Workshop 9

From Studyplace

Teachers College • Columbia University Class Meetings, Thursdays, 3:00-4:40 A&HH6577-A&HH6578 Navigator Course overview Participant pages Justice bibliography Social software Wiki Work Workshop 1 9/7/2006 Workshop 2 9/14/2006 Workshop 3 9/21/2006 Workshop 4 9/28/2006 Workshop 5 10/5/2006 Workshop 6 10/12/2006 Workshop 7 10/19/2006 Workshop 8 10/26/2006 Workshop 9 11/2/2006 Workshop 10 11/9/2006 Workshop 11 11/16/2006 Workshop 12 11/30/2006 Workshop 13 12/7/2006 Workshop 14 12/14/2006 Workshop 15 12/21/2006

• Let us start with the reasoning of Judge DeGrasse in the Campaign for Fiscal Equity, Inc. v. State of New York

"Contrary to defendants' argument, increased educational resources, if properly deployed, can have a significant and lasting effect on student performance. There is a causal link between funding and educational opportunity."

I've included Judge DeGrasse's words above (with my emphasis) not because I think judicial reasoning has much to do with the academic subject of education, but because I think they illuminate a key turning point in his decision. He assumes that because increased educational resources can (in some circumstances, and under the guidance and direction of particular educators, institutional arrangements, and parental involvement) have a significant and lasting effect on student performance, this then implies a causal link between funding and educational opportunity. I could be wrong, but it seems to me that this argument has logical problems.

If a causal link was really to be invoked, the right word in the sentence prior would have to be "do" or "will", not "can". Just because increased resources can have a significant effect on student performance does not mean that they always do, or that increased resources necessarily generate educational opportunity. Perhaps more damaging: here DeGrasse equates educational resources with funding, even though he takes Hanushek and Armor to task for doing essentially the same thing. DeGrasse is clear that what matters is particular "inputs", not dollar figures themselves. Here he seems to violate his own line of defense.

Even if we accept his equating of resources with money we run into some logical trouble. From the notion that increased resources sometimes (implied by the word "can") lead to increases in educational performance it does not follow that increased resources are necessarily generative of educational opportunity, even if we give opportunity some strict operationalization. I think DeGrasse may be trying to argue that because resources can lead to improved performance this justifies the notion that resources create the opportunity for improved performance. He is not saying that resources cause improved performance; rather, he is arguing that resources, or more precisely "funding", engender the opportunity for improved performance.

But just because increased educational resources can be observed to have a significant effect on student performance does not mean that "funding" somehow causes educational opportunity. The problem is in the assumption. Effect is simply the wrong word. Relationship is a more precise descriptor of the interaction between resources and performance. As DeGrasse knows full well, many other factors - aside from resources - contribute to the relationship between young persons and performance. A causal connection simply cannot be established. That resources can be associated with performance may have nothing to do with the resources measured but with other factors not modeled. If so, changing the resources, but not the unmodeled background factors, may do little to engender educational opportunity.

Essentially my problem is with the causal connection that is established. Even an academic with marginal training in research methods would never make the claim that causality can be inferred from regression or other statistical analyses. A sketchy correlation is the most that can be established. Now correlation, of course, probably has little value to a judge who has to make an authoritative, definitive decision on a school funding case. But in academia it does. And this may be why the location of the CEE campaign at Teachers College can be seen to compromise the institution's intellectual integrity. Those of us who see otherwise are like DeGrasse - willing to consider the evidence presented and reviewed at the trial, but not looking to deal with "long-standing academic debates".

Neil Eckardt 11:40, 2 November 2006 (EST)

Does this do justice to Judge DeGrasse's discussion of the causal link in section V. of the opinion? Robbie McClintock 14:34, 2 November 2006 (EST)

An unrelated point - The decision states: "This court has held that a sound basic education mandated by the Education Article consists of the foundational skills that students need to become productive citizens capable of civic engagement and sustaining competitive employment." What does this definition of a sound basic education means in terms of our discussion of educational justice or injustice?

I see the problem with this case (and those that have come before them)is the fact that schools are dealt with in isolation. Students who attend a school that is decrepit or has a limited amount of resources often have many other obstacles to face outside of the school. I would guess that a school’s state of disrepair is almost always in correlation with a lot of other factors that will adversly effect learning (such as home life, health isues, access to books, safe spaces, etc.). If these aren't addressed to, I am skeptical about what kind of progress can be made. MMannix 13:01, 2 November 2006 (EST)

[edit] Campaign for Fiscal Equity

I think the case "Campaing for Fiscal Equity vs. State of New York is pertinent to our discussion of justice, injustice, and what educates.

• The Campaign for Fiscal Equity website. www.cfequity.org

• Background information Ensuring Every New York Child Their Constitutional Right to a Sound Basic Education

• The 1995 decision "the New York constitution requires that the state offer all children the opportunity for a "sound basic education". Campaign for Fiscal Equity, Inc. v. State of New York

• Michael Rebell is the legal council for CFE. He is also a staff member for the Campaign for Educational Equity here at teachers college.TC website

• Douglas Reed. On Equal Terms.

Civil Rights Project

[edit] Ongoing readings

• Judith N. Shklar. The Faces of Injustice (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990)
  
• John Dewey. Democracy and Education (New York: Macmillan & Company, 1916), especially Chapters 1-9
  • What is the relation between democracy and justice? A lack of democracy and injustice?
  • Is equity an adequate measure of justice? Inequity of injustice?
  • The indvidual student relative to the distribution of resources.
  • Does truly democratic or a just (in some sense) education need to be redistributive?
• Amartya Sen. Development as Freedom (New York: Anchor Books, 1999).
  • What is the relation between the distribution of resources and development, properly understood? Relative specifically to development as education?
  • What is the concept of cultural capital and is it useful in making sense of questions of educational equity?
  • What cultural assets deserve value (Randolph Bourne. "Transnational America")?

Questions, resources, materials, tools, things to work with in a workshop. That is what is supposed to go here. That is supposed to add to the article page. Just in case you are like me and are not sure or forget.Sms2157 16:37, 12 October 2006 (EDT)sms2157

[edit] Follow up on TC's Conceptual Framework

• Original FIRE letter
• Follow up letter
• Piece on Intellectual Diversity by former Columbia Provost Jonathan R. Cole
• AERA's official position on Social Justice

• Opinion article in the Columbia Spectator: go to the article

maggie reid 11:35, 26 October 2006 (EDT)

Thanks for finding this Maggie. Perhaps to discuss the matter further would be to beat a dead drum that people are done hearing. Nonetheless, I think this article is interesting. I think it helps to illuminate the notion that Teachers College is an institution where education, not politics, is supposed to be under investigation. Some of the language in the article pushes me to ask: What might an apolitical conception of justice look like? What, or rather who, would be the unit of analysis for such a conception? Are there good, existing intellectual resources that encourage such a conception? (this is a more or less overt attempt to introduce Plato's Republic to our discussion)...

Neil Eckardt 09:31, 2 November 2006 (EST)

Hi folks,

Here is a link to the text of TC's Conceptual Framework. It might be interesting for us to read the college's official position on social justice (p. 26-30) as a component of their teacher education programs and to read the college's conceptual position on assessing the commitment of candidates to social justice (Standards 10 and 11, Appendix E). The college's mission statement may also be of some interest.

I suggest this because we may want to situate our approach to the study of justice within the broader institutional context at TC. We may agree or disagree with TC's approach to educating teachers, but discussing it might give us a helpful common point of departure. The question of how to educate persons to have a concern for (social) justice seems to me to be very close to the question of how to work towards justice in general. Anyway, just an idea. Neil Eckardt 09:13, 16 October 2006 (EDT)

I found a few aspects of TC’s conceptual framework interesting:

First, the statement about teachers as “moral actors”. I was wondering what others thought of this statement in light of discussions we’ve had about character development, etc.

I also thought the discussion of dispositions was interesting. “We cultivate these dispositions by ‘…emphasizing the moral dimension of education, guiding prospective teachers in developing their own personal vision of education and teaching, promoting the developing of empathy for students of diverse backgrounds, nurturing their passion and idealism for making a difference in students’ lives and promoting activism outside as well as inside the classroom’ (Villegas & Lucas, 2002, p. 25).” I am not really sure what is meant by a disposition. MMannix 11:10, 19 October 2006 (EDT)

I'm not quite sure either. To me the connotation of disposition is that it's an opinion/feeling that is somehow basic, and requires no argument. I'm not sure if this meaning is intended in the text, and maybe I'm just argumentative, but I'm not convinced anything should stand without argument. I don't know enough about standpoint epistemology to determine it's relevance to this use of disposition, but it might be a place to start. Eric Strome 13:17, 19 October 2006 (EDT)

I'm posting this quote here because I think that it might be interesting to discuss in class:

Traditionally organized schools help to reproduce social inequalities while giving the illusion that such inequalities are natural and fair. Schools purport to offer unlimited possibilities for social advancement but they simultaneously maintain structures that severely limit the probability of advancement for those at the bottom of the social scale (Labaree, 1997). p. 26 Conceptual Framework

Matt 15:00, 19 October 2006 (EDT)