Constructivism as a cudgel, grift in gap-talk

There is so much happening in public education here, and yet still so little evidence of the adults in charge will make students their priority.  A couple quick bits in this E3 newsletter. 

Constructivist cudgel

Barbara Oakley recently summarized research on the persistence of bad ideas in education – in this case constructivism (The Teaching Method That Can't Fail).  Run through the woke word mill, it becomes… student-centered learning.  It feels good doesn’t it?

“The fact that your brain builds its own representations says nothing about whether that building goes better with more guidance or less. That’s an empirical question. And the evidence overwhelmingly favors more guidance for beginners, not less.”

Honest brokers can make mistakes and correct them. Oakley’s piece helps explain how constructivism can become an ideological cudgel for dishonest school officials.

Stanford’s Educational Opportunity Project described 2009-to 2019 like this:

“River Forest SD 90, Illinois provides roughly average educational opportunities while children are in school. Students learn 5% less each grade than the U.S. average. Socioeconomic status is far above the national average. Learning rates are 21% lower than those of districts with similar socioeconomic status.”  Full Report   Trends

For reference, NAEP’s 2016 national averages in proficiency were roughly 40% in math and 30% in reading. A wealthy suburb with “exemplary” schools should exceed that. Results after 2016 illustrate Oakley’s point — when explicit instruction gave way to constructivism.

“Its core argument is simple: the dominant framework in education—constructivism—is structured so that it can never be shown to be wrong. And a framework that can’t fail can’t improve. “

Source: https://edopportunity.org/

The K-8th switch to constructivist curricula beginning in 2015 was followed by River Forest becoming a national outlier for low learning rates.  Early literacy instruction was now “balanced”…on that precipice?  To be clear, sanctimonious women of the PTO wanted more for students than just lower academic standards.

Gender was a social construct, tests and homework faded, colonialist books were banned, and games, art, and a skit beheading a president became “UDL alternatives” for a written book report.  The snarky, boisterous behavior of braces-wearing boys and girls was hushed - adults preferred sound baths for their new “friends”.

Middle schoolers endured new 80-minute periods of student-inquiry after the district contrived its own truth about why block scheduling – “more math time”, though it suited the new curricula.

Preachers of equal outcome promised these ideas would “eliminate the racial predictability of achievement”. By 2024, district 90 had the largest achievement gap in its history, nearly doubling the state’s average gap in scores between poor and non-poor students. Seasoned teachers were leaving, and those who stayed were rebuking their leadership the only way they could – a mostly anonymous survey. Not a whisper from the district.

The unseriousness and disregard for academics was astonishing – but there was no time to dig into results with democracy at stake. District communicators exercised “shared values” in silence or through misdirection.  Local media had already handed out a fake award to the adults punishing children, and a hive-minded school board was busy promoting a serial academic offender.

Some will say “lowering the ceiling” on students was not planned, even if it was cruel. For others, charity was swamped by too much strange, too much deceit, and obvious decline under constructivism. 

When it was too hard to hide scores, officials said teachers had chosen the curricula. Later, “implementation drag” was blamed. Oakley notes:

“Yet when students taught through discovery and inquiry don’t do well, the framework never takes the blame. The teacher didn’t implement it correctly. The test measured the wrong thing. The scaffolding was insufficient. The culture wasn’t ready. The reform didn’t have enough time.”

It’s late February and River Forest teachers don’t have a contract – yes, “fundamental change” has consequences. The good news besides double-gold for USA Hockey, a few school board members exposed the myth, a few parents are talking publicly about policy-induced learning loss, curriculum review is underway, and there are signs of recovery. 

District 90 is not done with DEI though – a thoughtful re-write is coming soon says the board director of DEI.

Grift in gap-talk

The Chicago Sun Times reported last week “Illinois lawmakers announce plan to close school funding gap”.  It sounds good…much like the language used to sell constructivism so don’t be surprised by the connections.

Ralph Martire leads an economic ‘thinktank’ supported by public unions, co-authored the IL state funding plan, and was on President Obama’s education DEI committee. As a district 90 board member and president between 2011-2019, he saw another “gap” and oversaw this wholesale switch to constructivism. By 2024, his ideas had created larger gaps  – the gaps between poor and non-poor students reached –48 in ELA and –58 in math.

Ralph graduated from elementary school and in 2019 joined the board at OPRF high school – where River Foresters attend.  There, he led the elimination of honors classes in order to “equalize” freshman ability, according to Greg Johnson, who also sees things as mostly black or white. After two years, ELA and math gaps remain between –30 and –50. The solution offered: more school funding, not higher academic expectations.

Only in C(r)ook County can gap-talk become a career path — steer schools downward, then raise taxes to fix what rotten policy created. 

Read Oakley’s substack here and subscribe to it for free. Stay tuned for the full length report.

It’s E3, where equity still means fair. So fair, you can have this delivered to your inbox for free SUBSCRIBE