes time with these drill and kill approaches to reading. We need an emergent literacy curriculum that focuses on the child's natural disposition to wonder (inquire) about print and discover (experiment with) how it works in a print-rich environment full of meaningful predictable books and opportunities to use invented spelling to communicate meaning. This requires teachers and administrators who value learning about language and literacy and child development and are willing to inquire and discover how to put that learning into practice in their classrooms.

That's a good point. Minnesota maintains a loose local control environment. Massachusetts exerts quite a bit of control. They both align math the same way, but Minnesota gives local schools quite a bit of latitude. Apparently state regulation is not crucial.

I think that Edutopia could be a force for good in that we understand the value of social production. We should be past talking about technology in the classroom and moving forward into using the lessons learned for creating adaptive schools.

When are we going to align all of our 50 state standards to the PISA? This is the problem with the US, everyone wants local control when it comes to education, and we cannot agree on what students should know and be able to do. When we figure this out, I believe our students will exceed the world!!!