DIVERSITY IS ITS OWN REWARD

In EdBlog World, sometimes everyone talks about the same Thing at the same time. For the progenitor of said Thing, this is considered a success: you put something out there and people engage. Whether they fully agree with you or not, they’re talking and your name and ideas are bandied about. More Google hits for you, additional interviews and comments, more folks dropping by your website. It’s all good. 

I’m assuming that was Jay Greene’s purpose in submitting “Adding Up to Failure: Ed schools put diversity before math” to City Journal. The guy has a PhD. from Harvard—surely he knows how shabby this “research” was, how his conclusions are completely unsupported by any kind of valid statistical analysis. Indeed, most of the reactions to the piece focus on the fact that Greene and his co-author, Catherine Shock, played very fast and loose with data. Greene and Shock counted course titles in a cross-section of university ed-school catalogs and developed a multiculturalism-to-math ratio, by way of explaining unimpressive math achievement for U.S. students in PISA and other studies. Neither correlation nor causality have anything in common with this exercise, however.

In a subsequent interview in EdNews.Org, Greene equivocates, saying the calculations are “meant to amuse,” similar to a joke with a kernel of truth. Interviewer Michael Shaughnessy seems to be in on the chuckles, pitching Greene questions about the “three cheap, sleazy credits” a prospective teacher would get for a course in multiculturalism or diversity. In the City Journal piece, Greene and Shock throw out a sop to those who care about diversity, noting that students should learn to “appreciate a variety of cultures.”

Excuse me, but that perception—courses in multiculturalism are all about valuing other cultures—is what’s really wrong in all of the brouhaha over this piece. Has anybody participating in this discourse seriously looked at the changing demographics of students in American public schools? Surely Jay Greene understands the dire situation around hiring qualified, effective teachers for high-needs schools, teachers who are able to communicate with students with different backgrounds, not to mention different languages or life goals? The culture we need to value here is our own, the rapidly changing world where tolerance and the ability to maneuver and connect globally supercede these little their-test-scores-are-higher-than-our-test-scores contests. 

I hate to use this phrase, but what Greene has done here is recycle the most hackneyed false dichotomy in education policy: content knowledge vs. pedagogical effectiveness. A quick skim through syllabi at some of the university ed programs Greene and Shock scorn reveals that some well-meaning professors are looking to assist equally well-meaning novice teachers willing to take on challenging assignments. You can certainly argue with the rigor of course content, but the intent of requiring pre-service teachers to become aware of diversity issues in modern schools, or build a tool kit of strategies to cope, is unassailable. Teachers cannot function without deep content knowledge, but if they can’t communicate effectively or build genuine relationships with their own students, all the trigonometry in the world doesn’t help. Being the father of three himself, you’d think Dr. Greene would realize this. 

For an excellent summary of this piece, see fellow Teacher Leaders Network blogger Renee Moore’s reaction.

Comments

[john holland]

I guess this joke at the expense of ed schools and teaching in general is funnier to people who don't actually have to deal with diversity or the difficult skills involved with valuing all types of learning and learners. Just the type of Ivory tower jousting that makes us teacher types want to hurl burning vats of pink soap at the ed wonk elite.

[john holland]

I guess this joke at the expense of ed schools and teaching in general is funnier to people who don't actually have to deal with diversity or the difficult skills involved with valuing all types of learning and learners. Just the type of Ivory tower jousting that makes us teacher types want to hurl burning vats of pink soap at the ed wonk elite.

[Nancy Flanagan]

Thanks for posting, John. What's interesting is the increasing dominance of the Econ and Public Policy departments over Ed schools in shaping opinion. Ivory Tower jousting, indeed--with the home team taking it on the chin.

An economist friend claims that they have better theories and qualitative data analysis tools than educators. So--they win most arguments about ed policy.

Not, however, using the lousy data analysis techniques that Jay Greene was endorsing.