Who destroyed Detroit? asks Deborah Meier, calling it a “bombed-out shell of a city.”
“It was first and foremost the fault of some quite well-educated, high test-scorers in the management of the auto industry and in high places in Washington D.C.,” she concludes on Ed Week‘s Bridging Differences.
Don’t blame “corporate reform,” responds Robert Pondiscio.
There is an idea at loose in overheated corners of the edusphere, which I pray you do not share, which sees a manufactured “shock doctrine” conspiracy to drive American education onto the rocks in order to seize control and make a buck. It’s a lovely, comforting illusion, isn’t it? We are capable, wise, and all would be well if the malefactors of great wealth were not aligned against us. That is far easier to accept than our own shortcomings, low expectations, failed notions about schooling, and stubborn refusal to adapt. Perhaps we were as complacent about our schools as Detroit’s auto execs were about their factories.
Test scores are “not a definitive measure of ‘intellectual prowess’,” writes Meier. Pondiscio agrees, but asks “what of it?”
Testing did not destroy schooling. It revealed the rot and complacency within too many schools, especially those serving our poorest children, like Detroit’s.
We adapt, we grow, or else we stagnate and decay. The factories that employed generations in Detroit stand empty. One hundred years ago, they didn’t stand at all. A generation hence, maybe two, something else will stand in their place. But not if we pretend nothing’s wrong, Deb. Not if we choose not to run the race.
Pittsburgh was the Detroit of the late ’70s when the steel industry collapsed, writes Pondiscio. “Today it’s a lovely and livable city, with a diversified economy built on education, technology, and finance.” Pittsburgh adapted.