I write this at the risk of further enmeshing our university in an embarrassing net of Harry Potter comparisons.
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix is easily my least favorite in the series. Reading 840 pages worth of Harry whining and losing his temper is about as fun as reading Finnegans Wake. However, I reread the Potter books faithfully every summer, and on my latest reading, I found a fun parallel that had previously escaped me. Order of the Phoenix is full of various "Educational Decrees" issued by the Ministry of Magic as that political body attempted to establish more control over Hogwarts School. These decrees are recommended by the newest teacher at Hogwarts, Dolores Umbridge; her qualification was her post as Senior Undersecretary to the Minister of Magic. Umbridge is quickly set apart from her fellow teachers through her standardized, government-approved curriculum, her close governmental ties, and her painfully dull classes. But within just a week of her appointment, a new Educational Decree is passed which gives her the ability to inspect the other teachers and assess their performance; later on, yet another Educational Decree givesUmbridge the power to fire teachers. The Daily Prophet, the newspaper of wizarding Britain, reports on "falling standards" at Hogwarts and lauds "fair and objective evaluation."
Leaving aside some of the extraneous context, let's focus on the situation. Politicians find a "crisis," using weasel words and legislative power to exert control over schools, despite the fact that the politicians have never been educators (all the while pressuring the educators to be led by the blind). The press follows the government's lead slavishly. This should be ringing some bells.
For decades, Americans in high places have been telling a tale full of sound and fury. American schools are being outstripped by foreign ones; schools are suffering from falling standards; teacher quality is the most important ingredient in school success, and ours is substandard. So No Child Left Behind was implemented enthusiastically by Congress and President George W. Bush's administration in 2001; Race to the Top was announced by President Barack Obama and Secretary of Education Arne Duncan in 2009. The former manipulates with a stick, as punitive measures are taken against schools which fail to live up to its demands. That these schools are more often than not providing services to children living in some state of poverty (economic standing is the great correlative factor in academic achievement) is ignored. The latter uses a carrot; states that play the federal government's game of increased "accountability" and school choice are awarded with large sums of money.
Education expert Diane Ravitch—the first person mentioned in this article who I can actually refer to as one— replied to the implementation of RTTT in the Los Angeles Times, saying "Today there is empirical evidence, and it shows clearly that choice, competition, and accountability as education reform levers are not working…This approach may well make schools worse, not better." So just like the Ministry of Magic, the American federal government took steps to not just standardize what's taught in schools, but control it as well. Unfortunately, the government appears to have no idea what makes schools better.
What's most troubling to me are the comparisons we can draw between the fictional and the real fourth estates. The Daily Prophet takes cues from Fudge, reporting on some issues fawningly and completely ignoring others. Newsweek features a cover story on Michelle Rhee and gives Bill Gates an interview where they treat him as if his opinions on education are valuable or well-reasoned. "The Colbert Report," of all things, takes time to be serious with Rhee and other would-be/know-nothing reformers like Geoffrey Canada and John Legend. Those of us with a clue have to rely on op-eds by people like Diane Ravitch or the unfortunately late Gerald Bracey, who are hardly household names. The press should be the spark that inspires us to demand accuracy from our leaders, to ask pointed and incisive questions. Instead, they seem to be taking the politicians' words for granted.
I'm hardly making a direct comparison; after all, Umbridge was planted at Hogwarts to create a Ministry stronghold there while rooting out Dumbledore and his admirers, who were asserting the unpopular viewpoint that Lord Voldemort had been resurrected. We have no such troubles in the real world. Ours are more mundane and less magical. If it were the other way around, maybe we'd care a little more.