Thompson: Waiting For Compromise

Diane Ravitch's and Nancy Flanagan's blogs (here and here) have been having a great dialogue about the quest for a middle ground in this age of "reform." Flanagan writes that today's teaching profession holds in:

A maelstrom of pent-up resentment over being forced to do what's wrong for kids, and being afraid of losing gainful employment by speaking out. There are little bursts of resistance, but mostly it's a pretty beaten-down crowd, looking for someone to blame, and sharing some truly disheartening stories. Surrender and capitulation, mouths to feed, the mortgage due. What are you going to do? 

Flanagan asks whether we should seek "a compromise between embracing federal/corporate reforms and pointing out that American public education has its flaws but serves many kids well?"  

Personally, I revere compromise.  The point where the accountability hawks went wrong, I believe, was when they claimed to be representing the civil rights movement of the 21st century and challenged the integrity of people in the "status quo" who disagreed with their policies.  Collaboration is great, but its goal is getting people to agree.  Compromise is better because it allows opponents to agree to disagree.  It is the better system where each side gets part of what it wants.  Neither side has to change their beliefs.  They just have to honor their agreements.- JT(@drjohnthompson) via.     

Comments

[Sarah]

The government in general seems to have forgotten how to compromise. It’s really a shame, but an unfortunate reality nonetheless.