stuhlsem's review against another edition
3.0
I don't even know where to start. This book was fascinating at the same time as being terrifying.
While it is presented as an overview of education reform, Class Warfare actually reads like a pro-charter-schools manifesto. Steven Brill uses some statistics but mostly anecdotes to tell about certain charter schools that vastly outperform their neighbors. While there are, undoubtedly, some fabulous charter schools and some superstar educators all over, the book never felt like a real, balanced look at how we can fix our educational system.
Regardless of my personal feelings for charter schools, Steven Brill didn't actually use any real numbers or facts to convince. While his anecdotes do show that a couple programs in NYC are excellent, they don't show that charters would fix education. Additionally, there were no citations, and it was very difficult to find out where his numbers were coming from at any given point. He argues passionately against teacher unions throughout the entire book, and then at the end, praises them for their future role in retraining teachers. He praises Scott Walker's efforts to destroy collective bargaining in Wisconsin, but then claims not only that Scott Walker went too far, but that it was the unions' fault.
Steven Brill seems to believe that it is both possible and necessary for schools to be run like businesses and by businessmen. He does not address the many businessmen that have absolutely no idea of how education works, and he seems to expect all teachers to work 20 hour days, seven days a week. He wants to give principals ultimate power over hiring and firing teachers, but doesn't even acknowledge the possibility of incompetent or malicious principals. He does, however, acknowledge incompetent and malicious teachers. The double standard continues throughout the book--Brill focuses on burnt-out or undertrained teachers whose students underperform, and his solution is to allow principals to fire them.
While Brill does point out some very important problems within the school system--in certain states, it is impossible to remove teachers for any reason, some pension plans encourage teachers to remain in the classroom long after everybody wishes they would leave, young teachers are forced out of schools because of budget issues--his solution doesn't seem realistic, or even very good.
While it is presented as an overview of education reform, Class Warfare actually reads like a pro-charter-schools manifesto. Steven Brill uses some statistics but mostly anecdotes to tell about certain charter schools that vastly outperform their neighbors. While there are, undoubtedly, some fabulous charter schools and some superstar educators all over, the book never felt like a real, balanced look at how we can fix our educational system.
Regardless of my personal feelings for charter schools, Steven Brill didn't actually use any real numbers or facts to convince. While his anecdotes do show that a couple programs in NYC are excellent, they don't show that charters would fix education. Additionally, there were no citations, and it was very difficult to find out where his numbers were coming from at any given point. He argues passionately against teacher unions throughout the entire book, and then at the end, praises them for their future role in retraining teachers. He praises Scott Walker's efforts to destroy collective bargaining in Wisconsin, but then claims not only that Scott Walker went too far, but that it was the unions' fault.
Steven Brill seems to believe that it is both possible and necessary for schools to be run like businesses and by businessmen. He does not address the many businessmen that have absolutely no idea of how education works, and he seems to expect all teachers to work 20 hour days, seven days a week. He wants to give principals ultimate power over hiring and firing teachers, but doesn't even acknowledge the possibility of incompetent or malicious principals. He does, however, acknowledge incompetent and malicious teachers. The double standard continues throughout the book--Brill focuses on burnt-out or undertrained teachers whose students underperform, and his solution is to allow principals to fire them.
While Brill does point out some very important problems within the school system--in certain states, it is impossible to remove teachers for any reason, some pension plans encourage teachers to remain in the classroom long after everybody wishes they would leave, young teachers are forced out of schools because of budget issues--his solution doesn't seem realistic, or even very good.
ericaaaaa's review against another edition
2.0
Probably a 2.5...but ugh, this book. It started off good, with a nice history of how unions began in New York and also how they became very powerful. But once it got past the background, it was a lot of overviews of pretty recent education history. Changes are, if you're reading this book at all, you already know a lot of what's happened in the past five years. There was a lot of name dropping of prominent players, whether politicians, reformers, or union heads; and the vast middle seemed to be completely about everything behind the scenes of Race to the Top applications and YAWN. I would get excited when Brill would start highlighting some star teacher who could keep kids completely engaged, but it always seemed to veer back to politics before getting to how/why teachers are successful. The book wasn't overtly anti-union but also had little good to say about them. There was some redemption in the conclusion when the author and other reformers finally started to admit that star teachers everywhere couldn't be the answer, because the same star teachers were burning out and resigning before the age of 30. No, the answer is that reformers have to be able to work with unions to be able to bring systemic change. Well, duh? I wish I could say that this book enlightened my thinking in new ways but nearly every point has been made elsewhere.
roddej86's review against another edition
3.0
This is such a hard book to review, because I read it through so many lenses. On the one hand, it provides a fairly thoughtful history of the ed reform movement and its precedents. It's extremely interesting to the policy wonk in me, with its focus on the interrelationships of the key players in this debate, and on the formation and reformation of the key institutions. In these regards, it was fascinating to the me who read this as a disinterested student of the movement.
On the other hand, it verges on the libelous when it comes to teacher's unions. Interestingly, Randi Weingarten, President of the American Federation of Teachers, is prominently featured and Brill states outright that she was the informant with whom he spent the most time. She comes across well, generally. But Brill reports all kinds of hearsay (of the horse's-head-in-your-opponent's-bed variety) with just a wink at journalistic integrity, and seems uninterested in actually engaging the arguments of his opponents. He infantilizes parents of students in poorly performing schools, and dismisses communities who support their community schools as ignorant. He ignores the very real reasons that all public employees need collective bargaining. He knows you can't have good schools without good teachers, but he seems not to care about the corollary, that you can't have good teachers without good training, good professional development, good benefits, and the requisite structural conditions of possibility: the time and institutional support to be the best teachers they can.
I'm an ed reform proponent. I work for a major player in the movement. I have my own concerns about unions. I agree with Brill that we need to put students first, above all other considerations. But I found this book unsettling, unfair, and unrepresentative of the viewpoints of the majority of us in the movement.
On the other hand, it verges on the libelous when it comes to teacher's unions. Interestingly, Randi Weingarten, President of the American Federation of Teachers, is prominently featured and Brill states outright that she was the informant with whom he spent the most time. She comes across well, generally. But Brill reports all kinds of hearsay (of the horse's-head-in-your-opponent's-bed variety) with just a wink at journalistic integrity, and seems uninterested in actually engaging the arguments of his opponents. He infantilizes parents of students in poorly performing schools, and dismisses communities who support their community schools as ignorant. He ignores the very real reasons that all public employees need collective bargaining. He knows you can't have good schools without good teachers, but he seems not to care about the corollary, that you can't have good teachers without good training, good professional development, good benefits, and the requisite structural conditions of possibility: the time and institutional support to be the best teachers they can.
I'm an ed reform proponent. I work for a major player in the movement. I have my own concerns about unions. I agree with Brill that we need to put students first, above all other considerations. But I found this book unsettling, unfair, and unrepresentative of the viewpoints of the majority of us in the movement.
blissfulliving's review
4.0
Definitely worth a read regardless of one's political view. It is a must to leave one's views behind as one delves into the book or else one's preconceived notions could take over. Bon voyage.
More...