CHANNELING PRAVDA! Why is Bill Gates saying those things? Truly, we have no idea: // link // print // previous // next //
FRIDAY, MARCH 18, 2011
How not to get into college: The SATs have been in hot water this week because of the writing assignment which appeared on one-third of its recent tests. Unlucky students were forced to respond to this incoherent prompt:
Defending the assignment, the SATs executive director told the New York Times this: The primary goal of the essay prompt is to give students an opportunity to demonstrate their writing skills. For that reason, we dont know why students wouldnt be given a choice of three or four topics. That said, we were mainly struck by the horrible writing displayed in the prompt itself.
Most people believe that the reality these shows portray is authentic? We wont attempt to pick apart the incoherence of the full prompt. But if we were scoring, no student could have received a top score unless his or her essay began with this paragraph:
(Also accepted: Say what?)
In our view, its pretty sad when the testing industry offers such mumble-mouthed confusion on one of its highest-profile tests.
Our question: If the SAT creates writing like that, do you have faith in its ability to grade the writing of others?
INTERLUDECHANNELING PRAVDA (permalink): On March 3, it fell to Jon Stewart to air an intelligent segment about the nations public schools. See THE DAILY HOWLER, 3/15/11.
Two weeks earlier, it fell to the much-reviled New York Post to report, in substantial detail, about the state of New Yorks hushed-up test score scandal. See THE DAILY HOWLER, 3/17/11.
Why does it fall to tabloid newspapers, and to comedians, to make such presentations? In part, this situation obtains when the liberal world quits on such basic topics. The liberal world quit on black kids long agoand it has generally sat and stared as teachers, and their infernal unions, have become big political targets.
When the liberal world refuses to care, others fill the void.
In part, this explains why the worlds second-richest person is driving our education debate. That lucky ducky is Bill Gates. Gates may be thoroughly well intentioned, but it isnt clear he knows squat from squadoosh when it comes to the public schools. Recently, Gates began an op-ed piece in the Washington Post like this:
Does Bill Gates know what hes talking about? More specifically, are the claims weve highlighted accurate? Well assume that Gates is well-intentioned, but he clearly plays an outsized role in Americas education debate. In part, this may explain why you hear so many facts which are grossly misleading or wrong.
How bizarre is our education discourse? Consider the column we cited yesterdaythe current piece by Ronald Wolk, founder and past editor of Education Week.
Education Week is an influential publication, though youll never hear its work discussed at career liberal portals. Because the publication is influential, it should be amazing to see what Wolk has wrought in his current piece. As he starts, Wolk offers a gloomy assessmentthe type of assessment which is constantly heard when public schools get discussed:
According to Wolk, our education system has failed to keep an important promise. The evidence is abundant and well known, he says, and so need not be detailed here. Wolk then runs through a few alleged facts about drop-out rates and scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (the NAEP), the so-called gold standard of educational testing. But soon, he pens the following passage, sounding a lot like Gates:
If anything, Wolk is even gloomier than Gates. In the past thirty years, we have made little or no progress in improving education, he says. More precisely, we have not improved student performance. We have not reduced the dropout rate, or closed the achievement gap.
In the present environment, you hear such claims all the time. According to Wolk, the evidence is so well known that he doesnt have to restate it! But as far we know, all three of Wolks basic pronouncements are either false or misleading.
The facts he cites are indeed well known. The problem is, they arent true.
Lets set aside the claim about the drop-out rate. As far as we know, Wolks claim is inaccurate. But the drop-out rate is famously hard to define and determine, and we havent attempted to study it.
Instead, lets look at Wolks gloomy claims about student performance and the achievement gap.
Wolk refers to nearly 30 years of effort. Judging from the rest of his piece, he refers to the period since 1983, when a federal commission published A Nation at Risk, a famous report which he says stunned the nation. But is it true that we have made little or no progress in improving education since that time? Is it true that we have not improved student performance or closed the achievement gap since 1983?
In his piece, Wolk cites the NAEP as his primary source of data, as almost all researchers do. But if we look at results from the NAEP, one of Wolks claims is simply false, while the other is grossly misleading.
If we want to go back to 1983, we have to use the data from the NAEPs so-called long-term trend assessment (for all such data, click here). But in those data, black students and Hispanic students are doing massively better, in both reading and math, over the period Wolk has defined. The achievement gaps havent closed as much as one might wish, but thats because white students are doing better tooand the gaps have plainly narrowed in most areas. Meanwhile:
The NAEP began conducting a second survey, the so-called Main NAEP, around 1990. Here too, performance by black kids and Hispanic kids is strongly improved, massively so in mathand the achievement gaps have narrowed. For the reading report, click this. For the math report, just click here.
(For an overview of the relevant data in both NAEP surveys, see THE DAILY HOWLER, 9/1/10.)
Why is Ronald Wolk saying these things? Truly, we have no ideabut everyone says these things, all the time, from Barack Obama on down. Meanwhile, a small, hardy gang of billionaires have pushed their way into the discussion; they now have an outsized influence, as well discuss on Monday. That said, why should Bill Gates know whereof he speaks, if a man like Wolk is parading about uttering such obvious howlers?
Given the money Gates has to dispense, is it surprising when various folk stand in line to act like his bromides are accurate?
We live at a very strange point in timea time when truth has virtually disappeared as a basic concept. If you hear a claim being widely advanced, you can feel almost certain its false. In this country, we used to laugh at the Soviet Unions proceduresat the way Pravda could make the truth disappear. But we ourselves live in a Pravda cultureand the career liberal world stares.
Do liberals care about public schoolsabout the deserving kids who attend them? Plainly, no, we do not. On our One True Channel, the various corporate-funded hosts would jump off the Golden Gate Bridge before they would stoop to discuss our public schools or the ratty kids who attend them. Career liberals parade about the land, praising themselves for their vast racial greatnessbut they wouldnt discuss the lives of black kids if their own lives were at stake.
And so, it is left to comedians to conduct sane discussions about our public schools. Billionaires step into the void, crafting our Pravda-like discourse.
Bill Gates speaks in the Washington Post. As he does, career liberals entertain us rubes with tales of the silly Ms. Bachmann.
On Monday, we will return to Gates, the richest and perhaps most influential of the public school billionaires. But why is Ronald Wolk saying those things? Truly, we have no idea.
Gates rebutted: To see Bill Gates column rebutted, you know what to do: Just click here.