[lbo-talk] Fighting NCLB, etc.

[Miles Jackson]

Alan Rudy wrote:
> Miles,
>
> I'm still not following.  In a world where public institutions are under
> deep fiscal stress, the kinds of efficiency being demanded by those pushing
> for accountability and testing does two things... it provides metrics for
> the explicitly anti-quasi-socialist people running such institutions to
> measure who is most efficient, discipline those who are less efficient and
> intensify and speed-up the demands made on employees.
>
> The problem as every critique of progressive scientism has pointed out is
> that the definition of efficiency is fundamentally flawed.  The kinds of
> programs you are accepting define efficiency in short-term fiscal and
> financial terms and measure them by deeply flawed metrics.
>   
Then I'm not making myself clear.  I wholeheartedly reject the idea that 
we should define efficiency in short-term fiscal and financial terms and 
use deeply flawed metrics.  What I am arguing is that using resources 
effectively in a public institution contributes to the public good.  
Good assessment--not the poor practices you're excoriating--will help us 
more effectively carry out the mission of our public colleges and help 
our students learn. 

--Let me give you an example.  I work at a community college (my PSU 
email address is the result of a long-term part-time teaching gig 
there).  Based on assessment data, we're developing a first-year 
experience program to help first generation college students transition 
from pre-college courses to college courses and successfully complete 
their AA degree.  From the university perspective, I know getting a 
2-year degree may not sound like much, but that 2-year degree will 
positively impact the lives of these students.  Moreover, given that 
these students are mostly from socially disadvantaged groups, the 
program will allow us to allocate state resources to support the goals 
of social justice and social equity.  (Socialist redistribution!  
Quick!  Somebody alert Beck!)

See?  Assessment doesn't have to be some nefarious scheme to waste 
faculty time and privatize public institutions!  It depends on how we do 
it and how the data are used.  I agree that we need to carefully monitor 
this assessment work and make sure it's meaningful; however, rejecting 
it in toto is rejecting an institutional tool that we can use to help 
build a more humane society.

Miles