By contrast with the release from GOP HQ quoted in my last posting, I’d like to point out how much the governor’s rhetoric has improved in this same area.
The governor started out, a couple of years back, making the same kinds of misleading statements about public education as Mr. Dawson — saying, essentially, that we weren’t getting any improvement for our investment in public schools, when most of the data indicated otherwise (he was careful to select those very few data that supported his false conclusion). This has been, since the beginning, the standard rhetorical procedure for all those who want to undermine public education — first say that we’re wasting our money on it, then try to get the voters to buy some snake oil instead.
But the governor is no dummy, and ultimately an honest man. (I think the false and misleading things he’s said about the schools arise from his utter ignorance of the world of public education, and his instinctive distrust of that terra incognita.) This shows in the rhetorical about-face I’ve witnessed on his part recently.
Check out, for instance, the governor’s release of the same date as Mr. Dawson’s. Mr. Sanford has now learned to say,
This goes to show that there are a whole lot of teachers, parents and students working very hard to educate our state’s children, and they deserve credit for these improvements.
Mind you, he’s referring to the exact same data that caused Mr. Dawson to say, "Regrettably, this is sad and disappointing day for South Carolina’s students and parents."
Of course, the governor uses his congratulatory statement as a setup for the sales pitch for the snake oil, following those words immediately with:
Unfortunately, incremental change in SAT scores isn’t going to get us where we need to be in terms of competing with other states, let alone in competing with the rest of the world. That’s why this administration will continue pushing for fundamental reforms to the current system that give parents more choices…
Still, Gov. Sanford’s acknowledgment of progress is laudable. And it’s smart, on one level: Most of us love our public schools and are proud of their progress. The governor is trying to sell a political idea, and you don’t get anywhere with most voters by trashing the schools.
But on another level, he’s throwing away an essential tool in his selling process. It’s impossible to sell something as far-out and obviously unworkable as PPIC without getting people so worked up against the current education reform process that they’re unable to think clearly. Don’t expect to see the governor’s allies in this process drop the tactic. The only sector of the electorate in which they have made any progress is among those who have heard the statement, "We keep throwing money at the schools (they love that phrase, "throwing money"), and they just keep getting worse" so many times that they believe this utter canard.
They’re like the poor, programmed souls in Huxley‘s Brave New World:
The students nodded, emphatically agreeing with a statement which upwards of sixty-two thousand repetitions in the dark had made them accept, not merely as true, but as axiomatic, self-evident, utterly indisputable.
Groups such as the Orwellian South Carolinians for Responsible Government and its moneyed out-of-state fellow travelers aren’t going to give up the lies, because they can’t win without them.
But let’s at least appreciate that the governor is learning a little of the truth about the schools, and speaking it. Yes, you can say he’s being the "good cop," but we usual suspects should learn to appreciate any kindnesses we can get. Remember, the bad cops will be back in the interrogation room in force, come January.
Related Posts
As always, Brad, I enjoyed your op-ed piece. With respect, however, I think it should have been noted that the governor’s statements are not simply the rhetoric of a “good cop.” The governor is a strong supporter of public education, notwithstanding his belief (which I think you suggest is inconsistent with such support) that the introduction of market forces would have a salutary affect on it. Consider: the governor’s FY 05-06 executive budget proposed an increase in public teacher salaries to $500 above the southeastern average, and that proposal was adopted by the General Assembly in its budget; in that same executive budget, the governor proposed that the Base Student Cost be fully funded, and it subsequently was — for the first time in five years; the governor spent political capital promoting and ultimately signed into law the the Education and Economic Development Act, a law to tailor high school curriculum around career clusters to better prepare public high school students for the 21st century workforce; and, working through the Commerce Department and the Workforce Investment Act Board, the governor began the Jobs for South Carolina’s Graduates program, which allocates $2 million annually toward aggressive dropout prevention efforts in 14 of SC’s poorest-performing schools. I guess the point I am trying to make is this: this is not a zero-sum game, and support for the introduction of market incentives into the education system does not necessarily mean support for the dismantling of the public education system.
As always, Brad, I enjoyed your op-ed piece. With respect, however, I think it should have been noted that the governor’s statements are not simply the rhetoric of a “good cop.” The governor is a strong supporter of public education, notwithstanding his belief (which I think you suggest is inconsistent with such support) that the introduction of market forces would have a salutary affect on it. Consider: the governor’s FY 05-06 executive budget proposed an increase in public teacher salaries to $500 above the southeastern average, and that proposal was adopted by the General Assembly in its budget; in that same executive budget, the governor proposed that the Base Student Cost be fully funded, and it subsequently was — for the first time in five years; the governor spent political capital promoting and ultimately signed into law the the Education and Economic Development Act, a law to tailor high school curriculum around career clusters to better prepare public high school students for the 21st century workforce; and, working through the Commerce Department and the Workforce Investment Act Board, the governor began the Jobs for South Carolina’s Graduates program, which allocates $2 million annually toward aggressive dropout prevention efforts in 14 of SC’s poorest-performing schools. I guess the point I am trying to make is this: this need not be a zero-sum game, and support for the introduction of market incentives into the education system does not necessarily mean support for the dismantling of the public education system.
“Today’s announcement is further evidence of what little results Inez Tenenbaum has produced during her tenure.” – GOP Chairman Katon Dawson
The word “little” should be used to describe something that is un-countable, as in, “The Republicans have put forth little effort toward solving South Carolina’s problems.” SAT scores, like all scores, are countable.
Instead, use the word “few,” which is more apt when modifying a plural: “Few Republicans have the integrity to admit that Mrs. Tenenbaum has put our education system on the right track.”
You wouldn’t say “little Republicans” unless you were talking about midget Republicans. Just a friendly grammar tip from a public school-educated reader.
Brad, In the interest of fairness, will you post the organizations that spent money in SC to defeat PPIC? Not all of them, but the significant ones. I could be wrong but the teacher’s unions pulled in outside money.
Anecdotal stories are sometimes not relevant but here is one. My children (and me too) ALL went to public schools. There was a world of difference however. Just take the bathrooms. From middle school through high school my daughters would not use the school bathrooms. These were gathering places for the bullies who would hit anyone who came in for money, also the smokers, and also a habitat for violence and not to mention unsanitary conditions. How did they make it through so many years of school like that? The band director had one “clean” facility that only band members could use. Ergo, problem, then solution. I complained to a school board member, and even provided an article, where some schools had begun a program where honor students had special designated bathrooms. His answer was, well, this would tend to be racist since most of the honor students are white. So, nothing was ever done. I could go on with more examples of what our children are being put through. But I don’t expect you or The State to change your thinking, at least very much.
Well, well, well, Mr. Warthen: Isn’t this just the pot calling the kettle black?
Orwellian? Think about the stupid and vapid “Things are getting better” crap you spew forth. Think about the loyalty oath of a few years back where they wanted elected officials to pledge not to say anything that might be considered negative about the government schools. You are engaging in the time-honored practice of accusing his enemies of his own worst crime. You are the authoritarian and elitist. You are the hack mouthpiece for the largest monopoly in the state. You are the bleeding heart who never saw a government expenditure or tax you didn’t want to increase. You are the pompous mid-level manager who crawls to hard core leftists in California to beg permission for his drivel. You are the shill for the Democratic Party that can only say positive things about a Republican if the Republican is bending to Democratic tactics or needs.
~
So really, Mr. Warthen, please don’t accuse others of engaging in authoritarian tactics. Such an allegation coming from one of the state’s foremost thugs–it is to laugh.
“You are engaging in the time-honored practice of accusing his enemies of his own worst crime.” — Truth-teller
Truth-teller, I would either say “your enemies of your own worst crime” or “one’s enemies of one’s own worst crime.”
As it stands, the pronoun “his” is ambiguous, especially since you are addressing Mr. Warthen directly.
Consider this similar example: “South Carolinians for Responsible Government is an organization that gets her membership from the lunatic fringe and has his office located on Gervais Street.”
See how it’s all over the place, T.T.? That’s what we’re trying to avoid. Let me know if you have any questions. If I need to, I’ll reference my (public) high school textbooks and get back to you.
RS–
Thanks for the correction. Pronoun-antecedent agreement is an essential component of a proper grasp of the English language. Hasty typing is a mortal enemy to pronoun-antecedent agreement.
So here’s a question for you: Do you really think I have a problem with pronoun-antecedent agreement? Or do you think I have a problem with hasty typing?
Best,
TT
P.S. – According to the much-beloved PACT, less than 30% of South Carolina’s public school 8th graders are proficient or above in English.
http://www.myscschools.com/tracks/testscores/pact/2005/
Hasty typing is the last refuge to which a lousy grammarian clings. However, your last post showed a marked improvement — much like South Carolina’s SAT scores.
The thing I would like to see you focus on next, T.T., is style. You said: “Such an allegation coming from one of the state’s foremost thugs–it is to laugh.”
Try to put yourself in the reader’s shoes. What is to laugh? The state? The thug? The allegation?
While I have no reason to doubt that Mr. Warthen is a thug of the highest order, whose only means of reason are a Louisville Slugger and a set of brass knuckles, the point is somewhat muddled by “it is to laugh.”
Consider this similar example: “Constant criticism of our schoolchildren’s improvements coming from those who purport to care so much about our kids — it is to cry.”
See how it detracts from the message? If you work on your style, T.T., I have no doubt that you can become a great writer, or at the very least, “proficient.”
RS,
One of the things that a would-be language cop should avoid is mixed metaphors. The linguistic error of the mixed metaphor occurs when a writer combines two or more pieces of figurative language that do not go together.
Let’s see if we can find an example from your most recent post. Ah, here’s one:
“Hasty typing is the last refuge to which a lousy grammarian clings.”
In the English language, the word refuge–when used as a noun–refers to place. It is a safe haven or a sanctuary, a place to which someone can retreat for security. So it makes no sense to say that a person “clings” to a “refuge.” When Osama bin Laden retreats to his last refuge (perhaps a cave in Tora Bora), he does not cling to it. How can one cling to a place? Can one hold it or grip it? In the future, your sloppiness may be penalized by a reduction of up to a half a grade.
But there are more important questions in that post that you manage to conveniently ignore. You look at the PACT data which shows that 70% of 5th graders are not proficient in English and you refuse to make a substantive comment. Do you think that this is not a problem?
If this does not qualify as an educational problem, what would? If our current situation at the bottom of the SAT pack is not a crisis, what exactly qualifies for that designation? If being last in high school graduation is not enough evidence that we need reform, what would meet your standard? Or do you believe that being last in graduation rates and SATs is good enough for South Carolina children?
I dare you to answer the question substantively instead of dancing around it.
Ta,
T.T.
I’m not sure the PACT test score is really a good indicator of educational progress, let alone justification for praise or criticism. Although we accept it as such for now, it really seems like we are using it to gloss over a more systemic problem: how adult (parental) illiteracy manifests in children. Since moving to SC I feel I have encountered a higher percentage of adult non-readers than anywhere else I have lived (IL, NC, TX), does anyone know the real numbers? I frequently hear anecdotes of how parental education is the strongest predictor of a given child’s academic performance. Has The State ever reported on strategies to use that relationship to the broader public advantage?
“They say that patriotism is the last refuge to which a scoundrel clings.” –Bob Dylan (paraphrasing Samuel Johnson)
I think Bob Dylan and Samuel Johnson were using the other definition of refuge: a source of comfort or protection. Or maybe ol’ Bob was mixing his metaphors… God knows he could use some help with the English language.
At any rate, your posts are showing a lot of improvement. That first one, in which you called Brad Warthen a pompous thug who spews crap, was pretty rough. It was a few bricks short of being the sharpest knife in the drawer, if you know what I’m saying. But you’ve improved, and I salute you for that.
Still, it’s what you ignore (alternate definitions of words and rapid improvement in SAT scores) that shows your hand.
Here is some interesting data about local readers, from a survey of readers of “The State” conducted in 2003. Problem is, I don’t know if people who read this paper are representative of the area or not.
http://www.accessabc.com/reader/143150_0403e_RPRD.pdf
It appears from this data that not too many South Carolinians are making it through college.
The basic issue which Inez Tennenbaum and Brad Warthen avoid is why the $12,000 we spend per pupil is not producing better results. It is either a defective process inside the classroom, or social circumstances outside the classroom which no amount of spending can overcome. Government school advocates don’t want to examine either one.
It is worth noting that part of the reason that the governor doesn’t want to send more money to public schools is because it will just get wasted. I spent years as an auditor, and audited a few school districts during that time. It was ridiculous to see some of the financial irresponsibility. We noted once where I finance director obtained a sizeable “tax anticipation” loan but forgot to deposit the loan check. It was in his desk when we noted that it never hit the bank. We noticed where a school paid bills for another organization, but didn’t realize that they had spent more than double what that organization had given them. We found many missing laptop computers. We dusted off equipment costing tens of thousands that was purchased simply because it “looked cool”. Money should not be dumped into education without accountability. It is time to create a GAO-type organization to hold these people accountable.
I would have said that differently, “…because a higher percentage of it will be wasted there than at other educational venues.” Even that’s a pretty ambitious claim, though. Are private schools audited the same way as public (I don’t know the answer, by the way). I often hear this claim (more waste at public), usually followed up by some sort of academic performance statistic, used to justify de-funding public education. I would actually be OK with that, IF there was a statewide, standardized audit/evaluation system that ALL schools (public, private, etc) had to adhere to. Maybe then we could spot actual waste and talk seriously about recruiting the best ideas from both approaches to education. But this isn’t a data-friendly state, I doubt it will happen.
Private schools have the best system for auditing results that can be implemented – it’s called “tuition”. Parents who are not happy with the results at one private school can simply choose to send their kids elsewhere.
The public school cabal that links politicians with power hungry school administrators and greedy developers/contruction companies is a
monopoly that is impossible to overcome.
I’ll believe South Carolina is committed to
public education when I see one school
district per county and ONE principal fired for incompetence. Til then, the slippery slope will keep on sliding…