It’s no secret that if you don’t toe the philosophical line in many teacher education programs, you encounter hindrances that range from brick walls to ambushes to professional punji pits. Sometimes it’s the administration; sometimes professors; sometimes peers. And sometimes all three work together to make sure you get the message that freedom of thought is fine – as long as you think the same way as the School of Education.

It plays hell with one’s career in education.

Occasionally we hear about a student whose worldview isn’t as malleable as the EduWeenies would like.

Michele Kerr is a 40-something who applied to Stanford University’s Teacher Education Program and was admitted. After letting it be known that she wasn’t on board with every element of the Program’s ‘social justice’ tenets, the problems quickly mounted. She was threatened with having her offer of admission revoked, including planning legal action to see that through. She was railroaded into being an enemy of the program, with administrators citing that students even felt uncomfortable sitting near her in classes because of her anti-progressive stances. The final straw was when the Program demanded a login and password for the blog on which she wrote anonymously about her challenges both with the program and the school environment in which she was training.

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education [FIRE] – a champion of freedom in academia – stepped in. As they have so many times, they set the offenders straight and Kerr was guaranteed fair treatment. Adam Kissel of FIRE summarized the issue:

“Like STEP, too many education programs today are teaching by words and deeds that only one orthodoxy or ideology is acceptable in future teachers,” Kissel said. “This refusal to accept alternative views is no way to prepare teachers to cultivate effective citizens in our democracy. Fortunately, senior administrators stepped in to set things right for Michele Kerr.”

You can read FIRE’s press release about the case: Victory for Freedom of Speech at Stanford: Student Graduates Despite Ed School Efforts to Revoke Admission, Investigate Private Blog, and Declare Student Unfit for Teaching.

That an outfit even has to investigate an issue warranting a title like that should make you balk – and it’s more common than you think.

The Washington Post’s Jay Mathews should also be praised for swallowing that most bitter pill and highlighting Kerr’s case even though he’s on a different philosophical track. He gives a well-detailed account of Kerr’s saga in “They Messed With the Wrong Blogger.”

Too few people, both inside and outside of the education game, understand how common this is – and how pervasive social justice theories are in schools of education. But we’re not just talking about pointy-headed academics who regard 1968 as the high-water mark of American life; it shows up in everyday classes, too.

You know, like “frequently” discussing sexuality in your kid’s geometry/trigonometry class.

Taica Hsu is a 2006 alumnus of STEP. He teaches math at Mission High School, part of the San Francisco Unified School District, in the city’s Mission District. The setting:

“Mission High School has the distinction of being the first comprehensive high school in San Francisco and the first such school west of the Rocky Mountains. The first building was formally dedicated in 1897. Mission High School is proud of its rich history and we have our very own museum on campus which highlights the evolution of Mission High over the past 100+ years. Located in the heart of the Mission District in San Francisco, Mission High is proud of its ethnic diversity and we try to instill positive social values, acceptance and tolerance in our students.”

And “in [Hsu's] world, trigonometry points to justice.”

A MissionLoc@l article about Hsu’s classroom offers an inside view into how STEP students/teachers – and those in similar programs – approach education:

“On one wall, of his purple-painted classroom, posters proclaim the ills of war and social stratification. On another, algebra students’ projects statistically break down the injustices of homeless, drugs and teen pregnancy.

“My ultimate goal is to make students aware of the inequities in society,” he says. “I want to make them want to change their place in society.””

I’d rather they just learned math, but such trivialities are increasingly displaced by the pet projects of the education game’s social engineers.

“And in his class, where a rainbow flag hangs in the back of the room and the teacher wears a “No on 8? pin more than a week after the measure has passed, sexuality also comes up.

Gilberto [a student] had never met an openly-gay person before coming to Hsu’s class, he says. He thought homosexuality was “weird,” and he balked at the idea of having Hsu as geometry teacher.”

I’m pleased that Gilberto is more accepting and tolerant than he was on day 1 – after all, he’ll encounter people of all sorts throughout the course of his life. But Hsu’s efforts impinge on the authority of parents to address these issues at home. Simply put, I’d rather talk to my child about the merits and drawbacks of Prop 8 than have it woven into a lesson about trigonometric proofs.

Extracurricular clubs and events provide opportunities for students to go beyond rigid academic disciplines – and for Hsu to extend a social justice program that includes fostering a ‘them vs. us’ strain of victimization:

““He knows what it’s like to be discriminated against, just like us,” Gilberto says, with “us” meaning all undocumented immigrants. “He relates to us. He understands. So even though it doesn’t look like it, we both have something in common.”

Discrimination is everywhere – perhaps Mr. Hsu would allow me to come in and talk to the kids about Southwest London’s contempt for American, George W. Bush-supporting Republicans who enjoy country music and operate with a decidedly-rural panache?

It’s not all serious, thoughtful curriculum, though – sometimes he and the kids just dress up in drag:

“Hsu encourages awareness of queer issues on campus. He is the faculty sponsor of the gay-straight alliance, which hosts a drag show to honor the Day of Silence in the spring.”"

Surely Mission High School has so much time and so many resources for these forays because they’ve outperformed every other school in the SFUSD, routinely topping the charts in academic performance?

No. Mission High is one of the lowest-performing schools in the District, having received a rating of 1 out of 10 – with 1 being the lowest possible score – in the 2008 Academic Performance Index Report from the California Department of Education. The June Jordan School for Equity competes with Mission High for that last rung on the SFUSD ladder. And the problem isn’t that Mission High has a large population of non-native English speakers and English Language Learners [ELL] – Moscone Elementary, which, according to Mission Loc@l, has a majority population of ELLs, scored a 9 out of 10.

It isn’t necessarily Hsu’s fault – we have no idea how his efforts contribute to those scores. What we do know is that STEP and its graduates would do well to re-evaluate their priorities if they want to institute the fairness and commitment to academic achievement that they purport to uphold.

Or they can marginalize the Michele Kerrs of the education world, mix homosexual marriage rights with Euclidean geometry, dress in drag and retreat from abysmal test scores. Our students won’t be prepared for college, but at least they’ll be ready for the Folsom Street Fair.

Greg Lippman and Jennifer Andaluz together provided the brains, muscle and elbow grease to found Downtown College Prep, the subject of Joanne Jacobs’ “Our School: The Inspiring Story of Two Teachers, One Big Idea, and the School That Beat the Odds”. To get the ball rolling, they created a small summer institute that would establish and test the themes that would drive DCP. From page 25:

“To connect with potential students and parents and try out their ideas, Lippman and Andaluz organized Summer Bridge, a free skill-building program for underachieving middle schoolers. Lippman’s parents donated the money for the program; San Jose State provided classroom space. Middle school counselors in San Jose recommended students, mostly Hispanic, who were struggling in school.

Expecting the usual summer snooze, Bridge students found themselves sweating through reading and math skills in an academic boot camp with Lippman and Andaluz as their drill sergeants. But, once they got over the shock, students got hooked on the attention and the sense of purpose. Their parents wanted more. Bridge parents began meeting with Lippman and Andaluz to discuss a charter high school.”

They did that without a fat, taxpayer-driven bank account. Makes you wonder what a public school with a $27,000 per-pupil budget is capable of – and why were aren’t seeing it.

Chapter 1 of Joanne Jacobs’ “Our School: The Inspiring Story of Two Teachers, One Big Idea, and the School That Beat the Odds” introduces San Jose’s Downtown College Prep, a charter school serving mostly Mexican immigrant families. DCP takes underperformers and develops them to succeed at a 4-year college or university. From page 9:

“”At DCP [Downtown College Prep], low achievers aren’t told they’re doing well; they’re told they can do better, if they work hard. The school doesn’t boost self-esteem with empty praise. Instead, Lippman and his teachers encourage what is known as “efficacious thinking,” the belief that what a person does has an effect. If you study, you’ll do better on the test than if you goof off. Work hard in school, and you can get to college. You have control over your future. So, stop making excuses and get your act together. The complete lack of sugarcoating may seem harsh to outsiders, but students seem to appreciate the honesty.”

Kids are the best fraud detectors alive. Honesty shows love and sincere concern. It’s no wonder that students at DCP – or anywhere, for that matter – prefer respectful honesty as they develop.

From the introduction [p. 2] of Joanne Jacobs’ “Our School: The Inspiring Story of Two Teachers, One Big Idea, and the School That Beat the Odds” comes the following passage. It’s sober, honest commentary on the reality of failing schools.

“Parents who have money can exercise school choice, either by buying a home in an area with good public schools or by paying tuition.

But less-affluent parents are stuck with what they get. If the local school is led by a distant bureaucrat, staffed by inexperienced or burned-out teachers, whipsawed by education fads, and dominated by bullies, parents are told reforms are on the way: Just wait a few years, and then a few more.

If the school is just second-rate, parents are fed happy talk about how everyone’s special and those nasty test scores don’t indicate the real learning kids are doing. Why, they’re going to be lifelong learners! It doesn’t matter that they’ve learned nothing so far. They can look it up on the internet.

Nobody says: “Juan can’t read or write well enough to fill out a job application; he doesn’t have the math to qualify as an apprentice carpenter, electrician or plumber. He can go to community college, because they’ll take anybody with a pulse. But he’ll be stuck in remedial classes to learn what he was supposed to learn in elementary or middle school. The odds are he’ll get discouraged and quit.” That, they don’t say.

… and when someone does say it, the victimized cry foul. Not the truly victimized, either.

And if you’re new to Twitter or aren’t sure how to get started, check out TwiTip’s 10 Easy Steps for Twitter Beginners. Give it a whirl!

Now for the Great Links… and some real stinkers that also deserve attention.

Via EIA, Andrew Sullivan and Michelle Rhee – two peas in a pod? Believe it or not, yes. I suppose even Sullivan gets to be sensible every once in a while. Blind squirrel, broken clock, etc. etc.

There aren’t too many men teaching K-12, reports Eduflack. In MA, fewer than 25% of K-12 teachers are men. And it’s everywhere, too – in April 2007 I wrote a post about male elementary teachers in NY dropping to 9%, a 40-year low. Some folks like MenTeach have been trying to raise awareness for a while now. Check them out and subscribe.

Ted Tedesco of Woodbury, Vermont is a hero. He’s worked to restore the Pledge of Allegiance in that small school district. The admins’ solution to his request is ridiculous, but at least everyone sees it. That, and a generation of kids in Woodbury knows how important it is to defend their country and their culture. As I wrote in the comments of the Core Knowledge post:

“A few months ago I attended a reunion banquet for a tiny, rural high school that closed shop during the consolidation efforts of the 1950s. Their meeting included the Pledge of Allegiance. When the Pledge came up in the agenda, all of the ~100 in attendance rose – and some with great difficulty, as they were in their 80s and 90s – to recite it.”

You know where I stand on this issue, and there’s a reason why I call the Green Mountain State “The People’s Republic of Vermont.” [Sorry, Jessie.]

Across the pond, here’s why I like the Tories. They’ve got a plan to re-introduce a bit of rigor to GCSEs and A-levels. The GCSEs in particular have been gutted – remember this physics teacher begging the government via petition to return mathematical rigor to secondary physics?

“Hot Boys”? I’d prefer that EdSector’s Quick and the Ed bloggers had a bit more self-respect. I already have trouble taking them seriously – these post titles don’t help.

Schools suing bloggers? You betcha. PRO on HCPS links to a libel case against an unhappy parent. Well, if “libel” means “a school district seething when held accountable by the public.” Guess who won? [UPDATE: PRO on HCPS gives us a better link for schools suing bloggers.]

Litigation is expensive when you’re trying to fire a teacher, administrator or school employee. In nearby Utica, NY, Craig Fehlhaber’s hearings have cost the Utica City Schools $250,000 – and counting. If Fehlhaber wins, the district will likely have to reimburse his attorney’s fees as well. We went through the same process in Cooperstown several years ago. If you ever wondered why schools tend not to dismiss bad employees, now you’ve got one reason.

Dave at ‘Friends of Dave’ – a very sharp blog, subscribe with all deliberate speed – highlights some recent irony in California. The California Association of School Business Officers have a conference at which they’ll discuss our tough economic times and how their districts can cope. And that conference is at a hotel/spa/golf course in Newport Beach. Dave has a sensible take on it all, but c’mon, CASBO. He says, “It is a bit ironic that the people who are typically the ones telling their co-workers that they can’t have an extra ream of paper are the ones having a really nice time at a Hotel and Spa on the beach.” Agreed.

Victory in Iraq Day – November 22, 2008. ZombieTime has declared 11/22/08 VI Day and I’m with him 100%. Read his post to see why it’s appropriate to declare VI Day and you’ll see why I support it, too.

“Building a GREAT teaching workforce,” described by American Board for Certification of Teacher Excellence’s Dave Saba. Saba/ABCTE sing the praises – rightly – of a new report on the effectiveness of alternative certification programs.

Again, this is an education site – the issue here isn’t for or against Prop 8. The issue is a cup of education reporting, a dollop of honesty and a sprinkle of irony. Stay with me here, you lewd and lascivious types. It gets saucy at the end. [Note: "NSFW" = a link is "not safe for work."]

In “If Gay Marriage is Allowed, Will Schools Promote It?” NPR looked at the ad campaigns on both sides. In one popular television spot [YouTube link] features:

“…a young girl who brings home a book called King & King.

“Mom, guess what I learned in school today,” she says in the ad. “I learned how a prince married a prince, and I can marry a princess!”

The ad was based on the real-life story of Robin and Robb Wirthlin, a Mormon couple living in Massachusetts, where gay marriage is legal. Two years ago, their son’s second-grade teacher read King & King to the class.”

Some say the ad is baseless fearmongering; others say it reflects the everyday reality of a legal redefinition of a societal norm.

In “Schools dragged into marriage debate,” Katy Murphy of The Education Report, a blog about Oakland’s schools, wrote:

“Whether you’re a campaign hack or just selling a home alarm system (or tires, or antidepressants, or disinfectant), scare tactics can really come in handy. And there’s probably no easier way to freak people out than to make them think their kids will be in harm’s way if they don’t vote a certain way or buy a certain product.”

One need not commit one’s life to textual exegesis to understand Murphy’s implication: supporters of Prop 8 are dishonest fearmongers [as are tire salesmen and those profit-hungry doctors, too?]. There are certainly over-the-top campaigners on Prop 8; Murphy, however, neglects to point out that those types are on both sides. Murphy cites the NPR article:

“National Public Radio did a story yesterday about how education has become swept up in the California campaign for Proposition 8, the same-sex marriage ban.”

Murphy is disingenuous once more. Education hasn’t “become swept up” in the Prop 8 debate; education is helping to push the broom – to the tune of $1.25 million from the California Teachers Association.

… and that was it. No mention of the Wirthlins’ MA case – despite it being explained clearly in the NPR piece to which she links – or any of a number of uncomfortable challenges that have either popped up already or surely will in the future. Murphy would like you to believe that the ad is a scare tactic based on irrational, hateful fundamentalism. She links to the YouTube response:

“Here’s the TV ad that prompted the story, followed by a response from State Superintendent Jack O’Connell.”

The ad is more than just a “response from State Superintendent Jack O’Connell.” It’s not a public service announcement by a state official; it’s a paid political advertisement produced and purchased by No On 8, Equality for All.

They write about the ‘scare tactics’ on their sister sites, too.

But what of O’Connell’s claims? Back to the NPR article:

“O’Connell says if Proposition 8 is defeated, that will have no bearing on the state’s education code. “There is no requirement, no mandate for any school in the state of California to have this [gay marriage] required as a course.”"

Very true, Superintendent O’Connell – though no one mentioned your straw man of “a course” being taught about gay marriage. One can assume safely that legislative decisions about society make their way into most classrooms implicitly or out of necessity. Consider that schools don’t have “a course” explaining how stealing private property is illegal, but it’s a lesson of our society, supported by law, that frequently pops up in schools. It will be no different [nor should it be, if Prop 8 is defeated] with a state’s legal ruling on marriage.

Murphy, seemingly horrified at any assertion for Prop 8, concludes:

“Do you think Prop. 8’s defeat — or passage — would have any real impact on education in California?”

Murphy could have peeped at her own website if she wanted to understand the concern some have when education and family values collide. When I accessed Murphy’s article, the right sidebar advertisement – just below that shiny, traditional apple-on-the-desk – was for Perry Mann’s 29th Annual Exotic Erotic Ball. Here’s a screenshot [click here for full-sized version]:

In case you haven’t attended, the Exotic Erotic Ball is “A Celebration of Flesh, Fetish and Fantasy,” and billed as “The World’s #1 Wildest, Sexiest Party.” You can view a generously tame [but still NSFW] photo gallery of the 2007 event here. OvaHere.com has a less-artistic, more realistic dump of [NSFW, either] photos from 2006′s Ball.

But this isn’t about Exotic Erotic Balls-past, it’s about what you get when you click an ad on The Education Report – for example, an ad on a disingenuous post about schools and values:

• Pricasso, the Penis Painter
• A dog with a sex toy in its mouth
• Dozens of barely-censored photos

Click the link and add to the list yourself.

Reading about public education on a news site [Bay Area News Group] and one click later you’re staring at a dog chewing on a dildo.

Ms. Murphy, you let me know if you  or anyone at the Bay Area News Group  would like to have a conversation about why some parents are worried about what their children encounter in even the most benign arenas.

I read Darren’s writeup about the CTA’s opposition to a fairly sensible bill – it closes a loophole that allows ‘no contest’ sex offenders to continue teaching.

A quick reminder: mixing criminals and children is a bad idea.

I was surprised that his post didn’t attract more attention. Then again, some of the most contentious, difficult, embarrassing issues in education tend to cause temporary blindness.

What’s this all about? From the bill itself:

A recent Associated Press (AP) study found that roughly 25% of all disciplinary actions against teachers involve sexual misconduct. In a study of all 50 states and the District of Columbia, the AP found 2,570 educators nationwide whose teaching credentials were revoked, denied, surrendered, or sanctioned following allegations of sexual misconduct. The study revealed that between 2001 and 2005, 313 California educators had their credential suspended or revoked for sexual misconduct. The study noted that while California law requires educators who plead guilty to, or are convicted of, specified sex, controlled substance, and violent felony offenses lose their credential, existing law allows educators who are convicted following a plea of “no contest” to those same crimes to undergo a discretionary review by the CTC to determine disposition of their credential instead of losing their credential automatically.

The CTA, which represents about 300,000 members in California, has a tagline of “Every child deserves a chance to learn and no child succeeds alone.” I’d say that sex offenders make it tougher to learn, but the CTA apparently wouldn’t agree. After all, no child succeeds alone.

The CTA’s argument rests on discrimination toward gays and lesbians [page 3-4 of this short PDF], but I don’t see how. Read the bill – if it’s there, I don’t see it. CTA Eileen and her union have done a miserable job explaining their case. If Eileen et. al. had done a tenth as good a job explaining the discrimination example as they’ve done whining about funding and praising Barack Obama, we [including the puzzled baby pictured at the top left] wouldn’t be nearly as confused.

Here’s Darren’s post in full – pop a Pepcid and go forth.

Keeping Sex Offenders Out of the Classroom

Sounds like a no-brainer, right? Well, the no-brainers at CTA oppose SB1105, which closes a loophole that currently lets certain sex offending teachers keep their credentials and continue teaching children.

Why does CTA oppose this bill? Because, they claim, it’s discriminatory against gays and lesbians. I found nothing in the bill that even hints at that (see first link above), but have since learned that there are more stringent penalties for pulling a Larry Craig than for pulling an Eliot Spitzer (hence the gay discrimination angle). The CTA is significantly overstating this case, though, in the 2nd link above.

Let’s look at who supports and opposes this bill–again, directly from the state web site above:

Support
Commission on Teacher Credentialing (Sponsor)
Association of California School Administrators
California District Attorneys Association
California School Boards Association
Los Angeles County Office of Education
Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office
Saddleback Valley Unified School District
San Francisco Unified School District

Opposition
American Civil Liberties Union
California Teachers Association
Equality California

I might agree that the penalties for sex crimes should be more consistent, but that’s not enough for me to oppose this legislation. Perfection is the enemy of the “good enough”.

Apparently the CTA thinks keeping gay and lesbian sex offenders employed is more important than keeping children away from sex offenders–and that’s all you really need to know about the CTA.

Congressman Mike Honda [Dem.] represents the 15th District in California – those of us outside the state can think of his district as Silicon Valley. Honda has been a teacher, principal and school board member, so public education isn’t just a hot topic for him.

Honda hosted a telephone town hall meeting about public education, and his office has made it available on his website. You can listen to the full call [about an hour] or individual questions.

I’m not convinced by many of Honda’s answers, and I tend to yawn at contradiction. At 24:07 in the call, Honda says:

24:07: “It’s not that the state [California] is cash-poor, it’s where the cash flows and how much of it – where it goes – and who controls it.”

Makes sense. But in answering a followup question submitted after the call:

“The greatest barrier to improving education is insufficient funding.”

There are certainly bigger sins than mixed messages in a town hall format, though.

Honda touches on the importance of teacher/principal quality around the 36th minute – and a telephone poll taken by listeners on the call showed that 70% saw teacher quality as more important to a school’s success than the school environment. I’d like to hear specifics about how Honda thinks California, or schools anywhere, can attract and maintain solid academic talent for its teachers and principals [especially those principals].

Having said that, this telephone town hall is an excellent feature. It’s cheap/easy to produce and is accessible to constituents, media and other interested parties – there’s no excuse for other members of Congress not to do the same.

Well done, Mike Honda – hopefully this is the first of many education telephone town hall events with you and other members of Congress. I’m not on board with many of your solutions, but I love the way you’re going about it.

From The Homeroom, the LA Times’ Southern CA Schools blog: The misnomer that is ‘teacher.’

One thing that education blogosphere is wonderful at is saying something and meaning nothing. Take, for example, this re-definition of ‘teacher’:

The problem with the label that educators have cornered themselves into is that it doesn’t provide a clear picture of what a teacher does. New teachers, student teachers and still developing teachers can teach until they are blue in the face and –- if they aren’t engaging their students –- not actually have a class of young people learning anything.

As a result, much of the beginning of the year, my classroom interaction with students is such that I try to make it clear to my students that we are a community of learners, committed toward common thematic and academic objectives. As such, I am aiding these students in their quest toward literacy and content proficiency.

Perhaps instead of framing the job as a “teacher” a new phrase would be more appropriate. I’m happy to hear your proposals. For now, I think I’ll try out “Learning Practitioner.”

… or you could stick with the unpretentious “teacher,” which works just fine. Relax, do your job, and the professional respect follows.

From InsideHigherEd.com: “The Innumeracy of Intellectuals.”

Professor Orzel, who blogs at Uncertain Principles, has a remarkable ability to restrain himself:

Ignorance of math can even be a source of a perverse sort of pride— the bit of the blog post that reminded me of this is a call-back to an earlier post in which he relates his troubles with math, and how he exploited a loophole in his college rules to graduate without passing algebra. To me that anecdote reads as more proud than shameful— less “I’m not good at math” and more “I’m clever enough to circumvent the rules.”

It’s not entirely without shame, of course.

Not without shame, indeed.

When I was in a Ph.D. program in the social sciences, I was floored by the innumeracy of my peers [and, at times, professors]. If I were a dean or provost, I’d expect that those to whom I awarded a doctorate would have a command of 10th grade math.

… and I’d be sorely disappointed.

From the Freedom of Information Committee Blog: “Cheap e-mail archiving software eliminates technical barriers to access.”

In some states – like New York and Florida – e-mail communications between public employees/servants are in the public domain. You can FOIL them because you’re entitled to them.

And if you ever request this information, you’ll likely get two reactions:

1. “What?” After which you explain that the information is public, and that you’d appreciate it in a timely fashion pursuant to the regulations in your State;

2. “What?” Followed by a litany of excuses, one of which is usually, “… but that’s too hard/costly to be practical.”

Sorry, public employees, but Waterford Technologies just eliminated your reliance on #2. For $99, a public institution can have unlimited licenses for e-mail archiving software.

#1, however, will still present itself nearly every time – such is life.

Teacher Jaime Escalante received the Presidential Medal for Excellence in Education in 1988. He gained notoriety when portrayed by Edward James Olmos in Stand and Deliver, the story of a tough, dedicated math teacher in Los Angeles. It’s a classic.

The moral of the story? When taught properly and when all parties are dedicated, anyone can succeed.

And, of course, the final score is one for the ages: Escalante et al.: 1; ETS: 0.

Take a look at a few bios of Escalante’s former students. They defied crass, ill-founded expectations and, with Escalante’s masterful guidance re: math and that other important discipline- life – they’ve done quite well.

The rise of Escalante’s math program in a LAUSD school is the stuff of education legend. Its collapse, however, is largely unknown. As Reason Magazine pointed out in its in-depth history of the program, it’s a shame.

I didn’t mind that South Park parodied Escalante a few weeks ago. Eric Cartman became Mr. Cartmenez, a capable instructor who guided his underperforming students in the ways of cheating. Infused with topical references to the New England Patriots cheating scandal, it was a lighthearted parody that poked a little fun without undermining the important work that Escalante is known for.

The Sacramento Bee posted today an interview with Mr. Escalante [hat tip: Intercepts]. Unfortunately for us, he now teaches in Bolivia, but he was back in the states to receive a Latino Spirit Award from the California Latino Legislative Caucus.

If there’s one thing you read today, make sure it’s this interview. Sound, common sense wisdom from funding to calling moms.

———-

Q: If you were a young man, would you choose to become a teacher again?

A: Absolutely. That’s the only thing I can do. Believe me, I had fun, especially when I used to deal with gang members or kids who weren’t motivated.

Before class and after class, I’d talk to them, to make them believe they could do it. I used to tell them, “Remember this: No one is better than you.”

Q: How do you feel about the term “hero”? Do you feel like a hero?

A: Not really. I’m just an honest man. An honorable man who did the assignment and the homework, because California gave me the chance.

Q: Do you have any regrets supporting Proposition 227 (the 1998 ballot measure that virtually ended bilingual education in public schools)?

A: I was in favor of monolingual language, and it was controversial in those days, because people thought I was going in the wrong direction. No. The tremendous success I had at Garfield High School was because I emphasized (English). I used to say, “Unfortunately, the test comes in one language, and you have to master that language.”

Q: Do you support the concept of a high school exit examination?

A: Yeah, I would say so, because when kids graduate … I assume that in four years, they’ll learn something. … What they have to do on the test is to emphasize their basic knowledge.

Q: Some say public education isn’t getting enough money. Others say money is not spent wisely. What do you think?

A: Money is not the problem. … We have to know how to spend it. We put too much money (in programs) that don’t achieve results. We waste a lot.

Q: What should California do about its dropout rate?

A: Schools alone cannot educate, they need the help of parents. … At Garfield High School, a high percentage of dropouts were kids who didn’t want to come to school. So I made them sign a contract.

And before that, I got in communication with their mom – mom is the one who calls the shots. I said, “Mom, … this is what we’re going to do, and you’re going to help me out. … I need you to control him. I’ll be calling you.”

Q: Advice to teenagers?

A: Set your goals and go for it. You’re going to have to go to college to be something. Otherwise, you’re going to be pumping gas all the time – and today, there’s no gas.