"Cutting Through Right-Wing Spin on Public Education"
August 7, 2006 11:00 AM
After the U.S. Department of Education released a long-delayed study showing public school students doing as well as or better than private school students, voucher advocate Paul Peterson responded in an entirely predictable way, arguing that the report's methodology was seriously flawed. But Peterson's one-note tune is beginning to sound a little shrill.
In an essay titled "Cutting Through Right-Wing Spin on Public Education," Kevin Franck of People for the American Way puts Paul Peterson's latest distortions in context:
Every school day in America, thousands of teachers work hard to help students grow into thoughtful, responsible citizens. The recent NCES study shows that their hard work is paying off. Tragically there are public schools that struggle, and those schools need honest, effective, and research-proven reform. We need to continue the debate about school reform, but we must remain committed to honesty and to our public schools. But quasi-academic proponents of privatization, like Paul Peterson, are committed to neither. (Via Education News.org)
If Peterson were ever to "rework" someone else's study and find that it is unfairly critical of public schools -- surely, that must happen sometimes -- then he might have some credibility. But when every Peterson study comes out the same way and concludes that everybody else's research has a pro-public school bias, it's hard to take Peterson seriously.
And, apparently, few journalists do. His response made only a tiny ripple in the media.



Comments
Unfortunately, Franck doesn't get into the heart of Peterson's claims.
Posted by: Sherman Dorn | August 7, 2006 10:07 AM
Well put. I've been following Paul Peterson's work for 10 years. Simply put, he has never met a pro-public school study that he liked, and he has never met a pro-voucher study that he disliked. Unfortunately, Harvard University does a great disservice to the public debate over vouchers by allowing Peterson to publish under the Harvard imprimatur, which gives Peterson the cover of being an "objective researcher." But it appears that the media are catching on to these games. Increasingly, Peterson is characterized (correctly) in the press as a "long-time voucher advocate," and this time around, his agenda-driven "study" refuting the Department's paper was all but ignored by the mainstream press. It's encouraging to see the media becoming more skeptical of ideologues who pose as researchers. We need more of that!
Posted by: Dan at AFT | August 7, 2006 10:43 AM