We are what we appear to value.  Reading Proficiency and Censorship.

Simultaneously the Wisconsin legislature is considering a bill to improve reading instruction for all children and a bill to limit what schools can provide for children to read.  Two bills each with its own perspective on how the state should fulfill its commitment to educating children.  One bill attempts to apply the best practices of the science of reading to ensure all children can be proficient readers.  One bill tells schools to limit what they provide for children to read and see.  Each bill uses the power of the state to transform how schools impact children.  Each bill is an expression of what we value.

What do we know?

Our WI constitution says the state is responsible for establishing and supervising public education.  State statute 118.01(2) outlines the state’s educational goals.  These include instruction in 118.01(2)(a) the basic skills of reading, arithmetic, listening, writing, and speaking, analytical skills to think rationally and solve problems, a body of knowledge in literature, fine arts, and the natural sciences, skills and attitudes for lifelong intellectual activity, and knowledge in computer science including the social impact of computers.

https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/118

What is being proposed?

Representative Joel Kitchens is spearheading Assembly Bill 321 to improve child literacy by creating an Office of Literacy, focusing teacher prep programs on science-based reading instruction, establishing and funding literacy coaching, and standardizing early literacy screening through grade 3 assessments.  Equally important to the use of phonics-based reading is the ban on schools from using three cueing strategies in teaching children to read.  Every child in 4K-grade 3 will be taught how to decode words and encode sounds – to read and write independently.  Each child will be taught the mechanics of literacy and strategies for building vocabulary.  A child’s ability will no longer be determined by her school’s reading program preferences but by best practice. 

The bill institutes change in teacher education and professional development to ensure that teachers know how to teach phonics-based reading.  Today most teachers do not teach phonics as it was not part of their baccalaureate preparation or their school district’s PD.  Most teachers learned to teach whole language or blended reading strategies dominated reading instruction.  Teachers will learn to teach and be accountable for teaching all children to read using the science of reading concepts and skills.

https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2023/related/proposals/ab321

State Senators Andre Jacque, Romaine Quinn, and Cory Tomczyk presented a bill that would cause schools to remove books and material that are “deemed harmful or offensive to minors from public schools and libraries” and “enact policies that ensure minors do not view harmful materials on public computers”.

Under the guise of parent rights to supervise what their children learn, the bill requires schools to publish their curricular materials so that parents may object to what they deem harmful and/or remove their child from that class instruction. 

https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2023/proposals/sb10

One bill supports our educational goals and the other subverts those goals.

I fully agree with Joel Kitchens when he says “Students will succeed by returning to the way most of us learned to read.  I truly consider this to be the most important thing that I ever worked on in the legislature”.  AB 321 advances the educational goals of our state by improving how we teach all children to read. 

Senate Bill 10 contradicts our educational goals to provide all children with opportunities to consider, think, and become intellectual problem solvers.  It ignores or does not trust the authority of school districts to supervise the materials they provide for children to read and see and experience in school.  Instead, this bill creates a new right for a parent to make that decision not just for that parent’s child but for all children.

SB10 is Wisconsin’s effort to keep up with other conservative-dominated state legislatures with book banning.  If successful, the bill ensures that schoolbooks and materials can be censored by a single parent or small group of parents.  It also places school boards in the bullseye of the issue to ban or not ban books.

https://www.wortfm.org/following-national-trend-wisconsin-lawmakers-introduce-book-ban/

Where is our educational high ground?

As a former school superintendent and school board president, I applaud Assembly Bill 321 and shun Senate Bill 10.  The high ground of public education is to teach children how to think and to resolve issues.  It is low ground to tell children what to think and to insulate them from issues they should, with appropriate instructional support, be able to consider. 

Our state constitution explains the educational goals of a public education in Chapter 118, section 118.01.  118.01(d) says “Each school board shall provide an instructional program designed to give pupils: (8) Knowledge of effective means by which pupils may recognize, avoid, prevent and halt physically or psychologically intrusive or abusive situations which may be harmful to pupils including child abuse and child enticement.  Instruction shall be designed to help pupils develop positive psychological, emotional, and problem-solving responses to such situations and avoid relying on negative, fearful, and solely reactive methods of dealing with such situations.  Instruction shall include information on available school and community prevention and intervention assistance or services and shall be provided to pupils in elementary schools.”

The high ground for our state is to implement the goals of its statutes.  Schools must constantly improve how we teach children while we constantly are vigilant regarding the educational materials we use for that education.  The state constitution gives schools the authority and responsibility to do these, and the role of legislation is to enhance not impede schools.  The constitution commends parents to work with local school boards to understand and advocate for the education of all children.

The high ground for local school boards is to constantly supervise the materials and experiences used to educate its students.   When a challenge arises the board can engage in an appropriate conversation with the conviction that the district has and is meeting its responsibilities for the entirety of our state’s educational goals.  We teach all children to become proficient in basic skills and to consider, think, problem solve and make decisions regarding their school experiences.  We do not teach them what to think or how to value their experiences.

When the Edges Crumble, We All Fall Down

Schooling has never been agnostic.  The egalitarian notion that “a mind is a terrible thing to waste” has always been slightly twisted to mean “as long as that mind thinks like my mind”.  As a generalization, we purposed each generation to create enough educated and productive citizens to support our continuing commonwealth.  So much for intentions. 

Within the past decade, the conceptual walls of restraint that have kept schooling and America’s best interests in touch with each other are failing.  The edges of our restraints are crumbling as they are cleaved by narrow-minded self-aggrandizers.  As a result, our enduring concept of an “American Way of Life” is shrinking into regional pockets of “my way of life”.  We no longer have a critical mass of self-balancing integrity, but loud spoken factions wanting public education to espouse their selective self-interests.  When the edges of our social contract fail, and they are, we will fall down.

What we know about us.

In truth, the education of children always has been self-interested.

For several millennia, royals learned to read, write, and count and the masses mumbled.  Property and wealth were guarded by laws interpreted only by men who could read and write it.  Illiterate people were easier to rule.  This social construct for education migrated to America.

The first school in the English colonies, the Boston Latin School of 1635, taught a narrow curriculum to a small number and group of children for specific community purposes.  To fill in the blanks, Boston’s town elders wanted their sons only to have a classical education like their father’s education so that sons could take their rightful place in the elite political, social, and economic life of New England.  Latin, Greek, the Puritan Bible, and the arithmetic of commerce.  White, Puritan, propertied boys only, please.

Up and down the English colonies, this was how early efforts in public education began.  New England merchants, middle colony merchants and landowners, and southern planters each assured an education for the propagation of their regional ways of life.

A change began in our post-Revolutionary expansion into western lands.  Early 1800s immigration brought peoples who aspired for economic and social mobility contrasted with the protective, conservatism of our colonial forefathers.  The Northwest Ordinance of 1787 said “…Article 3.  Religion, morality, knowledge, being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, school and the means for education shall forever be encouraged” and ideas of a more universal education to support an expanding nation crept into public ed, slowly but not for everyone.  This was the 1800s.  Enslaved people were purposefully kept illiterate.  American Indian children were consigned to boarding schools to educate native culture out of their future.  Gradually, white girls were enrolled in school.  Public education though still white, discarded its denominational and propertied requirements.

Eastern cities used compulsory school attendance laws to manage millions of immigrant children.  Truancy laws were lax when children were an essential and necessary low-cost labor force for mill work. Truancy enforcement became stronger when the need for literate, voting adults was required.  An eighth-grade education was the American educational capstone through the 1930s.  The need for a high school education was confirmed only after America entered WW2 and too many draftees lacked the basic, secondary education our military required.  Sound cynical?  It was. 

For the most part, 19th and 20th century America shaped our public ed into this:  an assured child daycare system that freed adults for work, an elementary-level education that prepared adolescent children for adult employment, a literate population able to read newspapers and magazines for their daily news, and an inculcated understanding of white, mainstream history and non-parochial values.

Still sound cynical?  It was.  It still is.  Politics shapes educational practices constantly.

Public education served special interests beyond literacy.  No matter the need, public ed has been our conduit for government taking significant, universal actions to stem perceived national emergencies.  When President Truman signed the National School Lunch Program, he not only fed school children, he provided a federal subsidy to our nation’s post-war farmers that continues today.  We eradicated polio in the 50s by lining up every boy and girl in school for a shot of Salk and a sugar cube of Sabin vaccines.  Children were a captive public health clientele.  The President’s Physical Fitness Awards became the standard in school PE to assure a constant readiness of fit, young men for military service.  A letter and lapel pin from Ike kept me doing pushups for years.  When the Russians launched Sputnik, we strengthened high school math and science curricula and enrollment in German language resurged because German was the language of physicists.  Public ed was a launching pad for the space race.  Schooling has been an agent for economic stabilization, public health, national defense, and international competition, forever.

In 2002 No Child Left Behind was a knee-jerk response to the downward trending of domestic NAEP and   international PISA test scores.  Politicians feared that the assessed education of American children was failing to keep up with the scores achieved by children in China.  If this continued, the United States would lose its status as the leading international economy.  Nationally mandated curricular standards and testing swamped schooling for the next decade.  We studied Finland’s educational delivery as a model for besting China.  Huh?  With NCLB we let an implied perception that our nation’s international economic status was sliding beat up students and teachers and schools for a decade.

A lesson in a senior economics class should ask this question:  What single expenditure balances a state’s annual budget?  Answer: Money for public schools.  Every governor runs as a “Friend of Education” making loud criticisms regarding the state’s past educational report card with promises for future improvements.  Once elected, each governor, regardless of promises, uses the state’s annual allocation to public education to balance the state’s annual budget.  When revenues are low, the Gov cuts education spending.  Governors ease the impact of inflation on other state agencies by regulating school funding.  The failure to increase education spending always is blamed on the opposition party.

“According to The Century Foundation, we are underfunding our K-12 public schools by nearly $150 billion annual, robbing more than 30 million school children of the resources they need to succeed in the classroom”.  Except, fully funding public education would require spending that partisan governors are unwilling to commit.

These are facts; you can look them up.

Critical junctures today

The liberal-minded desegregation of public schools in the 1950s and 60s is losing ground to a re-segregation of local schools.   New, conservative state statutes espousing parent rights allow charter schools to evolve into select-enrollment enclaves receiving public funding.  Parent choice is no longer just a choice of available schooling but a right to create schooling for parent purposes.  Segregated charter schools not only reject children of color but also children with educational disabilities.  Courts reason that assigning state funding to the children being schooled rather than to school districts justifies a re-segregating of public schools. 

https://civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/research/k-12-education/integration-and-diversity/black-segregation-matters-school-resegregation-and-black-educational-opportunity

States where the governor, legislature, and state Supreme Court are held by one political party are using partisan power to change public schooling.  Statutes are being written to shape curriculum, subjects, and teaching strategies to further partisan thinking.  Books are banned, curriculum is prohibited, and school leaders who oppose such can be charged with felonies. 

https://www.eqfl.org/board-of-education-passes-anti-LGBTQ-rules

https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-news/1600-books-banned-2021-22-school-year-report-finds-rcna4836

Why Is This Thus?

Perhaps Sir Isaac Newton explains the reversal of integration in public education policy with his third law – for every action in nature there is an equal and opposite reaction.  To wit, slavery led to the abolition of slavery and freed slaves led to Jim Crow laws and that led to the desegregation of schools.  Now, an equal and opposite action reverses integration into a legal resegregation of schools.  However, to accept this explanation is to justify doing wrong and labeling it as right.  Is equal opportunity under the 14th amendment just a majority party definition?  Today, yes.

There are other forces at work. 

Arlie Russell Hochschild (Strangers In Their Own Land) examined the sociology of Louisiana and neighboring communities in Mississippi and Texas.  Specifically, she examined the effects of partisan politics on a population already plagued with a congruence of economic, cultural, and political pressures.  Highly dependent upon a regional oil employment and affiliated industries that made their communities into historic company towns, these working families are not only dependent on industry pay checks but also forced to live in chemically toxic communities.  Politically afraid, they oppose all governmental entitlements that help people of color with food stamps, jobs, and job training.  They see the world as win-loss and believe liberal government is taking from them to give advantage to others.  They support conservatives who are cheerleaders for their local fears. 

But reductive policies and practices are not found only in deep southern states. More than half our 50 state legislatures have entertained bills to restrict curriculum, subjects, and books.  More than half have considered legislation that would restrict student opportunities based upon gender identification. 

School boards in all states are being approached by parents demanding specific books be removed from school library circulation.  Populist censorship is determining what children can read in school. 

What Are We To Do?

The Newtonian pendular swing of partisan-written educational policies will not serve the long-term future of our children.  Special interested voices make the endgames of all their machinations defined by the widest arc of their collective policy statements, and these increasingly speak for fewer and fewer of our population.  Each iteration becomes more and more radical or reactionary and less and less unifying.

I am guided by the sign-off words of a late-night radio host I heard in the 1970s.  “When you know what is right, try to do it” and I flavor his words with Margaret Mead’s commandment “Children must be taught how to think, not what to think”.  Throughout time, when adults attempted to shape the world their children would inherit by placing bias and prejudice in their upbringing, disaster has been sprung upon the world.

An older slogan comes to mind.  Nancy Reagan asked children and young adults to “just say no” when confronted with illegal drugs in the 1980s and 90s.  We need to tell our governmental representatives they are to “just say no” to any legislation intended to ban books, restrict curriculum, or restrict educational participation for special interested reasons.  Our children need to be educated to think and not to regurgitate selective and biased thinking.