社区黑料

In the opening lines of her towering 1967 essay 鈥�,鈥� German (and naturalized American immigrant) philosopher Hannah Arendt sighed, 鈥淣o one has ever doubted that truth and politics are on rather bad terms with each other, and no one, as far as I know, has ever counted truthfulness among the political virtues.鈥�

You鈥檙e nodding your head. Of course you are. The past two years of rancorous American governing have besieged the country鈥檚 on truths, facts and (especially) values that we all share. If we鈥檙e not sorting through easily disprovable lies about inauguration crowd sizes, , the or the virtues of . Obviously truth flounders in politics. That鈥檚 like saying that snow and the desert . C鈥檓on, man.

And yet, as the 2020 election cycle begins in earnest, we ought to remember that education politics are subject to these same constraints. What do we do about the fact that many of the obvious truisms in public education are, well, ? Reformers鈥� general instinct is to shout louder about the facts. When charter schools , reformers fall back on showing that these schools perform particularly well with historically underserved children. When reformers like Sen. Cory Booker face criticism for their education records, reformers reassert facts that support the efficacy of reform.

On the one hand, thank goodness. Public education badly needs folks obsessed with data about how students perform in U.S. schools. America鈥檚 kids badly need advocates who are willing to righteously, stubbornly insist on prioritizing those facts over all other things.

And yet, on the other hand, reformers need to be aware that they鈥檙e prioritizing. Their truths are not the only truths. That鈥檚 the alchemy of how truth and politics come together in persuasive rhetoric: Facts become powerful within a particular framing. Fact-free rhetoric struggles to persuade because humans have eyes, ears and noses. Meanwhile, rhetoric-free facts do not persuade, since they need some sort of context to mean anything.

Take the recent teacher strike in Los Angeles, for instance. It can simultaneously be true that 1) charter schools in Los Angeles , 2) teachers in L.A. (and Oakland, West Virginia, Denver, Oklahoma 鈥� basically everywhere) are being squeezed by the deepening inequalities in American life, 3) teachers see their unions as key to protecting their salaries and benefits, 4) the growth of non-unionized charters threatens those unions鈥� clout and viability, and 5) Los Angeles Unified School District how it will pay for the improved deal.

All of these things are, to varying degrees, true. And they鈥檙e far from the full universe of available truths that are related to the L.A. strike. That鈥檚 why there鈥檚 limited persuasive value in righteously, stubbornly trumpeting any one or two of these without attending to or acknowledging the others. It鈥檚 a reminder of what I warned before the last presidential election: Voters who are concerned with a set of primary issues (in this case: inequality, financial precariousness, etc.) can acknowledge contravening facts (charter students鈥� performance) without being persuaded to change their positions.

All of this happens within a broader national context. Part of why teacher strikes have become more common 鈥� and been met with popular sympathy 鈥� is that . Americans have been living their peak rhetorical stereotype for decades: We鈥檙e working harder but not getting ahead. The rules have been so thoroughly tilted toward the rich for so long that voters are for to level the playing field.

That鈥檚 why other truths 鈥� the district doesn鈥檛 know if it can afford to pay teachers better or sustain their benefits 鈥� aren鈥檛 moving folks right now. In a moment when many Americans are struggling to find a path to a dignified place in the middle class 鈥� with affordable housing, health care and retirement 鈥� complaints about the 鈥渓uxuries鈥� of urban teacher contracts are a poor starting place for reformers supposedly fighting for the underprivileged. They鈥檙e out of step with urgent concerns of our political moment.

Think of it like this: You鈥檙e trying a particular soup for the first time with a friend. You take your first sip, and your mouth is on fire. Holy heck, that鈥檚 some spicy soup! You moan to your friend, an education reformer. 鈥淵eah, that spoon is made of metal,鈥� she says. 鈥淎nd the soup鈥檚 packed with vitamin C!鈥� No. No, no. NO! Well, yes, it鈥檚 made of metal. But it鈥檚 not the point right now. The soup is spicy. You need something to drink. Water, but only to buy time while you search . This is an emergency! 鈥淟ook,鈥� your friend says, 鈥渢hat soup was made fresh today. It鈥檚 yellow. It contains organic compounds!鈥� You blink through sweaty tears. 鈥淲hat鈥檚 more,鈥� she says, 鈥渨e got here on our bikes!鈥� You expire, cut down by chiles.

This is how reformers risk sounding today 鈥� they鈥檙e announcing facts. They鈥檙e saying true things. But they鈥檙e not always engaging with the facts driving public attention.

So: how might reformers find their footing and advance kids鈥� best interests in today鈥檚 political context? First: There are no magic words to erase our big structural issues. Reformers need to shift their thinking to fit constructively within U.S. politics in 2020.

Obviously, they should zero in on ways that socioeconomic structures in the U.S. act as impediments to equality of educational opportunity. Neighborhood schools reinforce privilege in many communities 鈥� any serious movement to lessen inequality needs to intentionally and comprehensively engage this through education, housing and/or transportation policies. Reformers like Booker should hammer at this, at making clear that reform is about making it harder for the rich to buy better public schools inaccessible to the rest of us 鈥斅爅ust as they shouldn’t be able to wield their wealth to get cleaner air or water.

His 2020 campaign announcement video hints at this 鈥� an improvement on .

Reformers might also pay heed to the many structural injustices faced by English learners and/or children of immigrants. In a moment when these children鈥檚 families face intense, , education reformers have been silent. It鈥檚 not enough for reformers to announce that they 鈥渟tand with immigrants鈥� when Republicans in D.C. wrench thousands of immigrant kids from their asylum-seeking parents. This is a shame, since the ugliness of has sparked new political energy for doing better by linguistically and culturally diverse kids in U.S. schools. Education reformers should have constructive policy ideas to contribute to newly energized national conversations about how to actually support children of immigrants in U.S. schools. Their inattention has : Over and over, are in .

There鈥檚 so much more. Reformers could put more energy into expanding access to high-quality pre-K programs that save working families money and support better outcomes for kids. They could between . They could use the national focus on inequality to push harder to equalize education funding between school districts.

Reformers can fight today鈥檚 political tide. They can wish it were not real. But they would do better to show how their priorities align with this national movement to reduce inequality. Their choice of which truths to emphasize in 2020 will do a lot to redefine reformers for an energized, equality-minded public. Are we a movement that opposes unions? That despises school districts? That believes in public education? That supports immigrants? That cares about working families?

They don鈥檛 need to provide just one answer or be just one thing. There are plenty of truths to go around. But reformers need a better strategy than resuscitating their old talking points and rounding up the usual opponents. That won鈥檛 work in 2020 鈥� and that鈥檚 one fact they can count on.

Did you use this article in your work?

We鈥檇 love to hear how 社区黑料鈥檚 reporting is helping educators, researchers, and policymakers.