E Wayne Ross – Page 84 – Critical Theories in Education

The American Prospect: The trouble with blaming education

A glance at the current issue of The American Prospect: The trouble with blaming education from The Chronicle of Higher Education:

Education can help America remain competitive in a global environment and address economic inequality, but it is hardly the silver bullet that many make it out to be, according to Lawrence Mishel, president of the Economic Policy Institute, and Richard Rothstein, a research associate there and author of Class and Schools: Using Social, Economic, and Educational Reform to Close the Black-White Achievement Gap (Teachers College Press and the Economic Policy Institute, 2004). The EPI is a Washington think tank that promotes equity for working people and is supported in part by labor unions.

The authors trace this “education-as-panacea argument” to “A Nation at Risk,” a report requested by President Ronald Reagan in 1983, and add that the position “got a boost from New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman’s 2005 book, The World is Flat” (Farrar, Straus, and Giroux).

But too much focus on the education system ignores major sources of growth in productivity, the authors argue, including “the honesty of our capital markets, the accountability of our corporations, our fiscal policy and currency management, our national investment in R&D and infrastructure, and the fair-play of the trading system.” Such a “singular obsession” with education, they add, “deflects political attention from policy failures in those other realms.”

Without government intervention or changes in private-sector behavior, America’s growing income inequality and its shortcomings in global competitiveness cannot simply be laid on education’s doorstep, the authors say.

“These are not problems that can be solved by charter schools, teacher accountability, or any other school intervention. A balanced human-capital policy would involve schools, but would require tax, regulatory, and labor-market reforms as well,” the authors argue.

While the authors admit that manufacturing jobs have declined, they say those jobs have been replaced by “equally unskilled or semi-skilled jobs in service and retail sectors.”

“What made semi-skilled manufacturing jobs desirable was that many (though not most) were protected by unions, provided pensions and health insurance, and compensated with decent wages,” write the authors. “That today’s working class doesn’t get similar protections has nothing to do with the adequacy of its education. Rather, it has everything to do with policy decisions stemming from the value we place on equality.”

The article, “Schools as Scapegoats,” is available to subscribers or for purchase on the magazine’s Web site.

Rouge Forum Update

Dear Friends,

A two week road trip throughout California can tempt one to conclude that Thoreau’s comment, “What news? How much more important to learn that which is never old?” might be right.

But, in that two week period, UAW executives negotiated what may stand as the worst sellout of wages and health benefits in the history of US labor, agreeing to multiple-tier wage systems, a shell game for health benefits, an end to in plant restrictions like unlimited overtime. Should this package stand, it will surely influence education contracts, soon.

In Michigan, the state legislature shutdown state government, mainly because legislators want to eradicate a model health insurance plan administered, mostly, by the Michigan Education Association, probably the best educator health care plan in the US.

While Alan Greenspan admitted, “Iraq is largely about oil,” the dollar collapsed against, among other things, the Canadian loonie, making Rouge founder Wayne Ross a Cassandra of finance.

NEA executives did a weird dance of not opposing NCLB, while trying hard to appear to oppose NCLB, and key NEA locals began to pressure the union to stand for NCLB abolition. At the same time, AFT fought hard to retain NCLB, but to defeat merit pay, rather like the ethics of concentration camp guards.

Democrats and Republicans remained united as a class, for war and NCLB.

National resistance to the empire’s wars, and its school regimentation, remain bogged down, mainly by fear (in the k12 world) and opportunism (in academia).

Japanese teachers (1500 of them) joined to reject the re-militarization of their nation and schools, protesting against a new national pledge, while Denver students marched out of classes, refusing to chant religious portions of the US pledge.

Bulgarian teachers initiated and maintained a massive strike for pay and better working conditions.

A student at the University of Florida coined a new US phrase: Don’t Taze Me Bro!
while spectators, looked on and did nothing.

Seymour Hersh suggested that Americans learn nothing from history, paralleling Chalmers Johnson’s belief that Americans know no history and so cannot connect history and contemporary reality.

Scott Ritter warned, again, of a US attack on Iran .

All this and more is linked on the Rouge Forum No Blood for Oil Page.

With CalCare, activist NEA locals, parents, and students, the Rouge Forum is launching a major effort to overcome NCLB’s atmosphere of fear in schools, and its high-stakes exams, with direct action boycotts. We would like to meet with all those who are interested in helping out. Our California tour demonstrated that direct action is possible, and necessary. We will have a full report on the California tour soon.

Here is Jonathan Kozol writing about his anti-NCLB fast.

The Rouge Forum will have a big presence at the upcoming National Conference for the Social Studies Conference in San Diego, November 28 to December 1 this year. Plan to come on the phantasmagoric Rouge Forum tour of the city, the day before the conference begins.

Please plan to join us at the Rouge Forum Conference in Louisville, KY, March 14, 15, and 16.

Thanks to Adam, Gina, Amber, Tommie, Bob, Susan H and O, Betty M., Hoffie, Candace, Sherry, Sharon A., Bill Blank, Greg and Katie, Carol Panetta and Bob, Lyn Stinson, Perry, Wayne, MThomas, Kevin, Peter M, Dave Hill, Glenn Rikowski, Beau, Erin, all those who welcomed us on our road trip and Wanda J.

All the best, r

District gives teacher a black mark

The Vancouver Sun: District gives teacher a black mark

A letter of discipline goes into educator’s file for refusing to administer test
Published: Friday, September 28, 2007

VICTORIA – A Langford elementary teacher won’t be suspended but has been issued a letter of discipline for refusing to give a required reading comprehension test to her Grade 3 class last spring.

A notice to Kathryn Sihota from the Sooke school district said the letter will be placed in her personnel file and the B.C. College of Teachers will be informed

.

The district also said her refusal to follow her principal’s direction to issue the test constituted insubordination, and that further misconduct could mean more discipline “up to and including dismissal.”

Kathryn Sihota, who refused to give her Grade 3 class a reading test, has been told to administer the test next year.

The district said it expects Sihota, who teaches at Millstream elementary, to administer the disputed test — called the District Assessment of Reading Team or DART test — when it comes up again next year.

The decision by the Sooke board of education followed a hearing Tuesday, in which more than 100 teachers from Victoria and other parts of the province staged a rally.

While district officials would not discuss the decision, the information was released by the Sooke Teachers’ Association, a local affiliate of the B.C. Teachers’ Federation. The association is filing a grievance about the disciplinary action.

Sihota, co-president of the Sooke teachers’ group, said she was still considering her options with respect to the test.

“Spring’s a long way away. I haven’t decided what I’ll do next. I’m kind of hoping that the support that was here the other day from across the province may sway the board’s decision about making the test mandatory.”

In many other districts using DART, the test is not required, Sihota said. “It’s a tool that’s available for teachers, but it’s not a mandatory test.”

The teachers’ association has said it is concerned about how the district uses information gathered from DART. The district maintains the test yields valuable data on how students are faring and how the education system can respond to their needs.

Sihota said she did what she felt was best for her students. “I feel that I’m standing up to protect my kids.”

ZNet Commentary: Canadian Foreign Policy and Iran

ZNet Commentary
Canadian Foreign Policy and Iran
September 27, 2007
By Yves Engler

It appears that the US is planning an attack against Iran and Ottawa is pitching in to help.

Earlier this year, then Foreign Affairs Minister Peter McKay said, “Canada is deeply concerned with the direction that Iran is headed. The regime in Tehran cannot be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons.” McKay’s comment was made in Israel, a regional rival of Iran that already possesses nuclear weapons.

Referring to “genocidal” Iran a few months later, Jason Kenny (a federal cabinet minister) told a pro-Israel conference that Canada “will pursue every possible avenue in concert with our allies to ensure that [Iran] does not come into possession of nuclear weapons, which could unleash unimaginable violence.” Kenny concluded that, “He [Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad] must be stopped by the civilized world.”

Later MacKay released a statement claiming that “maintaining a relationship with Iran tests the bounds of diplomacy…peace is Canada’s goal and we support the United States’ effort to engage all regional partners in supporting the Iraqi government’s attempts to bring safety and security to the area.”
http://www.turning.ca/
Canada has also worked to de-legitimate Iran at the UN, putting forward a resolution condemning Iran’s human rights record. In an embarrassing outcome for Canadian officials, the motion barely passed (77-75). Iran’s UN representative responded to the resolution by saying, “Canada and other sponsors of this resolution [against Iran] are themselves implicated in serious rights violations for which they must be held accountable.” He specifically cited Canada’s horrendous treatment of Aboriginal people.

Canada has also been accused of spying for the US. Late last year, members of the Iranian parliament claimed the Canadian embassy in Tehran was a “den of spies.”

While progressives should oppose Iran’s human rights violations, its role in Iraq and its desire to develop nuclear energy or weapons, it is hypocritical for the Canadian government to use this as a justification for supporting a US attack.

Canada hasn’t opposed the US invasion/occupation of Iraq, which is certainly a war crime under international law, and the main cause of the current instability in that country. In fact, Canadian forces provided logistical support for the American-led invasion and relieved US troops from Afghanistan so they could redeploy to Iraq. In addition, Canadian companies continue to supply armaments for the US war.

At least the hypocrisy has been consistent.

Throughout the 1970s, the Canadian government’s Defence Programs Bureau had a representative in Tehran, which sold about $60 million worth of arms to Iran during the decade. This was during the same period that Amnesty International reported “no country in the world has a worse record in human rights than Iran.” The Shah’s brutal SAVAK intelligence forces killed tens of thousands, which prompted no condemnations from Canadian officials.

Nor did Canada protest when in 1953 the US and Britain overthrew Mohammed Mossadegh, Iran’s elected prime minister. Instead, it followed the lead of the UK and the US in doing business with a dictator and Canada opened an embassy six years later. By the time the Shah was overthrown in 1979, there were 850 Canadians in Iran (along with thousands of Americans), most working for foreign owned oilrigs, power projects etc. Not happy with the Shah’s departure, Canada closed its embassy in 1980 and did not reopen it until 1988.

Canadian hypocrisy is on full display regarding Iran’s drive to develop nuclear energy or atomic weapons. When the Shah was in power, Canada was prepared to sell Iran nuclear reactors. More broadly, after selling (or attempting to sell) nuclear reactors or uranium to at least 25 countries from Argentina to Romania, Canada has no right to criticize a country’s desire for nuclear power.

Some say that Iran’s push to get the bomb dates back to 1974 when India exploded a nuclear bomb. Canada provided the reactor that India, Iran’s regional competitor, used to develop the bomb. And Canada aided another of Iran’s regional rivals, Pakistan, in its successful program to build nuclear weapons.

In fact, Canadian uranium from Great Bear Lake was used in the only two nuclear bombs ever to be dropped on a human population. After Hiroshima and Nagasaki Prime Minister Mackenzie King declared: “It gives me pleasure to announce that Canadian scientists played an important role, having been intimately connected, in an efficient manner, to this great scientific development.” By 1959, Canada had sold $1.5 billion worth of uranium to the US bomb program. Today, Canada is the world’s largest exporter of uranium.

If Canada is to have any credibility regarding nuclear non-proliferation perhaps it should begin by getting its own house in order. Then, it would make sense to criticize its allies when they build weapons of mass destruction or break international laws and treaties. Only after doing all that would Ottawa have the authority to condemn Iran’s nuclear program.

Yves Engler is the author of two books: Canada in Haiti: Waging War on the Poor Majority (with Anthony Fenton) and Playing Left Wing: From Rink Rat to Student Radical. Both books are published by RED/Fernwood and available at www.turning.ca

Disabled single mom whips RIAA in court, seeks class action suit

Via RockRap.com:

Victorious RIAA defendant gets attorneys’ fees, turns to class-action plans

By Eric Bangeman | Published: September 24, 2007 – 09:39AM CT

from Ars Technica

Calling the RIAA’s case unjustified “as a reasonable exploration of the boundaries of copyright law,” a federal magistrate judge late last week awarded former RIAA defendant Tanya Andersen attorneys’ fees for her nearly two-and-a-half-year fight against a copyright infringement lawsuit.

Andersen is a disabled single mother living in Oregon with her now 10-year-old daughter. In February 2005, she was sued by the record labels, which accused her of using KaZaA to distribute gangster rap under the handle “gotenkito.” From the outset, she denied all wrongdoing, and in October of that year, filed a countersuit against the record industry, accusing it of racketeering, fraud, and deceptive business practices.The RIAA continued to press its legal claims against Andersen, despite any evidence other than an IP address tying her to the alleged infringement. Andersen even provided the name, address, and phone number of the person she believed was responsible for the “gotenkito” account. Inexplicably, the RIAA chose not to contact him for over two years, then chose to take his denial at face value, choosing instead to continue prosecuting the case against Andersen.

Throughout its prosecution of the case, Andersen accused the RIAA of underhanded investigative tactics. These included what Andersen describes as inappropriate attempts to contact her daughter. In one instance, the RIAA’s investigators allegedly contacted her elementary school, posing as a relative in an attempt to speak with then-eight-year-old Kylee Andersen about the alleged infringement. Even the RIAA’s own forensic investigator reported that he could not find “any evidence whatsoever” that Andersen had used KaZaA.

In June of this year, the RIAA finally came to the conclusion that it had an unwinnable case and decided to drop the case prior to its going to trial. The parties stipulated to a dismissal with prejudice—unusual for the RIAA, since it made Andersen the prevailing party and eligible for attorneys’ fees. Andersen dismissed her counterclaims without prejudice (meaning she can refile them) after she filed a malicious prosecution lawsuit against the RIAA.

In his order awarding Andersen attorneys’ fees, US Magistrate Judge Donald C. Ashmanskas noted that he had to make a decision on this case “without ever addressing the merits of the claims or the counterclaims.” Despite that, Judge Ashmanskas noted that there had been a “material alteration of the legal relationship of the parties,” and that with the sole exception of attorneys’ fees, Andersen had gotten “all the relief available to a defendant of a claim for copyright infringement.”

Judge Ashmanskas also cited the RIAA’s admission that the “evidence uncovered during discovery proved inconsistent and inconclusive,” a fact for which the labels could provide no explanation. He concludes that the RIAA lacked the prima facie evidence to support the claims of infringement.

“Whatever plaintiffs’ reasons for the manner in which they have prosecuted this case, it does not appear to be justified as a reasonable exploration of the boundaries of copyright law,” wrote the judge. “Copyright holders generally, and these plaintiffs specifically, should be deterred from prosecuting infringement claims as plaintiffs did in this case.”

While Andersen’s attorney adds up the bills, Andersen is seeking class-action status for her malicious prosecution lawsuit. Saying that the RIAA “has engaged in a coordinated enterprise to pursue a scheme of threatening and intimidating litigation in an attempt to maintain its music distribution monopoly,” Andersen wants to make a class from those who have been wrongfully sued by the RIAA; if successful, the RIAA could find itself locked in a long and costly legal battle.

BC teacher refuses to give test

Here are links to local stories and editorials about Sooke elementary teacher Kathryn Sihota’s refusal to give the District Assessment of Reading Team (aka DART) test.

News stories:
“Teacher in hot water over not giving test” (The Vancouver Sun, September 25, 2007)

“Victoria teacher faces discipline for refusing to test students” (The Province (Vancouver, BC), August 26, 2007)

“Teacher faces hearing for refusing to give test” (The Vancouver Sun, August 25, 207)

Editorials and Letters:

“Teachers have to follow the rules, just like students do” (The Vancouver Sun, September 26, 2007)

“Standardized tests prevent future shock for students” (The Vancouver Sun, September 26, 2007)

“Standardized tests prevent future shock for students” (The Vancouver Sun, September 26. 2007)

“Reading tests offer no benefits” (TImes Colonist (Victoria, BC), September 1, 2007)