Posted on by smead

Recommended Reading

Public Innovators has a good round-up on the strengths and weaknesses of the social innovation fund one year in.

National Journal’s hosting a rip-roaring debate on edujobs. Ariela Rozman’s takedown of those who criticize reforms as unproven, even while standing in the way of their implementation and evaluation, is particular must-reading.

–Sara Mead

2 Replies to “Recommended Reading”

  1. THIS is a takedown?

    Diane Ravitch suggests that these programs would fund “unproven” ideas. In fact, the foundation of the administration’s reform agenda—providing all students with effective teachers—has more research to back it up than almost any other idea in education.

    Oh yeah! Totally. Right on! . . . Tell me again; ummm which of the administration’s agenda items are research based as opposed to “common sense”?

    There is a point after ten years of this acrimonious yammer that responsible debate has to contain what we call “support” of documentation. Those of us that lay claim to thoughtful debate need to move away from the smorgasboard of nutrition-free delights cooked up by think tanks.

    Diane Ravich is going for the political jugular and has moved out of the ring of scholarly debate. She has become a media creature in order to make the public look at itself in the mirror. Rozman isn’t thinking.

    Perhaps the real problem is the way we see people like Rick Hess that try to have a foot in each reality. For him the Internet is a broadcast medium, not a place to discuss.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.