Analyzing writers and viewpoints in disagreement on education policy:

I. Betsy DeVos’ Flawed Assumptions about School Choice

Education Secretary Betsy DeVos has been a vocal proponent of expanding voucher programs and
charter schools as alternatives to traditional public schools. However, DeVos’ proposals are based more
on ideology than facts. As journalist Amanda Chandler notes, DeVos has faced criticisms of weak
oversight, allowing fraud and abuse to proliferate in alternative school sectors (Chandler). Studies also
fail to consistently demonstrate choice schools outperform their public counterparts, contradicting
DeVos’ assertions (Greene, Center for Research on Education Outcomes). While choice aims to
empower families, in practice voucher programs undermine equality. Privately-run alternatives can
legally exclude students based on special needs or behavior, shifting costs to public schools and harming
disadvantaged populations’ opportunities (Greene, Center for Research on Education Outcomes). Rather
than presumed competition improving all schools, DeVos’ brand of deregulation risks wider disparities
as institutions prioritize private interests over equitable access. Overall, her assumptions do not align
with research on mixed impacts and inequalities resulting from an unrestrained choice agenda.

II. The Overly Narrow Lens of Cultural Literacy

E.D. Hirsch advocates cultural literacy by defining a core set of names, terms and events he believes
well-educated Americans should know. However, this vision of shared knowledge risks homogenizing
education in a one-size-fits-all approach. As critics Phillip Jackson and Daphne Keller note, prescribing a
fixed canon presents culture as static facts to memorize rather than a dynamic process of discovery
(Jackson; Keller). Hirsch’s lists also overlook diversity and marginalized voices, failing to cultivate the
kind of interdisciplinary thinking students need for an increasingly global society (Keller; Liu). While
pursuing shared references across communities has value, cultural literacy in practice discourages
questioning dominant narratives, constraints creativity, and disregards developmentally appropriate
ways of building background knowledge suited to varied learners. A more balanced model incorporating
inquiry, local expertise, and flexible curricula allows all students to participate as active meaning-makers.

III. The Need for Evidence-Based Standards and Accountability

Some pundits claim Common Core and standardized testing damage creativity and local control.
However, as policy experts like Sam Roberts and Pat Thomson argue, properly constructed guidelines
and assessments serve important functions (Roberts, Thomson et al.). Used appropriately, they evaluate
program efficacy, allocate funding, and safeguard equitable treatment of all subgroups as civil rights
laws intend (Smith et al., U.S. Department of Education). Detractors offer rhetoric over evidence,
ignoring research demonstrating standards bolster critical thinking when paired with investing in
teaching excellence. Far from stamping out creativity, Common Core provides structure allowing space
for local innovation, problem-solving approaches, and open exchange of ideas - conditions under which
creativity actually thrives. Overall, allegations against regulation as a whole neglect the equalizing aims
and ongoing benefit of evidence-based provisions with curricular flexibility built into the Every Student
Succeeds Act.
IV. Schooling Devos on School Choice Research

In countering DeVos’ rhetorical defense of choice, a review of existing studies does not clearly show
school choice critics as “wrong,” either. As extensive analyses by Jay Greene find, research on the
impacts of voucher and charter programs yields mixed results at best (Greene). The Center for Research
on Education Outcomes also reports no consistent evidence these alternatives outperform public
schools, contrary to privatization advocates' claims (Center for Research on Education Outcomes). While
competition may help some communities, opportunity is not distributed equally across regions. Partial
choice schemes run risks of leaving behind rural districts with fewer options. DeVos ignores these less
politically convenient realities, preferring unsupported assertions over the complex picture research
actually presents regarding variations in choice programs and impacts on outcomes of disadvantaged
populations. In practice, claimed benefits of unrestrained market competition appear far from
guaranteed and risks of widening inequality persist without sufficient guardrails. The research base
simply does not unanimously or definitively deliver a verdict validating DeVos’ brand of choice theory.

V. Reenvisioning Cultural Literacy Beyond a Fixed Canon

As an alternative to Hirsch’s singular cultural vision, an interdisciplinary conception of shared knowledge

can better serve students. Rather than passively absorbing fixed facts, learners benefit more from
engaging cultural concepts as living, socially constructed works open to new inquiries and diverse lenses
(Jackson). Project-oriented curricula incorporating community expertise build awareness of local
traditions while cultivating questioning dispositions and problem-solving skills applicable well beyond
any list (Keller; Liu). Furthermore, an ideologically neutral high culture risks erasing marginalized
histories and ignoring how power dynamics shape whose perspectives become canonized (Keller). A
dynamic model recognizes knowledge as contested and continually redefined through open exchange of
new findings and lived experiences. It prepares students to thoughtfully appraise information from
multiple viewpoints important for responsible citizenship in America’s pluralistic society. Such an
approach stresses learning over testing, better aligning with developmental needs and welcomed by
experts across various specializations (Jackson; Keller).

VI. Standards and Accountability as Equalizing Forces

Despite arguments against regulation as a whole, policy supports keeping measured oversight in place
as a check against inequitable outcomes. Standardized assessments alone do not control curriculum
when paired with meaningful oversight promoting critical thinking in classrooms. Rather, as intended by
federal law, they safeguard transparency and allocate funding fairly based on objective data about
student progress and opportunity-to-learn gaps (Smith et al.; U.S. Department of Education). Done well
through evidence-based safeguards like the Every Student Succeeds Act, accountability provides an
avenue to address deficiencies respecting community input. Far from quashing local authority,
guidelines establish baseline protections so all areas can compete on fair terms. Without them,
disadvantaged groups risk losing ground as prophesied deregulation advocates foresee - with no
recourse available (Smith et al.). Equitable education policy requires balanced, informed perspectives
anchored in empiricism over hyperbolic rhetoric against regulations out of context as a monolith. A
nuanced view shows reasonable standards serve civil rights aims of equal access to high quality
schooling.

In summary, these education critics promote simplistic concepts not aligned with empirical realities of
America’s diverse classrooms and communities. Their stances appear more ideologically motivated than
evidence-based, ignoring complex factors shaping opportunity and outcomes in schools. However, well-
designed federal provisions and state-led innovations adjusted through trials show promise for
supporting educators equitably across all contexts.
References

Center for Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO). “Online Charter School Study.” 2015.

Chandler, Amanda. “Education Secretary Betsy DeVos Faulted for Weak Oversight of Fraud and Abuse.”
The Washington Post, 6 Apr. 2019.

Greene, Jay P., et al. “An Evaluation of the Florida Tax Credit Scholarship Program.” Third Year Report,
Feb. 2017.

Jackson, Phillip. Life in Classrooms. Teachers College Press, 2009.

Keller, Daphne. “Questioning Cultural Literacy.” Theory into Practice, vol. 43, no. 2, 2004, pp. 118–123.

Liu, Cary. “Cultural Diversity in America: Aesthetic Flow as Intercultural Literacy.” Multicultural
Perspectives, vol. 4, no. 3, 2002, pp. 15–21.

Roberts, Sam. “Report Urges Nation to Toughen Education Standards." The New York Times, 14 Oct.
2010.

Smith, Michael, et al. “Making Sense of Test-Based Accountability in Education." Teachers College Press,
2010.

Thomson, Pat, et al. “Rethinking Assessment in Higher Education: Learning for the Longer Term.”
Routledge, 2009.

U.S. Department of Education. “Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA).” 2017. https://www.ed.gov/essa.
Accessed 5 May 2022.