February 4, 2009
I was extremely touched and excited by Maurice J. Elias’ Dec. 10, 2008, Commentary “How to Foster Children’s Resilience While They Wait for Schools to Improve.” The theme of resilience is not spoken of enough in the context of policies for low-income children. Here in New York City, we still struggle to find a way to give such children and youths a voice—a way of allowing them to be heard and their experiences acknowledged by policymakers.
I agree with Doug Tuthill’s sentiments in his Commentary “Rethinking the Notion of Public vs. Private” (Jan. 21, 2009). Why do we care where a child is educated so long as that child is getting a good education in a civic-minded environment chosen by his or her parents? If a school meets these three criteria, then it is good for our country and worthy of public funds.
Two recent reports have called for greater student access to college, and also have suggested that the United States must do a better job of ensuring that college students graduate.
I am not surprised at the vitriolic remarks made by Rhonda Stone and Joanne Yatvin in their Jan. 7, 2009, letters to the editor excoriating my ostensible focus on “phonics” at the expense of reading comprehension. I welcome data-based challenges to research findings, but challenges predicated on appeals to authority, simplistic thinking, and untested assumptions are worthless and a waste of time.
National Public Radio’s “All Things Considered” used to have occasional segments in which the host and a guest would decide what terms had been so overused they should be forbidden. Right now, I’m ready to dump “global economy,” “at the end of the day,” and “chops,” as in “he/she’s got the chops.”
We applaud Education Week for collecting education statistics about all 50 states. The latest of your annual Quality Counts reports (Jan. 8, 2009) is indeed an invaluable starting point. It goes a step too far, however, when it pools together disparate measures to arrive at each state’s overall score. This may not be problematic for education scholars, but policymakers might (and do) inaccurately treat a state’s overall rating as meaningful.