New York State Education Reform and Misplaced Religiosity
by: Katie Zahedi

Diane Ravitch discusses the formidable pressures brought to bear on state departments of education by political and corporate sponsors to move ahead with reforms, but is this the only reason that NYSED is ignoring the wide-spread concerns of the state's principals. I find it hard to believe that anyone, including New York SED leadership could be so dedicated without a trace of beneficence in the mix. Aside from our leadership caving in to demands of the "almighty dollar", misplaced religiosity may explain their ignore-ance.

U.S. school performance lags behind nations like Finland, Singapore and South Korea. Dr. Heinz-Dieter Meyer in a December 2011 CASDA conference titled The Finland Phenomenon invited researchers in international comparative education programs to investigate the macro-factors involved in national performance on the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA). Aside from teacher quality, economic disparity was especially noted as a factor in low scores.
Misplaced religiosity was off the page of conference discussions however, cohesive cultural factors that sustain the critical levers of motivation and cooperation in these countries were central to Meyer's, and others', analyses of conditions that contribute to high and low scores. Many of the high scoring factors correlated with cultural cohesion, whether based in inherent shared values or authoritarian-based compliance.

In line with research into cultural factors in student performance, I am looking into such factors to explain NYSED's organizational culture. Zealous behavior is often elicited by subconscious needs. I propose that low pressure in the cultural space of our nation, previously occupied by shared values based in religiosity, has created a vacuum attracting a new set of agents at NYSED to resurrect the missing pillar that previously supplied cultural cohesion. With no disrespect to religion, the authority fitting to clergy may be wrongly used by leaders in other domains.

Tocqueville, at an earlier juncture, observed that American democracy was built on shared values within religious diversity. If his observation was correct, the cohesive influence of moral certainty, lessened with the decline of religious tolerance/shared values, may possibly corrode whatever it was that held us together in the first place. Religion has a different basis of authority than democratic organizations do, or should contain. Isn't the standards movement entirely understood as an attempt to reconstruct shared ideals? The standards movement answers the need for shared goals, steps over the confusion that diversity spawns, while holding someone accountable for the problems of society. While we value diversity, we still must learn how to better communicate across cultures. Who knows, administrative religiosity at the SED, done well, may reduce ambiguity and fill the void in cultural certainty.

The curiously didactic and declarative tone characteristic of NYSED memos, combined with increasingly prescribed directives sent to schools, may emanate from a sort of misplaced religiosity striving to reinforce, or otherwise hobble together, cultural agreement. Historically, religion has always had the authority to declare standards, and do so efficiently, i.e. without consultation. Religious power is often associated with an understanding that non-compliance results in personal loss. Of course no actual religion is invoked, but governments and their agencies tend to hanker after additional powers when things aren't going well, so endowing directives with a pseudo-religious posture may suffice.

Standards are being articulated as if to prop-up some form of shared canon that we can refer to in an almost infinitely malleable value system. The NYS Standards, absurdly tautological are catechisms to keep us on the path of certainty. They are prominently placed in every teacher evaluation, like "In the name of God" at the beginning of every Islamic document. There is no authority in an observation without referring to these tenets, while they are or should be, obvious. At the most, these standards serve as useful reference points.

Has a loss of certainty called forth a new priesthood ordained to reveal standards, regulations and systems, while requiring uniform compliance to ensure that everyone is doing what they are supposed to do with America’s children? The newly ordained priests roam the majestic halls of SED issuing grandiose decrees for the good of the domain, e.g., "all students will be college and career ready by 2014". When has that ever happened? I confess that I am unable to predestine that for my own, let alone other people's offspring.

The priest class, blessed with the gift of revelation, is rendered exempt from the need to have their own procedures evaluated and/or even consult experts in the field! The gift of discernment allows them to address the realm with immense authority, apparent in the declarative tone of memos demanding acquiescence. The pitch in SED memos does not request compliance, as in: "please implement", rather, principals "must", "will", and so forth.

The mysteries of religion are found in the various prescribed rituals involved in the storage and handling of their specimens of compliance, assessments. The priest class issues decrees, and principals and other adherents are charged with ceremonially following dictates emanating from pure revelation. Brothers and sisters (teachers and principals) who are subordinate to the priest class must demonstrate adherence through data/proof, which is not required of the priests who act on political expediency or revelatory whim. Sanctified, they live above the laws and standards that they issue for others.

The priests are faithful. In fact, the objection of thousands of experts does not shake their conviction! As true believers, they have unyielding faith, even though the cumulative years of experience in public schools of the entire priest class, including the chancellor, commissioner and all of the thirteen "fellows" may only amount to the average longevity of a few of the principals who object to the reform-revelation. Steadfast, they exemplify pious conviction.

Albeit an apostate or two, the NYSED appears united in faith and conviction. On 11/30/11 David Abrams, Assistant Commissioner for Standards, Assessment and Reporting walked off the job after he issued a memo on the schedule for the grades 3-8 ELA and Math Assessments for 2012 that was retracted by his supervisors. For school leaders, this debacle wasn't the first time to receive memos, upon corrected memos, upon repentance for incorrect memos.

What could lead grown men and women to dispute each other's directives publicly and even walk off their jobs over a memo? Are the directions for an evaluation schedule a form of liturgy? Perhaps Abrams' issuance of a memo that was not fully consecrated by the hierarchy was considered a grave transgression: Was public atonement for his sin meant to educate all against questioning the new priest class and their decrees?