"There is an implicit assumption that none of the critics' views and beliefs are valid."
It's always a big temptation to turn the position of people on the other side of a debate into a caricature. That's what's happening right now in our discussions of education reform -- and in particular Goals 2000. But this approach shuts down discussion and makes it extremely difficult to come to reasonable conclusions.
Rae Young Bond, a former director of public affairs for the National Governors' Association (NGA) and an evangelical Christian, believes that education reform is too important to be debated in this way. In a recent NGA report, "Voices from the Field: Communicating with the Public About Education Reform," Bond admits that she shares the uneasiness about certain aspects of school reform felt by many people on the right: "I have real concerns about the schools' evaluating my child's self-perception or self-esteem, his interpersonal skills, or other affective areas. In some areas, proposed outcome-based education measures have clearly gone too far, making all of the measures suspect to some in the current climate of distrust."
On the other hand, Bond also supports the National Education Goals: "I want the schools to evaluate my son's performance in mathematics, science, grammar and writing. I believe the National Education Goals are important because I need some valid criteria by which to judge whether my son is gaining the knowledge he needs to succeed. Indeed, what should a ninth grader be doing in mathematics?" And she worries that people on the right and left have gotten so caught up in stereotyping each other (and scoring points based on these stereotypes) that we are forfeiting the possibility of talking to each other and staking out common ground:
The rhetoric on both sides of the issue threatens real communication that could build on the shared concerns of parents and citizens across the political spectrum and build real support for the changes needed to improve the education system in the United States.
Bond sees this tendency in the discussions of school reform she has been reading:
... much of the literature on building public support for education reform largely deals with finding ways to work around the opposition. There is an implicit assumption that none of the critics' views and beliefs are valid, that they are obstacles to be avoided or moved. It also seems to assume that all opposition to education reform is part of a larger political and/or religious agenda.
Bond also knows from her own experience how some "school reformers" see the "religious right." Several months ago, she was part of a discussion about building public support for education reform, and when the stereotypes about "right-wing extremists" who are "pursuing a social agenda beyond education" got particularly thick, she identified herself as an evangelical Christian. People seemed taken aback, she says, and after the meeting, one of them "noted with wonder that she appreciated my remarks and was quite surprised that I was an evangelical Christian because I was so 'intelligent."'
Undoubtedly there are people who live up to the stereotype of the religious bigots who raise their own children not to ask questions and would like to make sure other people's kids are raised in the same way. But Bond believes that most Christian parents do not have a political agenda. They want what the overwhelming majority of other parents want -- safe schools with orderly classrooms where children can learn worthwhile content and parents can be involved in their kids' education.
Bond does not believe that there are no differences between the various sides debating the best way to improve public education or that these differences are unimportant -- far from it. And she is not talking about papering over genuine disagreements but about listening to people to see what they are really saying. She quotes Martin Luther King's words about the importance of allowing tensions to surface so differences can be examined and negotiated and concludes that:
More real progress will be made if education reformers honestly examine the critics' concerns, rather than disregarding them out of hand based on preconceptions about the critics or unquestioning support of the way we do things here. And the critics need to step back and take a hard look at themselves.
These are difficult issues, emotional issues, because they affect the thing dearest to each of us -- our children, all children. We must not discount people on either side of the issue because of who they are, because of what religious beliefs they hold, or because of their fears and concerns for their children ....
We can improve education and we can ensure a future of our children, but only if we listen with good faith, and reconsider if there are lines and boundaries we have crossed inappropriately.
While we argue, our children are being lost.