What do you think?
Rate this book
Grading Education: Getting Accountability Right
Yes, we should hold public schools accountable for effectively spending the vast funds with which they have been entrusted. But accountability policies like No Child Left Behind, based exclusively on math and reading test scores, have narrowed the curriculum, misidentified both failing and successful schools, and established irresponsible expectations for what schools can accomplish. Instead of just grading progress in one or two narrow subjects, we should hold schools accountable for the broad outcomes we expect from public education ―basic knowledge and skills, critical thinking, an appreciation of the arts, physical and emotional health, and preparation for skilled employment ―and then develop the means to measure and ensure schools’ success in achieving them. Grading Education describes a new kind of accountability plan for public education, one that relies on higher-quality testing, focuses on professional evaluation, and builds on capacities we already possess. This important resource:
- GenresEducationNonfiction
280 pages, Paperback
First published November 1, 2008
219 people want to read
About the author
Richard Rothstein
25 books307 followersRichard Rothstein is a research associate of the Economic Policy Institute and a Fellow at the Thurgood Marshall Institute of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund. He lives in California, where he is a Fellow of the Haas Institute at the University of California–Berkeley.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
to-keep-reference
March 3, 2022Según Horace Mann, por ejemplo, la música vocal tiene la particularidad de unir a las personas de distintos orígenes y reducir el nivel de conflicto.
Sin fines de lucro pág.157
En el libro Grading education: Getting accountability right, una obra excelente sobre la responsabilidad publicada hace poco por Richard Rothstein, el autor propone un programa mixto a nivel estatal y federal que sirve para evaluar una variedad de aptitudes cognitivas y personales de modo mucho más complejo que el actual, con especial atención a las capacidades necesarias para un buen ejercicio de la ciudadanía. Este libro, con argumentos claros y sensatos, es un punto de partida excelente para un debate nacional realmente productivo sobre el tema de la responsabilidad.
Sin fines de lucro pág.179
Sin fines de lucro pág.157
En el libro Grading education: Getting accountability right, una obra excelente sobre la responsabilidad publicada hace poco por Richard Rothstein, el autor propone un programa mixto a nivel estatal y federal que sirve para evaluar una variedad de aptitudes cognitivas y personales de modo mucho más complejo que el actual, con especial atención a las capacidades necesarias para un buen ejercicio de la ciudadanía. Este libro, con argumentos claros y sensatos, es un punto de partida excelente para un debate nacional realmente productivo sobre el tema de la responsabilidad.
Sin fines de lucro pág.179
July 31, 2013
I was really looking forward to this one, but it was such dense and complicated policy language that I couldn't really get much into it -- or out of it.
The most interesting thing, to me, was the appendix, "Schools as Scapegoats," written by Lawrence Mishel and Richard Rothstein from The American Prospect, October 12, 2007. In it, they deconstruct the argument that schools are failing -- and that the evidence is to be found in stagnant and declining wages, work sent overseas, etc. They point out that work is sent overseas in the US not because there are not qualified workers here, but because there are qualified workers elsewhere who will work for less money.
While policy makers argue that we must develop workers' skills in order to strengthen the economy and focus on human capital and "symbolic analysts" rather than "routine workers" (Robert Reich), "automakers moved plants to Mexico, where worker education levels are considerably lower than those in the American Midwest." (162).
The 1990s saw a tremendous advance in the productivity of American workers -- the same workers who were so badly educated. For a time, productivity gains were shared, and workers' wages rose -- though the denunciations of public schools and the calls for voucher programs and privatization continued. But after 9/11, wage growth halted.
The "Tough Choices or Tough Times" report bemoans the fact that "'Indian engineers make $7,500 a year against $45,000 for an American engineer with the same qualifications' and concludes from this that we can compete with the Indian economy only if our engineers are smarter than theirs. This is silly: no matter how good our schools, American engineers won't be six times as smart as those in the rest of the world." (164)
Yet the Touch Choices report's author still says, "the fact is that education holds the key to personal and national economic well-being, more now than at any time in our history."
"Rising workforce skills can indeed make American firms more competitive. But better skills, while essential, are not the only source of productivity growth. The honesty of our capital markets, the accountability of our corporations, our fiscal policy and currency management, our national investment in research and development and infrastructure, andthe fair play of the trading system (or its absence) also influence whether the U.S. economy reaps the gains of American's diligence and ingenuity. The singular obsession with schools deflects political attention from policy failures in those other realms" (165).
Workforce skills can't determine how the wealth of the nation is distributed -- if wages stagnate while productivity rises 10%, as it did in the five years before 2007 -- no amount of skill building will help.
While college graduates do earn substantially more than high school graduates, this is largely because high school graduates earn so much less, in inflation adjusted dollars, than they did decades ago. That today's high school graduates cannot find jobs with good wages and good benefits "has nothing to do with the adequacy of education" (167). Hotel jobs that pay $20 an hour with benefits do so because of unions, not because the maids have bachelor's degrees.
The most interesting thing, to me, was the appendix, "Schools as Scapegoats," written by Lawrence Mishel and Richard Rothstein from The American Prospect, October 12, 2007. In it, they deconstruct the argument that schools are failing -- and that the evidence is to be found in stagnant and declining wages, work sent overseas, etc. They point out that work is sent overseas in the US not because there are not qualified workers here, but because there are qualified workers elsewhere who will work for less money.
While policy makers argue that we must develop workers' skills in order to strengthen the economy and focus on human capital and "symbolic analysts" rather than "routine workers" (Robert Reich), "automakers moved plants to Mexico, where worker education levels are considerably lower than those in the American Midwest." (162).
The 1990s saw a tremendous advance in the productivity of American workers -- the same workers who were so badly educated. For a time, productivity gains were shared, and workers' wages rose -- though the denunciations of public schools and the calls for voucher programs and privatization continued. But after 9/11, wage growth halted.
The "Tough Choices or Tough Times" report bemoans the fact that "'Indian engineers make $7,500 a year against $45,000 for an American engineer with the same qualifications' and concludes from this that we can compete with the Indian economy only if our engineers are smarter than theirs. This is silly: no matter how good our schools, American engineers won't be six times as smart as those in the rest of the world." (164)
Yet the Touch Choices report's author still says, "the fact is that education holds the key to personal and national economic well-being, more now than at any time in our history."
"Rising workforce skills can indeed make American firms more competitive. But better skills, while essential, are not the only source of productivity growth. The honesty of our capital markets, the accountability of our corporations, our fiscal policy and currency management, our national investment in research and development and infrastructure, andthe fair play of the trading system (or its absence) also influence whether the U.S. economy reaps the gains of American's diligence and ingenuity. The singular obsession with schools deflects political attention from policy failures in those other realms" (165).
Workforce skills can't determine how the wealth of the nation is distributed -- if wages stagnate while productivity rises 10%, as it did in the five years before 2007 -- no amount of skill building will help.
While college graduates do earn substantially more than high school graduates, this is largely because high school graduates earn so much less, in inflation adjusted dollars, than they did decades ago. That today's high school graduates cannot find jobs with good wages and good benefits "has nothing to do with the adequacy of education" (167). Hotel jobs that pay $20 an hour with benefits do so because of unions, not because the maids have bachelor's degrees.
February 3, 2019
Comparable to his other books.
March 3, 2013
Grading Education: Getting Accountability Right by Richard Rothstein, Rebecca Jacobson, and Tamara Wilder is about much more than assessment in education; it is about how standardized testing became the ubiquitous, albeit dysfunctional and damaging, measure of our educational institutions and educators. Incessant assessment has become the new standard since schools became the scapegoats for the declining income of middle-class and working-class Americans. The argument goes: we are falling behind because our educational institutions and educators are failing to prepare our citizens for the new technological requirements of workers; hence, the emphasis on STEM. The fact is, our declining economic security and wages are not the result of inadequacies in our educational institutions but are the product of social and economic policy failures . . . “enhancing opportunity requires much more than school improvement” (165).
“American middle-class living standards are threatened not because workers lack competitive skills but because the richest amongst us have seized the fruits of productivity growth, denying fair shares to the working- and middle-class Americans” (166). College graduates are not in short supply. Underemployment is the new norm. The gap between college grad wages and high school grad wages is due to falling real wages of high school grads rather than demand for college grads. Manufacturing job are gone, but low wages in the new service economy is because of the lack of labor organizations assuring living wages, health insurance, and pensions, not because those working in the service sector are less hardworking or less skilled at what they do. We, as a society, have simply abandoned the “norm of equality” as a common goal. More education is not the answer to what ails us.
The current focus on quantitative assessment is misguided and counterproductive. Economists, sociologists, and management theorists caution against accountability systems that rely on numerical measures. If you are attentive, it is politicians and non-specialists who demand quantitative accountability; they do so in contradistinction to the opinion of experts. The authors point out that the Soviet Union employed quantitative accountability extensively; it was not a successful policy. Our history has not been successful either; for instance, body counts as a measure of victory in Vietnam. Campbell’s Law states that “the more any quantitative social indicator is used for social decision-making, the more subject it will be to corruption pressures and the more apt it will be to distort and corrupt the social passions it is intended to monitor” (77). In other words, quantitative assessment leads to goal distortion, gaming, and corruption.
The appraisal of an educational system must be its impact on its community. Should a library be evaluated by the number of books circulated or by the quality of books circulated? For instance, a library that contains the complete oeuvre of Ann Coulter, but not a single volume by Martha Nussbaum is not serving the needs of its community. The goals of America’s educational system has been, in addition to basic academic knowledge and skills, critical thinking, appreciation of the arts and literature, social skills, citizenship and civil responsibility, emotional and physical health, and, most importantly, the ability to discern the difference between demagoguery and reasoned democratic debate. These are the essentials. Others have argued that success is measured by the inculcation of shared democratic virtues, such as compassion, inclusiveness, equality, and a rational self-governing character.
This book is a much-needed rebuttal of the current discourse surrounding education. The language of incessant quantitative assessment has become the dominant rhetoric around education, and it now threatens to imperil higher education as it has primary and secondary education. Readers should be aware that this is not an easy read, but consider it your civic duty to familiarize yourself with the issue so you may hold politicians and public pundits responsible for their heretofore irresponsible polices in reference to education as well as policies that are responsible for lower wages and a lower standard of living for middle- and working-class Americans.
“American middle-class living standards are threatened not because workers lack competitive skills but because the richest amongst us have seized the fruits of productivity growth, denying fair shares to the working- and middle-class Americans” (166). College graduates are not in short supply. Underemployment is the new norm. The gap between college grad wages and high school grad wages is due to falling real wages of high school grads rather than demand for college grads. Manufacturing job are gone, but low wages in the new service economy is because of the lack of labor organizations assuring living wages, health insurance, and pensions, not because those working in the service sector are less hardworking or less skilled at what they do. We, as a society, have simply abandoned the “norm of equality” as a common goal. More education is not the answer to what ails us.
The current focus on quantitative assessment is misguided and counterproductive. Economists, sociologists, and management theorists caution against accountability systems that rely on numerical measures. If you are attentive, it is politicians and non-specialists who demand quantitative accountability; they do so in contradistinction to the opinion of experts. The authors point out that the Soviet Union employed quantitative accountability extensively; it was not a successful policy. Our history has not been successful either; for instance, body counts as a measure of victory in Vietnam. Campbell’s Law states that “the more any quantitative social indicator is used for social decision-making, the more subject it will be to corruption pressures and the more apt it will be to distort and corrupt the social passions it is intended to monitor” (77). In other words, quantitative assessment leads to goal distortion, gaming, and corruption.
The appraisal of an educational system must be its impact on its community. Should a library be evaluated by the number of books circulated or by the quality of books circulated? For instance, a library that contains the complete oeuvre of Ann Coulter, but not a single volume by Martha Nussbaum is not serving the needs of its community. The goals of America’s educational system has been, in addition to basic academic knowledge and skills, critical thinking, appreciation of the arts and literature, social skills, citizenship and civil responsibility, emotional and physical health, and, most importantly, the ability to discern the difference between demagoguery and reasoned democratic debate. These are the essentials. Others have argued that success is measured by the inculcation of shared democratic virtues, such as compassion, inclusiveness, equality, and a rational self-governing character.
This book is a much-needed rebuttal of the current discourse surrounding education. The language of incessant quantitative assessment has become the dominant rhetoric around education, and it now threatens to imperil higher education as it has primary and secondary education. Readers should be aware that this is not an easy read, but consider it your civic duty to familiarize yourself with the issue so you may hold politicians and public pundits responsible for their heretofore irresponsible polices in reference to education as well as policies that are responsible for lower wages and a lower standard of living for middle- and working-class Americans.
August 7, 2011
Although most parents are happy with their child's public school and have been for a long time, since the 80s the GOP has made a bludgeon out of our "failing schools." (Then, according to Bill Bennett, we were falling behind Japan because of our schools. Try not to laugh.) No Child Left Behind was an effort to bring accountability and ostensible objectivity in the debate about public schools. But, as this insightful book makes clear, only a fraction of what kids are supposed to learn is measured by NCLB's tests. This creates distortions of teaching to the tests. And while it was at least partially intended to help poor kids in struggling schools, the material effect has been that middle class and wealthy kids get a well rounded education while poor kids get simply basic skills. Rothstein, et al. give some solid suggestions of how quantitative accountability can be expanded and mixed with necessary qualitative measures such as teacher observations by an outside body.
October 10, 2011
Hindsight is 20/20, but even still it's hard to understand how our elected representatives allowed No Child Left Behind to get created in the first place. Rothstein provides dozens of reasons why it was doomed to fail, particularly highlighting the disconnect between the eight goals of education that the United States has striven for during the last century and an educational system that's focused only on teaching basic skills. This book would have been even better, I think, if Rothstein had provided examples of what constituted a proficient answer to the same question on two different state exams, and how those differences resulted in different qualities of education (e.g. 8th graders in New York learned to write organized essays while their counterparts in Pennsylvania didn't even receive spelling instruction).
November 2, 2012
I would suggest that anyone who has anything to do with education policy at the local, state, and national level read this book, but as Rothstein points out, the lack of sophistication in our current political climate means that even were policymakers to read this book, if it didn't already align with what they want to believe, it will more than likely just be discarded.
Instead, I would encourage everyone who votes and is interested in having a realistic and fair system of accountability for public education to read this book. Rothstein does an excellent job of distilling the goals of public education and analyzing how our current system of accountability fails. He concludes by suggesting what it would really take to make public education accountable.
Instead, I would encourage everyone who votes and is interested in having a realistic and fair system of accountability for public education to read this book. Rothstein does an excellent job of distilling the goals of public education and analyzing how our current system of accountability fails. He concludes by suggesting what it would really take to make public education accountable.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews