Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by n1 on Sunday June 18 2017, @11:08PM   Printer-friendly
from the telling-half-the-story dept.

Diane Ravitch, a top public education advocate, reports via AlterNet:

This month, the Public Broadcasting System is broadcasting a "documentary" that tells a one-sided story, the story that [Trump's Secretary of Education] Betsy DeVos herself would tell, based on the work of free-market advocate Andrew Coulson. Author of "Market Education", Coulson narrates "School, Inc.", a three-hour program, which airs this month nationwide in three weekly broadcasts on PBS.

Uninformed viewers who see this slickly produced program will learn about the glories of unregulated schooling, for-profit schools, teachers selling their lessons to students on the Internet. They will learn about the "success" of the free market in schooling in Chile, Sweden, and New Orleans. They will hear about the miraculous charter schools across America, and how public school officials selfishly refuse to encourage the transfer of public funds to private institutions. They will see a glowing portrait of South Korea, where students compete to get the highest possible scores on a college entry test that will define the rest of their lives and where families gladly pay for after-school tutoring programs and online lessons to boost test scores. They will hear that the free market is more innovative than public schools.

What they will not see or hear is the other side of the story. They will not hear scholars discuss the high levels of social segregation in Chile, nor will they learn that the students protesting the free-market schools in the streets are not all "Communists", as Coulson suggests. They will not hear from scholars who blame Sweden's choice system for the collapse of its international test scores. They will not see any reference to Finland, which far outperforms any other European nation on international tests yet has neither vouchers nor charter schools. They may not notice the absence of any students in wheelchairs or any other evidence of students with disabilities in the highly regarded KIPP charter schools. They will not learn that the acclaimed American Indian Model Charter Schools in Oakland does not enroll any American Indians, but has a student body that is 60 percent Asian American in a city where that group is 12.8 percent of the student population. Nor will they see any evidence of greater innovation in voucher schools or charter schools than in properly funded public schools.

[...] This program is paid propaganda. It does not search for the truth. It does not present opposing points of view. It is an advertisement for the demolition of public education and for an unregulated free market in education. PBS might have aired a program that debates these issues, but "School Inc." does not.

It is puzzling that PBS would accept millions of dollars for this lavish and one-sided production from a group of foundations with a singular devotion to the privatization of public services. The decision to air this series is even stranger when you stop to consider that these kinds of anti-government political foundations are likely to advocate for the elimination of public funding for PBS. After all, in a free market of television, where there are so many choices available, why should the federal government pay for a television channel?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19 2017, @02:37AM (8 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19 2017, @02:37AM (#527694)

    Everyone in the Western Hemisphere is an immigrant or is descended from immigrants.
    White people didn't show up till a little over 500 years ago--at which point they started to oppress and murder the folks who had been here thousands of years.

    ...and the Iroquois, as an example, were more civilized than the Europeans who invaded and occupied their land.

    ...and a bunch of USAians are descended from criminals who were "transported" in order to get rid of them.

    Thinking that your shit don't stink makes you look like a fool.

    Your first link is broken

    WFM. 2 hits and more filtered as duped content.
    You're not in the USA?
    Court Rejects Arizona Sheriff's Unfounded Stereotype That Immigrants Are Criminals [thinkprogress.org]

    You're going to have to do better than that

    You first.
    Show me a legit study that proves different.

    -- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19 2017, @06:33PM (7 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19 2017, @06:33PM (#528074)

    Take your "Wee Wuz Kangs" nonsense somewhere else. The idea that any civilization was more advanced than Europeans is ludicrous. China might have been more advanced in the past, but 500 years ago it was all European nations that were the most advanced by leaps.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19 2017, @09:24PM (6 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 19 2017, @09:24PM (#528158)

      Europeans had superior weaponry but their social systems have been exploitive and predatory for millenia.

      Tribal life in North America, in particular, The Five Nations, was cooperative.
      The Iroquois, specifically, had a governmental system where the women made the decisions.
      Moms guiding the path a society takes makes for a better society.
      Guys tend to screw up things.

      -- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 20 2017, @05:11AM (5 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 20 2017, @05:11AM (#528338)

        Whoa, whoa there, buddy.

        First off, tribal life in North America was sometimes cooperative. At other times it was red, ravening war complete with mutilations, annihilations and your general rape and pillage.

        And as for women making decisions, I'll allow that I've known some very level-headed, far-sighted women. I've also known some batshit crazy women I wouldn't want anywhere near the levers of power. Or hell, near the levers of powertools. Especially chainsaws.

        If you're going to make any kind of case for limited access to power, how about making it more based on some measure of merit over and above ovary count?

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 20 2017, @05:28AM (4 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 20 2017, @05:28AM (#528344)

          I'll stick with months of pregnancy as the best metric.
          Having a person emerge from your body tends to make you have a better appreciation for what happens to that person.

          I've seen far too many muscle-headed testosterone-driven nincompoops to want to have them in charge.

          powertools. Especially chainsaws

          Pretty sure they didn't have those back then.

          -- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 20 2017, @02:35PM (2 children)

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 20 2017, @02:35PM (#528458)

            Commies are sexists. Who knew?

            No, seriously, months of pregnancy? That's your metric for civic virtue? Sucks for the infertile. Mother Nature and Gewg have decided that you're not good enough for a vote!

            ... it's hard to even parody, it's so silly.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 20 2017, @07:31PM (1 child)

              by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 20 2017, @07:31PM (#528672)

              It worked and worked well for centuries.

              After you've given birth, we'll talk.

              sexists

              After I've also heard you condemning patriarchies, we'll talk.
              Until then, I'll consider you to be among the muscle-headed testosterone-driven nincompoops.

              -- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 23 2017, @05:42AM

                by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 23 2017, @05:42AM (#529859)

                Feudalism worked, and worked well, for centuries, in multiple different societies across human history. Patriarchal feudalism, even.

                That doesn't mean it's something to advocate.

                Oh, and what the hell, since I'm here, I'll go on the record: sexism bad. Patriarchy bad. Still doesn't mean that matriarchy is worth anything more than patriarchy. Just because fire hurts doesn't mean ice doesn't as well.

          • (Score: 1) by khallow on Friday June 23 2017, @04:00AM

            by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Friday June 23 2017, @04:00AM (#529814) Journal

            I'll stick with months of pregnancy as the best metric. Having a person emerge from your body tends to make you have a better appreciation for what happens to that person.

            And the obvious rebuttal here is "Think of the children" [wikipedia.org]. There have been plenty of stupid things done for the cause of protecting kids (including in no particular order, racism, war on drug, book burnings, getting scared into groupthink, and being tough on victimless crimes. The main problem here is that while you might get a better appreciation for what happens to another person, society is more than you and your kid(s). That connection to your child is a massive conflict of interest.

            And given the number of screwed up mothers out there, I don't see that having children helps that much. If you can learn from experience and aren't given to a variety of dodgy hysterias and delusions, then sure, you could be a good leader. But that would be the case whether or not you have children.