Great post and new info from Dr.Schneider. I would add one additional caveat to what I’ve seen reformers and their allies do to get around proscribing favorable outcomes to research they fund. They select institutions and researchers like CREDO (for studies on charters headed by husband and wife team from Hoover institution with long histories of promoting charters) or university professors for voucher placement studies and ramifications, with a long history of supporting vouchers, to create supporting documentation for their goals while simultaneously denying the same data to less favorable or independent institutions or even federal courts.
Perhaps the most sobering component of the privatization push is its unprecedented demand for data collection (data “mining”) on American students. Data mining is not just an American issue. However, on the American front, two education activists have been at the forefront of the fight against this mammoth student data collection: Louisiana’s Jason France (here’s a great example of his writing on the subject) and New York’s Leonie Haimson (her is her testimony on student data/privacy issues in a September 2013 New York city council meeting).
(For those unfamiliar with the data mining issue, see this concise yet thorough summary on the WhatIsCommonCore blog.)
US Secretary of Education Arne Duncan believes that there is “power” in data for “school reform”.
Indeed there is. The issue isn’t whether there is “power” in data collection and storage, and its potential sharing. There certainly is power. That is precisely why the public…
View original post 1,002 more words