Mertha, Andrew. (2006). The Politics of Piracy: Intellectual Property in Contemporary China. Reviewed by Dexin Tian, Bowling Green State University

Mertha, Andrew. (2006). The Politics of Piracy: Intellectual Property in Contemporary China. Singapore: Singapore University Press. Pp. xvii + 241         ISBN 9971-69-337-2 Reviewed by Dexin Tian Bowling Green State University September 11, 2007 Intellectual property rights (IPR) comprise three dimensions: patents, copyright, and trademarks. China’s IPR policy is both problematic and complex. In his book, The Politics of Piracy: Intellectual Property in Contemporary China, Andrew Mertha challenges the recent rhetoric that argues for a simple correlation between greater external pressure and better Chinese domestic compliance with international norms and U.S. demands; He argues that the existing analyses fail to probe deeply enough into the country’s complex matrix of functional institutions and local political networks. Based on his field research in China and personal interviews with hundreds of people of both current and former U.S. IPR related officials and their Chinese counterparts, Mertha asks the question: “What has been the impact of external pressure on China’s IPR policy making and implementation processes” (p. 3)? I will first describe how this question is answered in each part of the book and then offer my critical comments on the book. The book consists of seven chapters and an index. The preface is impressive in that Mertha has had a six-year long fieldwork experience in Sichuan, Guizhou, Yunnan, Jiangsu, Shanghai, and Chongqing in China since the late 1990s. He has obtained fruitful first-hand data from extensive interviews with people from the Office of United States Trade Representative (USTR), the Department of Commerce, and the International Intellectual Property Alliance, and the like on the U.S. side, and scholars, lawyers, businesspeople, private investigation agencies as well as some pirates themselves on the Chinese side. With this book, he intends to shed some light on the often misunderstood and highly sensitive issue of the politics of piracy in China by offering a chronologically grounded analysis of the political and organizational development of IPR in China. The first chapter, entitled “Foreign Pressure and China’s IPR Regime,” outlines the topics to be covered in the book and lays the groundwork for discussing China’s IPR regime in the following chapters. The first topic is the conceptualization of foreign pressure, which comes from various countries but mainly from the United States in the form of trade sanctions, revoking China’s most-favored nation status, and blocking China’s entry into international organizations like the World Trade Organization (WTO). Admitting that U.S. pressure may succeed in making China promulgate IPR-related laws and regulations, Mertha argues that the enforcement of IPR actually hinges on the domain of China’s complex bureaucracies and local IPR enforcement agencies. The second topic is the politics of China’s IPR regime, which comprises three distinct clusters of bureaucracies, respectively, responsible for patents, copyright, and trademarks of IPR. Finally, Mertha generalizes the significance of his research by saying that IPR provides a typical window into the policymaking and policy enforcement processes of contemporary China, and the Chinese experience can be instructive and applicable to many other developing and post-socialist countries. Chapter 2, entitled “The Structure and Process of Exogenous Pressure,” provides a summary of the IPR negotiations between the United States and China. As a result of the 1988 Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act in the United States, USTR was put in charge of providing Congress with an annual report on unfair trade practices abroad under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974. China has always been at the top of the “priority watch country” list in the Special 301 Report, and U.S.-China IPR negotiations occurred in 1979, 1989, 1995, and 1996. To Mertha, the substantive content of the U.S. demands in the negotiations overwhelmingly represent the interests of those industries that either complain the most or influence USTR the most. The Chinese side has brought little to the negotiations table except for some counter-demands or desires to change the status quo as little as possible. It is true that U.S. pressure has successfully framed the negotiation issues and ultimately influenced the Chinese laws and regulations, but this does not automatically translate into effective policy implementation and enforcement. The following three chapters, entitled “Patents and Faux Consolidation of China’s Administrative Patent Regime,” “The Copyright Problem,” and “Trademarks and Anti-counterfeiting" form the heart of Mertha’s text that traces the history, cultural context and ongoing economic implications of patent, copyright, and trademark laws through the maze of the Chinese bureaucracy. Due to historical, cultural, and economic reasons, the idea of establishing a consolidated IPR regime combining patents, copyright, and trademarks under an umbrella organization has never materialized. Instead, there is a different bureaucratic structure for each type of IPR featuring institutional fragmentation. China established its National Patent Bureau (later changed to State Intellectual Property Office, SIPO for short) in 1979 mainly due to foreign pressure. SIPO was constantly transferred from one administrative superior institution to another—from State Science and Technology Commission (SSTC, 1980-1982), to State Economic Commission (SEC, 1982-1988), back to SSTC (1988-1993), and then to the State Council (1993- the present) in the past decades. Such transfers have made it politically weak and set it institutionally adrift. For instance, the patent bureaus at the provincial levels have their immediate leadership association with SSTC instead of SIPO and only receive so-called "professional guidance" from SIPO. Similarly, China’s National Copyright Administration (NCA) was established in 1985 and its first copyright law took effect in 1991, which was revised again in 2001 with frequent pressure from the United States. However, NCA is fragmented and dependent on its various host bureaucracies. Organizationally, it is a ministry-level institution directly under the jurisdiction of the State Council, but in reality NCA remains a subordinate organization to both the Ministry of Culture (MOC) and the National Press and Publication Administration (NPPA), which are more concerned with cultural, ideological, and value-laden media than IPR. Due to its scarcity in power and resources, NCA has to ally with other institutions such as the China Copyright Protection Center affiliated with NPPA and the Anti-Piracy Alliance affiliated with Provincial Press and Publication Bureaus. Different from patents and copyright, trademark enforcement has won more success for three principal reasons. First, the trademark management system and subsystem extends from the State Administration of Industry and Commerce (SAIC) at the national level all the way down to the Administration of Industry and Commerce (AIC) at the provincial, township, and even village levels. Second, the State Quality Technical Supervision Bureau (SQTSB), which is mainly responsible for maintaining product quality and overall standardization, has carved out a substantial niche in the crackdown against counterfeit products in China. The competition between the two systems and their subsystems is over the lucrative gains in the crackdown, but it has enhanced China’s trademark enforcement to some extent. Finally, there has been lateral influence from foreign trademark holders with commercial operations in China. They hire detectives to collect evidence and submit it to local trademark enforcement agencies. Through offering gifts, banquets, or even late evening massages, these foreign trademark holders have effectively persuaded the local bureaucrats to protect their trademarks. The last two chapters, entitled “Evaluating the Argument and Analysis” and “Casting a Wider Net” summarize the theme, justify the argument, and elaborate on the significance of the research. To Mertha, exogenous pressure from both top-down demands of USTR and lateral efforts of foreign companies did result in China’s promulgation of its IPR laws and regulations and the establishment of the IPR regime. However, enforcement effectiveness is overwhelmingly observed outside the courtrooms and the offices of the IPR bureaucracies but hinges on local agencies rewarded by side payments from foreign IPR holders. The conclusions of this study provide insight into the politics of contemporary China and offer instructive lessons for IPR disputes in similar countries. The book, on the one hand, is a valuable contribution to the study of IPR in China from the politico-administrative perspective, which has been either neglected or misinterpreted. Conventional literature usually takes the legal-judicial perspective and emphasizes top-down legal IPR protection in China. Mertha’s findings reveal that top-down U.S. pressure is successful in establishing laws and regulations on paper, but full implementation of the laws and regulations requires the existence of functional organizations at all levels that are sufficiently funded. This observation is both important for scholars to recognize and instructive to future U.S. IPR negotiators as to whom to talk to and what to address. On the other hand, Mertha has touched upon the crux of the issue by locating a serious policy problem with China’s IPR regime and by explicating the complicated bureaucratic structure in the Chinese patent, copyright, and trademark administrative organizations. By outlining the structure of each organization and exposing the institutional fragmentation featuring scarcity, embeddedness, and dependency, Mertha has successfully convinced the reader of his argument regarding the significance of external influence and the Chinese mentality of passive resistance. Meanwhile, Mertha’s finding based on his extensive and in-depth interviews with the usually cautious Chinese regarding sensitive topics has made an unprecedented contribution to the study of the Chinese bureaucracy by providing an extensive road map into the maze-like IPR regime in China. However, it is clear that Mertha needs to integrate a cultural explanation into his research. He has treated China as a pure pirate country and posits that any positive change in China’s IPR policy is the result of external pressure like the official USTR or the private foreign IPR holders. Although these ideas are largely supported by his findings, these findings can only serve some practical and short-term purposes. To resolve the IPR issue in China from a long-term point of view, he should also take both the Chinese IPR holders and consumers into consideration. Foreign IPR holders may have their commercial operations in China for some periods of time, but the Chinese IPR holders are there and will be there for a much longer period of time. Actually, for thousands of years, the concept of individualized or private IPR has been nonexistent in Chinese history, but the Chinese have also produced centuries of innovation and inventions like paper making and block printing, to name just two, which have benefited human beings all over the world, without any form of protection of their patents or copyright. Thus, it is also necessary for Mertha to address the deeply-rooted Chinese cultural values that are historically resistant to IPR protection and discuss ways to awaken the national awareness of the significance of IPR protection to make his findings more far reaching and meaningful. About the Reviewer Dexin Tian is a PhD student in the School of Communication Studies at Bowling Green State University. His major is intercultural communication, and his research interest is copyright infringement and protection in China.

Henderson, Harold. (2006). Let's Kill Dick & Jane: How the Open Court Publishing Company Fought the Culture of American Education. Reviewed by Sarah Katherine Abrams, University of Virginia

Henderson, Harold. (2006). Let's Kill Dick & Jane: How the Open Court Publishing Company Fought the Culture of American Education. St. Augustine's Press. Pp. 168     ISBN 1587319195 Reviewed by Sarah Katherine Abrams University of Virginia September 13, 2007 Harold Henderson, author of the new book Let’s Kill Dick & Jane: How the Open Court Publishing Company Fought the Culture of American Education, does not believe in the American education system, as shown in the following quote, “American schools have not deteriorated – they’ve never been good enough” (p. 10). The Open Court Publishing Company was known for producing reading instruction textbooks which used direct instruction of phonics. Let’s Kill Dick & Jane was written as a cultural study rather than a corporate history for an audience of reformers and who Henderson lovingly refers to “would-be” reformers. Harold Henderson is a noted longtime staff writer at the Chicago Reader and claims. Somewhat dubiously, to be the world’s first blogger. Henderson has ties to educational and environmental organizations, as well as being an outspoken anti-war activist. He created Let’s Kill Dick & Jane as a platform to showcase what he perceived as glaring issues of educational reform inertia through the example of Open Court. He chose Open Court because of its legacy and persistence in attempting to alter a resistant school system. The author’s goal is to change the culture of American public education, and he states that to do so you must first make the culture and the flaws visible to the public. While Henderson may be nationally known, he is not trained in any sort of educational methods or philosophy. As such, a non-education person praising a program for schools created by another person not trained in education leaves the reader feeling that Henderson has little insight into the educational culture he wants so desperately to change. The book opens with Henderson stating that the educational culture was offered tools to save itself through Open Court’s products, but anti-intellectual elements prevented education from taking these tools. His biases teeter on the line of being anti-American, with a strong preference for a European style of education. He criticizes American education and educational culture, as seen in the following, “How can we educate our masses as rigorously as Europeans do their elite? This book is about their [Open Court’s] efforts to answer this question in practice – and their difficulty in finding educators at any level who were willing even to ask it,” (p. 11). Henderson seems to have fallen into a form of idol worship of Blouke Carus, who founded the Open Court Publishing Company in 1962 and who is the central character of the book. Carus had many common enemies with Harold Henderson, such anti-intellectual, life-adjustment philosophy, and the whole-word (Dick-and-Jane-style) method of learning to read. Carus was not trained in education, and Henderson quotes him as saying, “My own education has been woefully inadequate…. my training in writing was a farce,” (p.13). Despite this lack of educational training, the chemical engineer felt confident in openly criticizing John Dewey and others who have been trained in education. As Henderson summarizes it, “Blouke saw schooling as a problem to be solved and business as a plausible way to solve it.” (p. 21) Carus’s method of choice to transform education was through textbook reform, which is applauded by Henderson. Henderson explains Carus’s goal in choosing this approach: “to eliminate progressive education and to provide a much broader and more academically oriented education for each child” (p. 25). Henderson reiterates frequently that the Open Court textbooks were not traditional and contained the best of both progressive and traditional methods. Henderson sees the textbooks as something new: “Blouke has created a system in which both stereotypically traditionalist and progressive methods worked in tandem for children.” (p. 41) To the contrary, Carus’s actions and words show that he disliked progressive education and wanted more classics, traditional literature, and universal education. Henderson also claimed that Open Court led the way in research. The company tried many different ways of selling their books and of fighting huge economic losses. They promised that scores were guaranteed to increase if children were taught exactly as Open Court said. In addition, Open Court tried to prove results with self-reported data. One experiment was designed to show that using the Open Court method would increase a student’s IQ, a measure that Henderson does not question. However, that and other experiments were discounted because of the researchers' self-interest, and no external party was used to confirm results. Open Court also created a test school to showcase how well the method would work, and they set up a field test to determine what problems existed with the methods. The results from these experiments were intended to help them learn how to fix the problems with Open Court. When the experiments that the company set up failed, teachers were blamed. Henderson makes the doubtful claim that Open Court was a visionary in testing and documenting their program. Both Carus and Henderson believed the problems of Open Court were due to the teachers, and Henderson chooses to gloss over any problems with the Open Court system. Henderson tries to draw the reader to the conclusion that the reason for Open Court’s failure was inadequate teachers. Carus was looking for a “teacher-proof” method of educating children and stated, “Education is too important to be left to the educators” (p. 110). Henderson makes the claim repeatedly that Open Court did not work because teachers would not put the required effort into it. When given the chance to fix the teachers’ guides or make recommendations for the teachers, Open Court instead chose to try to gain the support of administrators and the state board. They hoped that the teachers’ superiors could force them to use the Open Court textbook in the way the company wanted. Henderson admired Open Court’s direct instruction methods and was saddened that it did not take over education in the United States. He describes the impact of Open Court as, “the education culture absorbed the impact and emerged unscathed.” (p. 127) Henderson and Carus may be disappointed, but their goal of revolution had serious flaws. Textbooks in education are supplied to meet the demands of the school, and change is unlikely to occur there without teacher support. The culture of education may appear to be in a state of inertia, but if Henderson had been trained in education and realized how many people it touched, he would have realized change is slow but is occurring continually. Another key point that both Henderson and Carus miss is that directly attacking teachers would not yield the results they want. Being part of the system and working with it, not against it, is much more effective. In this case, it is dangerous, and not productive, for a person lacking adequate training to praise an educational program created by another person who also lacks training in education. By taking this approach, Open Court’s direct instruction methods run the risk of being discredited by both insiders and outsiders in education. Both Henderson and Carus strongly criticize the education culture, yet do not try to change the system in any meaningful way. They both want to transform that culture through sheer force, and not by using its most powerful weapons, teachers. The program and the book were not written for educators, missing another element to shift the system. They are in fact not written for an educationally aware audience, but rather for a curious voter in an attempt to make them believe in the purported bleakness of the outlook for American education. About the reviewer Sarah Abrams is a PhD student at the University of Virginia, studying social foundations. Her focus is on the realm of education policy within the context of after-effects and unexpected consequences, but she also has a passion for education history and philosophy.

Maguire, Meg; Wooldridge, Tim; & Pratt-Adams, Simon. (2006). The Urban Primary School. Reviewed by Joseph Mintz, London South Bank University

Maguire, Meg; Wooldridge, Tim; & Pratt-Adams, Simon. (2006). The Urban Primary School. London: Open University Press. Pp. 280     ISBN-10 0335201776 Reviewed by Joseph Mintz London South Bank University September 15, 2007 The Urban Primary School focuses on the UK context, but part of the strength of this book derives from the comparisons made throughout to the education system in the United States. The authors have created a book that also has relevance to those in other countries who are also interested in the tensions between policy initiatives and issues of equity and social justice that this book explores. Having said that, the book is written by UK authors with the expectation that the readers will have some familiarity with developments in UK education policy within the last two decades, such as the introduction of a National Curriculum in 1988 and programmes designed to increase the emphasis in primary schools on literacy and numeracy (the National Literacy and Numeracy Strategies) from 1997. The authors draw on a wide range of sources and the ideas presented are well embedded in the existing literature, particularly in respect of social policy and education. Tomlinson and Gerwitz are extensively quoted, with references as well to ideas from Cox, Whitty and Bernstein. There is also some consideration of authors looking at social policy in a wider context such as Will Hutton, who is one of the leading thinkers on social democracy in the UK. The authors attempt to link trends in education policy to the actual experience of urban primary education, whether as a teacher, headteacher, parent or child. This is an ambitious aim and although the breadth of their project means that they sometimes fail to analyse some issues in enough depth, in general they raise a number of key issues that are of importance to those engaged with primary education. The authors define the urban primary school as being one that is faced by a number of challenges to do with the general level of affluence of the school intake and surrounding area. Although they concede that such schools can be found in both rural and urban areas, it is in cities that they predominate and it is clear that the main interest of the authors is on primary schools in the inner city. The early chapters cover a consideration of how to theorize the urban context, covering the historical processes related to urbanization. More recent trends such as white flight, gentrification and city polarization between classes are also considered concisely, and much of the subsequent discussions on links between policy and social policy are based on the ideas introduced here. They identify urban schools as forming part of a popular discourse where urban equals difficulty and failure, which if one reads the tabloid press in the UK is easy to recognise. They are careful here to develop one of their main themes - that issues around poverty - housing, healthcare, employment and power relationships based around class are a key reason why urban schools underperform. In later chapters they specifically challenge the notion put forward by right wing policy advocates to the effect that the exceptions - schools faced with urban problems who succeed against the odds, point towards teaching quality as the key issue in such underperformance. This is, though, a contested area of debate, and the authors fail to cover ideas put forward often cogently by writers such as Chris Woodhead (see Sunday Times (London), June 3rd 2007) that it is clear lines of accountability and an emphasis on good teaching that gets results in these "exceptional" schools. As with the analysis of other policy arguments in this book, the right's viewpoint is presented only as forethought to its demolition, whereas a more in depth critique of its ideas may have led to a more rounded view of the policy issues raised by the authors. Chris Woodhead, of course, was both the old Conservative government's last and the New Labour administration's first Chief Inspector of Schools. As a book mainly focused on the UK, there is some in depth consideration of how New Labour policy on education developed, which may be difficult to interpret for readers not familiar with the context. It is though, generally not difficult, to see resonances with other countries such as the US where policy has as well been driven by a desire to set standards and to use tests and assessment as a driver for school improvement. One can hear the authors' unspoken assertion that policy developments by New Labour and Tony Blair could often be classified as right wing. In Chapter 2, issues stemming from economic deprivation as considered in Chapter 1 are explored further. In addition, other typically urban issues are considered, such as the challenges of providing for significant numbers of children with English as an additional language without adequate resources, problems faced by refugee children, including the need for additional emotional support for those who have suffered trauma and dislocation and key problems around teacher recruitment and retention. The authors give an authentic account of the interplay between these and other factors, which as they portray are often the stuff of urban primary school life. In Chapters 3 and 4, the focus moves to a review of some small scale research carried out by the authors on the views of primary teachers and headteachers on their experience of working in the urban primary school. Although perhaps slightly tangential to the main thrust of the book on debates around social policy, the research gives a slightly more upbeat tone to the discussion, indicating the often positive attitude of teachers to the challenges of the urban context and their desire to make a difference. Chapter 5 focuses on parents and it is here that we begin to see flesh develop on the key idea of the book - namely how (often right wing) macro education policies often mask of ignore the realities of class based and race based inequalities on the ground. Drawing on work by Gerwitz, the authors argue that "the rhetoric of partnership can sometimes mask uncomfortable dilemmas". For example, they point out how some parents can find themselves inevitably drawn in to conflicts where teachers are middle class and parents are working class - power relationships implicit in this class analysis often distorting the whole idea of partnership. In Chapter 6 "Supporting Diversity", there is a consideration of the trend in sociology to challenge uni-dimensional analysis of issues in terms of, for example, race or class. Drawing on writers such as Shane and Hall, they consider how the "lived lives" of the players in the urban primary school and its community are often more complex and offer numerous potential intersections between varied trajectories of race, class and gender. As they point out, "being from Manchester and/ or being gay might be equally, if not more important, to an individual who might be described as Afro-Caribbean.." They point out the danger that, for example, a continued unidimensional focus on ethnicity opens up the risky possibility that it could be used by some as a reason for underachievement and may "distract attention away from what schools actually offer to working class students". It is interesting to note, however, that they do not throughout the rest of the book apply this analysis with much conviction, and in particular do not explore its consequences for their largely class based critiques in other areas. For example, in Chapter 5 they use Gerwitz's ideas to consider how some policy initiatives (such as Sure Start in the UK) could be conceptualized as an attempt to eradicate class differences by making working class parents in to vocal, well-informed, well-behaved middle class parents, reflecting a deficit approach in which the values and cultural capital of working class families are marginalised. One feels bound to ask, though, especially given their analysis in Chapter 6, whether this class based analysis is really accurate when applied to the complexities of urban life in the 21st century. Is it really true that parents from a range of backgrounds can only conceptualize themselves in one dimension? Even is we must agree that some of these possible trajectories will be harder to access due to educational outcomes and income inequalities, is the neat distinction in to working and middle class really the clearest way to conceptualized these ideas? In Chapter 7 the analysis based on class in further developed, and related ideas are introduced in Chapter 9 on Social Justice. "State schooling in the UK has always been a classed project", state the authors, drawing support for this assertion from work by Williams and Ball, considering evidence on how the middle classes deploy strategies to achieve better educational outcomes for their children, for example by manipulating physical space by buying properties in "good" school catchment areas. The authors point out how policies aimed at introducing choice/competition in to education consumption has led to greater opportunities for the middle classes to intervene in the market to their own advantage. They also concisely explore the effects of such choice mechanisms in practice for urban schools - for example how reducing rolls of perceived "bad" schools can lead to an unavoidable cycle of an increased intake of children perhaps with emotional and behavioural difficulties, subsequent problems with staff recruitment and demonization exacerbated by market mechanisms and distortion by local and national media. In Chapter 9, although the authors admirably attempt a definition of social justice, drawing on work by Harvey, Runciman, Cribb and Gerwitz, the reader is still left with the feeling of trying to get a purchase on this essentially slippery concept. They do, however, manage to incisively point out how New Labour's approach to social justice has been confused by their simultaneous appeal to market forces and their inability or refusal to truly challenge established power structures. Yet this issue perhaps lies at the heart of the definitional problem - we might feel that social justice is up there as an ideal with motherhood and apple pie - but it is much less clear whether social democratic, Marxist or right wing policies are a better choice for practically achieving the ideals of social justice. Again, the argument of this book that poverty is an inescapable factor in educational failure does not in itself tell us what social or economic policies will best lead to alleviation of that poverty - an analytical gap that is brushed over by the authors. What is of more interest in Chapter 9 are the case studies on how policy issues get translated on the ground in individual primary schools and classes. For example, the authors consider the situation of a school being asked to focus Gifted and Talented Funding (a UK initiative to focus resources on stretching more able children) on particular children when they know that a broader range of children could potentially benefit from these resources. They then carefully explore the potential conflicts that this creates for the teaching staff in the school. In Chapter 10, the authors expand on the interesting early references in earlier chapters to comparisons between UK and US perspectives. For UK and no doubt other readers, the summary of recent developments in American Education Policy will be of interest. The authors further focus on what the authors view as successful interventions, which have had more of a grass roots development path in the US, such as the charter schools movement and the State University of New York Education Teacher Centre (SUTEC) - an initiative to provide a broad supportive environment to student teachers working in urban primary schools. The authors make it clear that they have more faith in such organic, bottom up approaches to make a real difference to the urban primary school than the top-down policy initiatives that the critique earlier in the book. Conclusion In this book the authors clearly and authoritatively explore the challenges facing urban primary education, focusing on the UK but with the addition of a thought provoking international perspective. They summarize key ideas in the literature on the relationship between social education policy and typical discourses around class, race, gender, urban space and cultural capital. This analysis is, at times limited, and one could have hoped that the authors would have given more consideration to the complexities of political debate that inevitably arise from their identification of poverty as a key factor in educational attainment. Nevertheless, there is a refreshing emphasis on local and practical issues which are often given less prominence, such as urban problems with teacher recruitment and retention. In particular, the case study approach employed in Chapters 9 and 10 brings to life how some of the theoretical clashes between policy and lived realities actually play out for specific schools and teachers. This book will serve well as an introduction to social policy issues in urban education and teachers working in urban and other settings should be aware of the complex factors affecting their working lives that it explores. As such, trainee teachers, teacher educators and indeed school governors would also find this book of interest. About the Reviewer Joseph Mintz Senior Lecturer in Education Department of Education London South Bank University 103 Borough Road London SE1 0AA Joseph Mintz is Senior Lecturer in Education at London South Bank University. He tutors on initial teacher training and masters level programmes which support teachers in working in the inner city context. His research interests focus on approaches to helping children with barriers to learning. He also has an interest in the use of E-learning to develop teaching strategies in Higher Education

Conchas, Gilberto Q. (2006). The Color of Success: Race and High-achieving Urban Youth. Reviewed by Garth Cooper, Michigan State University

Conchas, Gilberto Q. (2006). The Color of Success: Race and High-achieving Urban Youth. NY, NY: Teachers College Press. (Foreword by Pedro A. Noguera.) Pp. 168         $56 (hardcover) ISBN 0807746614 Reviewed by Garth Cooper Michigan State University September 20, 2007 Starting with A Nation at Risk in 1983, there has been a steady cry for standards, accountability, and regulation of schools, teachers, and students. The neo-conservative nature of the No Child Left Behind legislation, with its direct influence from the business world, and alignment of efficiency and performance standards with educational goals, has led to a redefinition of education in the United States. Educational scholars have written extensively regarding the impact these policies have had in undermining the democratic purposes of public education, intensifying inequality, and bringing schools increasingly under the economic and cultural domination of corporations and the market (Apple, 1996; Aronowitz & Giroux, 1993; Asher, Fruchter & Berne, 1996; Molnar, 1996; Saltman, 2000). In his book The Color of Success, Gilberto Conchas focuses on the issue of educational inequality and its effect on minority students’ school achievement within the framework of the national push towards standardization and accountability. Conchas claims the aim of his book is to “reveal why and how Black, Latino, and Vietnamese high school students achieve academic success, despite limited opportunities.” More specifically, “to highlight how urban schooling can empower youth and structure success.” Following the lead of S. L. Lightfoot’s (1983) scientifically crafted portraits of goodness in schools, he attempts to demonstrate that there is a need for researchers to explore a more complex and nuanced understanding of the goodness and successes of schools, rather than always focusing on school failures. In attempting to meet his purpose, Conchas examines minority students’ experiences in one California urban public high school (Baldwin High School). “Through the actions and voices of high-achieving, low-income Black, Latino, and Vietnamese students, this book offers and debates solutions aimed at mitigating patent invidious practices and latent structures of inequality that plague educational systems throughout the nation." (p. 1) "This book initiates an exploration of ways in which urban school practices may empower low-income minority youth in their efforts to achieve social mobility. At the heart of this endeavor are narratives of student success.” (p. 2) The book begins with an emphasis on the conceptual framework for his argument. Conchas attempts to link cultural-ecological explanations of minority schooling with institutional rationales for student success. He claims there are two levels of structure in the educational setting: a) macro-structures, which are larger political and economic constraints that either impede or enhance students’ social mobility (race, class, and gender); and the micro-structure (school sizes, class sizes, curriculum, and pedagogy), which affect the daily performance of youth. In Chapter Two, Conchas examines the micro-politics of race prevalent in most school settings, which are reflective of the stratification witnessed in American society in general. Using teacher and student voices, he shows how some school programs, such as career academies and advanced placement programs, promote cohesion and tolerance across racial lines, in direct contrast to the environment encountered in the general high school setting. The next three chapters focus, separately, on the three racial and ethnic groups that were studied, African-American, Latino, and Vietnamese. The goal for this section of the book is to allow the successful students themselves to share their perceptions of high achievement in school. It pays particularly close attention to how high-achieving minority students construct success narratives and academic strategies. This is the “how-to” portion of the book from the studied students’ perspective. Not satisfied with offering a qualitative answer to the achievement riddle, we next get some quantitative data that attempts to draw comparisons in response to the student voices in the previous chapters. For example, the author tries to ascertain whether peer pressure and teacher influences work through the school context as suggested by the students. While Conchas pays homage to the idea of cultural capital, he downplays the role of the family, instead focusing on the significance of relationships within the school setting. The significance of Social Support Systems dominates the final chapter of the book. Conchas argues that institutional mechanisms and social stratification have the most profound affect on student achievement. His number one assertion is that “smaller and intimate school-within-a-school structures or small learning communities are significant for student engagement.” Student engagement then leads to student achievement, fostered by a decrease in the sense of isolation and an increase in the feeling of camaraderie felt in these settings. Conchas has done an excellent job of falling in line with the researchers that have come before him. There is a preponderance of literature to support the existence of the achievement gap of minority students, as well as, literature which suggests that this gap can be overcome in the correct environment. His assertion that we should focus on success stories rather than failures makes great sense. If you want to cook a better omelet, you don’t focus on those that went wrong with previous tries instead you attempt to emulate those that turned out well. However, just as it is unrealistic to think that you can replicate that perfect omelet - prepared in a well-equipped kitchen with the glass-top stove, in a non-stick pan, and fresh from the refrigerator ingredients – with one that is prepared at a campsite over a wood fire, in a cast iron skillet, with ingredients that were packed into the woods in a cooler bag, it must be acknowledged that there are very unique structures in place at the researched institution. The limited purview of Conchas’s research, focused on small groups of students within one school, makes it impossible to generalize any of his findings to other school districts. There is nothing to suggest that his findings would translate to different school environments. This is not meant to discount totally his effort though, as his positivistic outlook towards school improvement is a refreshing change from the “emphasis on failure” approach applied by most researchers. Readers holding only a cursory interest in the minority student achievement gap should find themselves satisfied with Conchas’s tales of success at Baldwin High School. However, for those more interested in actually addressing the challenges of closing the gap, and discerning solutions that can be generalized across a variety of school settings, the findings in this book will leave them wanting. References Apple, M. W. (1996) Cultural politics and education. New York: Teachers College Press. Aronowitz, S., & Giroux, H. (1993) Education still under siege. Westport: BerginGarvey. Ascher, C., Fruchter, N. & Berne, R. (1996). Hard lessons: Public schools and privatization. New York: Twentieth Century Fund. Lightfoot, S. L. (1983). The Good High School. NY, NY: Basic Books, Inc. Molnar, A. (1996). Charter schools: The smiling face of disinvestment. Educational Leadership, 54(2), 9-15. Saltman, Kenneth J. (2000), Collateral Damage: Corporatizing Public Schools—A Threat to Democracy.Boulder, CO: Rowman and Littlefield. About the Reviewer Garth Cooper is a doctoral student in Teacher Education at Michigan State University. He is currently working on his dissertation which is focused on the impact of the "Highly Qualified" requirement of the NCLB legislation.

Irwin, Cait with Evans, Dwight & Andrews, Linda. (2007). Monochrome Days: A firsthand account of one teenager's experience with depression. Reviewed by Robbie J. Steward, Michigan State University

Irwin, Cait with Evans, Dwight & Andrews, Linda. (2007). Monochrome Days: A firsthand account of one teenager’s experience with depression. N.Y.: Oxford University Press, Inc. Pp. v + 160         ISBN 978-0-19-531005-4 Reviewed by Robbie J. Steward Michigan State University September 26, 2007 Monochrome Days should be on the required reading list in every high school psychology class and noted for discussion within curriculum in every graduate program in counseling, psychology, and social work. The inclusion of this text is a curriculum imperative given than most adolescents having symptoms of depression and anxiety, (particularly those from families having lower socio-economic status), do not seek help. There remains a dire need in general society to reach students and parents alike in an attempt to educate them about the disease and the resources around them (Bailey, 2007), in addition, to better preparing novice professionals in disseminating the necessary information to the public that will facilitate prevention and early diagnosis and intervention. This collaborative effort among one diagnosed with depression (Cait Irwin), a psychiatrist (Dwight Evans, M.D.), and a free-lance health and psychology writer (Linda Wasmer Andrews), accomplishes these objectives. The chapters flow easily and effectively set the stage for the presentation of an engaging, personal, and heart-wrenching story that also serves as an easy-read textbook that informs laypersons and budding professionals of the language associated with diagnosis, treatment, and management of depression. The legitimacy of its utility and meaningfulness in education and psychology is validated by advance acclaim by the directors of three of the leading national organizations that have the charge for improving the lives of children and adults living with serious mental illnesses and their families: the National Alliance on Mental Illness Child & Adolescent Action Center (NAMI), Active minds, Inc., and the suicide Prevention Action Network (SPAN USA). The case description component of the book presents a teen’s autobiographical journey through the struggles of depression, which is a major negative cause of engagement in at-risk behaviors (i.e., substance abuse, anorexia, etc.), academic failure, suicidal ideation, and potential death. Written in retrospect and after extensive trial and error efforts in treatment over time, the content uniquely not only presents an in-depth description of internal and interpersonal struggles associated with the ongoing vacillation between hope and despair, but also provides well-defined guidelines for self-assessment (pp. 29-38), help-seeking strategies for successful intervention (i.e., pp. 30, 65), and personal day-to-day management of symptoms associated with this particular diagnosis (i.e., Chapter 7). In many ways, the text has the qualities of a traditional casebook in that it does describe psychological-emotional experiences from onset of the disease and throughout treatment and management interventions in addition to family members’, friends’ and acquaintances’ responses. Life before and after onset of the symptoms are addressed, signs and symptoms of how and when things went wrong, suicidal ideation, hospitalization, tried and failed attempts at therapeutic interventions, medications, and coping, as well as family heart-break and disconnect are presented as realities that may occur during and after recovery. However, this is not the traditional casebook, which typically has linear successes and the happy ending of full recovery with a resulting cohesive and stable family system. The authors sensitively address the negative influence of the disease on the family system, relaying some understanding and forgiving interpretation of others’ detachment and awkwardness, during a time of greatness need of the one diagnosed. However, in doing so, these words are balanced with descriptions of behaviors from others that were found to be most helpful and supportive even though actions might not have been received positively at the time or may not have resulted in immediate positive responses. This work shares the knotholes and flaws that are so often missing in other caseworks. The presence of the identified “patient” as an author in collaboration with professionals allows the evolution of a portrait of one whose insight about their influence on others as well as others’ influence on them is well-documented. Monochrome Days extends the description beyond one individual’s personal story of success to infuse the many faces of significant others’ responses, the effect of the disease on those around them, an abbreviated overview of the literature addressing diagnosis and treatment, and the need for the ongoing inclusion of personal responsibility in monitoring the disease as essential to recovery and management. This is a hard-hitting story of confusion and deep psychological hurt that is not quickly resolved through attention from family and friends, or introspection about the irrationality of thinking. Mainstream ideas about depression resulting solely from an absence of love, social support, and an accommodating environment are refuted. The frightening reality presented is one in which a prevailing negative emotional state of despair and sadness may suddenly occur for no clearly identifiable reason and persist over long periods of time in spite of all personal, family, and school system efforts for correction and healing. Ms. Irwin’s evolving and resilient spirit exhibited throughout her experiences of hopelessness, haplessness, and a non-reality based sense of social isolation are detailed in a manner that is simultaneously unsettling, and inspiring in spite of the pervasiveness and complexity of the collective set of symptoms and effects. Nevertheless, this book is by far much more than a casebook with the primary objective of provoking empathy and understanding of mental illness and depression as a disease. The carefully crafted organized words of the authors and the artwork aptly portray the emotional emptiness and hopelessness associated with depression. However, there are additional qualities that make his work a significant contribution to the literature and an educational tool that heightens sensitivity and awareness, and provides critical knowledge as well. The attention to gender differences increases readers’ awareness of the varying faces of depression based on socialization within our general social structure (pp. 14, 16, 87). Differences between characteristics associated with normal development during adolescence and those associated with depression are noted. The authors help readers better distinguish between what is considered ‘normal’ and what is not at this stage of development. Additional distinguishing points that further enhance knowledge and awareness about the disease include: a 61-word glossary that covers the most relevant nosology associated with diagnosis and pharmacological (i.e., pp. 81-86), various modalities of treatment of the disease (i.e., cognitive-behavioral therapy—pp. 86-88, interpersonal therapy—p. 88, family therapy—pp. 88-89, group therapy—pp. 89, 92-93; a section answering the most frequently asked questions related to understanding depression (pp. 127-136), strategies for battling stereotypes and stigma and effective transitioning into adulthood (Chapters 6 & 7); and, lists of organizational resources (21) (pp. 141-144), books categorized by reading level, first person accounts, and biographical accounts (15), hotlines (2), and websites (2). This book represents one example of a one-stop primer that is guaranteed to lead to increased sensitivity to the perils of the experience and knowledge about exactly what to expect and do once a formal diagnosis of clinical depression occurs. Readers who are mental health professionals or who are in training in this capacity will be left with greater empathy for the impact of depression during this sensitive developmental stage and a better understanding of the world through the eyes of those with whom they work. Teachers, parents, and adolescents are offered a glimpse into the personal and interpersonal tensions and dilemmas experienced by sufferers of depression and those around them. Consequently, they, likewise, will be better prepared to identify and intervene when symptoms present within themselves, within families and within social networks. Depression is presented as a disease, with well-defined signs and symptoms (i.e., changes in eating habits, changes in sleeping habits, changes in activity levels, changes in energy levels, feelings of worthlessness, changes in thinking ability, and thoughts of suicide) (pp.31-34), and having various types (i.e., Dysthymia, Bipolar disorder) (p. 13), which require immediate and ongoing attention. In highlighting these points, the work is stellar and makes a meaningful contribution to our understanding of that which has been identified as one of the most prevalent mental illness diagnoses in this country today and that 14% of teens report experiencing some associated symptoms by age 18 (p. 13). However, what is equally important to understanding depression, but not directly addressed in the case highlighted, was apparent implicitly in the manner in which etiology was addressed. Those who are depressed may not be able to clearly identify the points of etiology of the disease, only the prevailing sense of hopelessness. Although the authors took care to identify multiple possible explanations for the origins of the depressed mood (i.e., genetics, biology, psychology, environment) (pp. 15-21), they suddenly become less forthcoming about offering readers some insight about the etiology of the depression of the case described. The explanation was limited to a reaction of seemingly having no idea at all about the causes, to trying to fit in at school, to the genetic contribution from her father, who reportedly suffered from similar symptoms. This absence of expressed insight about reasons for onset and triggers is somewhat noteworthy given reported multiple contacts with therapists and hospitalizations. Nevertheless, individuals do have the right to share or not share pieces of their own personal stories, but this void in the text omits volumes of key information that might have informed readers of the most important factors, which would have provided some insight regarding intervention. For example, a description of how her family system and personality might have specifically contributed to the onset and how changes that occurred during treatment led to more positive outcomes would have been beneficial in completing the picture for laypersons and practitioners. Targeting a specific combination of triggers may engender some hopefulness about individuals’ sense of control, even if limited, over the process and outcome of the recovery experience. The content in the present state reinforces for some a potentially most terrifying conclusion that depression occurs suddenly with no precipitating event or set of events. Providing this information would also have added to the literature addressing prevention, which would certainly benefit readers as well as the profession overall. Regardless of the reasons for the omission, readers must be cautioned in drawing conclusions resulting solely from a disease or medical model perspective without some direction or sense of causality attached that extends beyond the genetic and biological explanations. References Bailey, L. (2007). Students with symptoms of mental illness often don’t seek help. The PsychwatchNewsletter, 10. Retrieved June 30, 2007, from http://www.psychwatch.com/news.htm About the Reviewer Robbie J. Steward is Director of the MA Counseling program and Professor in the Department of Counseling and Educational Psychology & Special Education at Michigan State University. She is currently examining the influence of counselor-trainees’ cognitive-psychological-emotional characteristics on their development of counseling competence. Her research interests include multicultural counseling training, counseling supervision, and the identification of non-cognitive variables that influence academic success in K-12 and undergraduate university student populations.

Epstein, Kitty Kelly. (2006). A Different View of Urban Schools: Civil Rights, Critical Race Theory, and Unexplored Realities. Reviewed by Ishwanzya Rivers, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Epstein, Kitty Kelly. (2006). A Different View of Urban Schools: Civil Rights, Critical Race Theory, and Unexplored Realities. N.Y.: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc. Pp. 144     ISBN 0-8204-7879-2 Reviewed by Ishwanzya Rivers University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign October 6, 2007 Also see Jamel K. Donnor's review of this book. Using her passion for education, social justice, and civil rights, Kitty Kelly Epstein, an Oakland area educator, parent, and researcher uses her relationship with the Oakland school district to construct a historical case study of one urban school district involved in civil rights, local control, and curriculum battles. A Different View of Urban Schools: Civil Rights, Critical Race Theory, and Unexplored Realities (2006) examines racial and economic issues faced by the Oakland school district and its elected school board. Dr. Epstein describes what she calls the “alternate” issues of education (e.g., curriculum, teachers, financial decisions, and control of the local school district) that enable academic success because “Americans expect schools to be fair, to provide opportunity, justice, skills, and enlightenment” (p. 2). Epstein uses the events (e.g., attempted state takeover, the Ebonics debate, and statewide tracking) of the Oakland school district to investigate and analyze the challenges faced by other urban school districts and demonstrates how American institutions replicate racism, power, and privilege. Epstein provides a different view of urban schools by challenging the strongly held myth that “urban schools were o.k. in the good old days” (p. 3) prior to the 1960s Civil Rights movement that promoted integration and diversity. The belief is based on the premise that the conditions of the 1960s brought chaos, violence, corruption, and dysfunction to urban schools, and as a result, responsible people including those in state and federal governments, academics, and businesses, have been forced to intervene to save the children attending these schools (p. 4). A Different View of Urban Schools was written to show that “public schools, especially urban schools, were not good before the 1960s, at least not for the Latino, African American, and Asian students who attended them. The book was also written to show that intense but little known civil rights battles took place in many Northern cities; the post 1960s school boards which resulted from these struggles did not “screw up” the schools but within existing constraints, made progress on equity issues; these equity policies have produced some advances in civil rights and cultural sensitivity; urban school districts were increasingly constrained by state and federal policies and then direct intervention; and the logic, structures, and practices of American racism flow throughout both the history and the current period” (p. 3). Underlying her manifold purpose, Epstein wants to encourage educational debates that challenge traditional liberal and conservative rhetoric and to do this she expresses five, basic unchanging and generally unmentioned realities about U.S. education, which are: The U.S. is a capitalist country. The entire U.S. education system sits on a structure of tests and sorting invented by members of the Eugenics movement who believed Northern European whites to be smarter than everyone else. Democracy is limited. The more white and affluent the parents of a particular group of children, the more likely they will have real influence over expenditures, curriculum, school structure, and personnel selection. When districts with less affluent citizens make different decisions about these issues, their power to make the decisions is increasingly circumscribed. There is no single public. There are actually four different American systems: the somewhat responsive suburban and middle class public system; the urban systems, many of which have been taken over by outside state, federal, or private interests; the system of private and parochial schools for working class and urban children which are not well-funded but are still somewhat responsive to their local communities; and the system of elite private schools to which the wealthy send their own children but which are required to follow none of the rules and procedures which have been established to control the schools attended by the poor. Nevertheless, American students, parents, labor union, civil rights groups, and community groups have on many occasions successfully challenged the structures and policies that result from the first four realities. Epstein urges that by understanding these realities educators and parents are able to make informed and conscientious decisions about education. As the title of the book suggests, Epstein employs critical race theory as her theoretical framework to emphasize the deeply embedded racism within every institution in American society especially the education system. She defines the important contentions of critical race theory as “defining race as a salient aspect of U.S. society and education; racism is rooted in property relations; and racism is permanent in U.S. society” (p. 6). She insists that by using critical race theory as a theoretical foundation we are better able to look at urban schools and actually understand that the problems we think are inherent to this type of school are actually problems that are inherent to a racist society (e.g., achievement gap). Her historical case study rests on the foundation of Marxist methods, which imply a historical, dialectical, and materialist investigation, allowing her to look at an individual phenomenon (the Oakland school board) within the totality of all phenomena (national education systems). She uses Marxist methods to gain a deeper and broader understanding of the place of urban schools in U.S. society and to bring a historical outlook to educational debates, filling an important void in current discussions. Marxist methods are also employed to help the reader understand that educational functions do not operate in isolation from other social functions. Using Paulo Friere’s ideology that schools are sites of struggle, Epstein concludes, “schools in this period are a preeminent place of social struggle in the U.S.” (p.2) and it is the awareness of this struggle that guides the thoughts and ideas in this discussion of the Oakland school district. Also Friere’s notion of schools as places where people struggle for justice provides critical hope that even though educational systems are embedded within a broader system of racist political and economic power they can in fact elicit change. Using the aforementioned theories, Epstein presents her examination of urban schools by beginning with a revisionist history, noting the often-ignored racial dynamics of northern cities. She then proceeds with the struggles and contradictions of urban districts, particularly addressing the control of monetary expenditures, which occurred after African Americans finally had enough political clout to make decisions about their urban schools. Finally, she looks at the generally ignored accomplishments of urban school boards under minority leadership. While the specific focus of A Different View is the Oakland school district, the author uses it as a lens to view other urban school districts that have experienced or are currently experiencing similar issues. Having set the tone of the book, Epstein uses chapter two to take the reader on a journey through pre-1960s Oakland to look closely at the assumption that urban school districts have declined in the last quarter century and are providing a less adequate education than in a previous era. In proposing an alternate history of urban schools, she also exposes racist policies established during earlier years of the school district, such as employing IQ testing as a means of “tracking” the entire district. Using archival data and personal interviews she highlights the corruption and manipulation of early leaders and politicians and how the connection between politics and education led to a stratified, segregated school system in Oakland. Relaying heavily on the tenets of critical race theory, chapter two exposes the hidden and not so hidden layers of racism and discrimination in the early Oakland school district. Demonstrating the responsiveness of the residents of color to discriminatory practices, policies, and ideologies, chapter three describes in detail the beginning of civil rights’ activist groups’ in Oakland efforts to tackle discrimination and racism in the education arena. Chapter three also looks at community efforts and involvement in obtaining racial representation among teachers, in redrawing attendance boundaries to circumvent segregated schools, and having community participation in the selection process of the superintendent. In detailing the actions of the groups from elections and meetings to picketing, sit-ins, and arrests, Epstein shows how the coalitions of activists were able to elicit substantive forms of change in their local school district. By offering a cursory glance at the coalition building and activist mobilizing, readers are left to draw the conclusion that Oakland’ residents were not passive by-standers while flagrant acts of discrimination took place. Chapter four, “Civil Rights and State Takeovers,” gives us the story of the Oakland school board defeating a state takeover of the school district. While highlighting the Oakland school district, Epstein explores a nationwide struggle occurring in predominantly low-income African American and Latino school districts. She uses this chapter to show that despite the gains made in integrating school boards and diversifying local control, state governments found a new way to disenfranchise the people of urban cities by using failing test scores and financial crises to wrangle away their elected control. Detailing the historical events leading up to the 1988 attempted takeover, Epstein makes clear the racial and financial implications of the proposed takeover. She argues that state takeovers did not occur until the late 1980s when most urban school boards were either integrated or completely minority and that these takeovers happened in cities where the student population was and still is predominantly low income Blacks and Latinos. She also points out that these takeovers were in cities that did not vote to give up its local board and voiced strong opposition to the takeover. While many cities did succumb to hostile state takeovers, the Oakland school district was able to defeat the proposed takeover through strong coalition building and support, sound financial practices, and competent leadership. Epstein states that “the attempted takeover is important because it was defeated by organized opposition in the city; it played out as an interesting example of the principles elaborated by critical race theory; and the local school board took important civil rights actions in the fifteen years following its defeat of the state takeover” (p. 40). Well-run school districts are not impossible under minority leadership and chapter five provides a great deal of evidence through the changes enacted by the school board. The underlying purpose of this chapter is to document the structural changes the minority-run school board tackled and to highlight important civil right actions taken by the board in the midst of negative press coverage. Once again Epstein draws the reader back to debates that captured national attention (i.e., the Algebra project). In an attempt to rid itself of years of institutional racism, the school board proposed a resolution to stop “ability-based” tracking. While the school board ended the bottom “remedial” track, they came face to face with the reality that tracking is strategically imbedded in all curricula from “gifted” to “special education” and the monetary value associated with these “tracked” classes makes it hard to totally rid the system of tracking. The school board weighed in on another equity issue when it decided in 1991 to reject the adoption of a new social studies reader that it found irrelevant, inconsistent, and detrimental to its students. This battle showcased the importance of textbook material and how literature can reinforce stereotypical and derogatory images. “Oakland residents organized intensively against the books” (p. 64). This chapter once again shows the resiliency of Oakland residents to battle and triumph discriminatory and racist practices. Exploring the teacher shortage in urban schools, chapter six argues that 1) that a major factor in urban school ineffectiveness and, sometimes, chaos is a set of state and federal laws which prevent urban schools from hiring those adult college graduates who have proven effectiveness working with students in urban schools; 2) that the lack of urban school teachers in general and “minority” teachers in particular is erroneously understood as a recruitment problem; 3) that the real causes rest on a racially skewed set of criteria for the initial selection of teachers; 4) that the selection system has its roots in white American racism, both institutional and ideological; 5) that the erection of an equitable teacher selection system will require struggle by those adversely affected by the present system; 6) and that an equitable and educationally effective system would select candidates first on the basis of effectiveness in the classroom and would then require each to add to his or her knowledge base those elements missing in his or her undergraduate education. Criticizing No Child Left Behind (NCLB), Epstein blames the shortage on the NCLB provision that demands “highly qualified” teachers in every school district. She argues that this provision has created a situation where there are no teachers at all for many of the lowest income students. She proceeds to ask, “What does it mean for a teacher to be qualified? Why do urban districts have a shortage? Whose fault is it? What are the ultimate consequences? And what are the general solutions” (p. 69)? Epstein picks apart the teacher shortage debate by first highlighting that the lack of minority teachers is not a recruitment problem but is actually the problem of a certification and selection process that favors nonminority applicants. She adds that by not certifying minority applicants who are willing to teach in urban schools and who would be most effective, state policies and regulations contribute to the nationwide shortage of teachers. Tracking the requirements of teachers across school types and social class, A Different View shows that wealthy private schools are not tied to credentialing laws, allowing those schools to hire college graduates who have a genuine passion for teaching, resulting in no shortage of teachers. Suburban schools, while tied to credential rules, have their pick of certified teachers; as a result they are not at a loss for teachers. Urban schools are not allowed to hire passionate teachers without any credentials and they cannot find enough people with credentials to teach in their schools. This results in many schools with no teachers. The certification process has ultimately led to the whitening of the teaching force, which according to Epstein highlights America’s history of institutional racism. Epstein uses the teacher shortage to point out the glaring effects of institutional racism but also to urge resistance to racism so that the power of education can be realized. While ultimately presenting a different view of the reasons for a teacher shortage in urban schools, chapter six also raises pertinent questions about the certification and selection process and its impact on would be minority teachers and minority students. Faced with a teacher shortage for reasons described in chapter six, “Oakland employed college graduates who were effective with students but had not yet achieved credentialed status” (p. 89). Chapter seven is an overview of Oakland’s Partnership Program. In an attempt to rectify the teacher shortage as well as the lack of minority teachers, the Oakland school board developed a three-pronged approach which would help new teachers maintain a paid job while working on the credential, create a recruitment, instruction, and support system run primarily by African American, Latino, and Asian educators and help with test fees and test preparation through nurturing assistance. The Partnership Program substantially increased the number of minority teachers in the Oakland school and subsequently became the model for other “alternative certification” programs in California. Acknowledging a need to challenge the current teacher education program, Epstein also presents a reform program. This program outlines an eight-step solution to what she feels are the true causes for the teacher shortage in urban schools. Chapter eight analyzes power and politics, a major theme of the book, through the discussion of the Ebonics struggle that took place the Oakland school district. While acknowledging that this was an enormous struggle against who gets to define language as “right” or “wrong,” “proper” or “improper,” Epstein only looks at the Ebonics debate for its contribution as a civil rights victory for the school board and the relationship of the victory to the racially constructed image that people in Oakland were incompetent to rule themselves. Epstein’s decision to concentrate on these two factors further strengthens her belief in the critical race theory tenet that racism is rooted in property relations, who owns the language and its usage. The Ebonics debate wasn’t solely about educating African American students and communicating with them, it was about power and control, and Epstein points that out in this chapter. “The Ebonics resolution hit two racial nerves: the idea that all dialects are equal in origin and communicative potential and the lurking, unstated notion that the black dialect is evolving in its communicative power about a subject which is ignored in standard American dialect—the evolving nature of racial injustice” (p. 104). Chapter nine looks at the situations where the contradictions in providing quality education are visible. According to Epstein, contradictions in education are a result of the fact that schools have a positive and a negative function for the average non-affluent urban student and their parents. Schools provide a service, because they are a place to obtain skills and knowledge; they also act as a social sorter, moving some students forward in society and holding some back, generally along racial and class lines. Most urban families need the service and are harmed by the sorting (p. 106). Using this statement as an anchor, Epstein uses “standards” testing, teacher actions, and No Child Left Behind to provide concrete examples of the contradictory nature of education. She concludes chapter nine with the statement that “the educational system is unjust, but the ideas and the struggles which emerge within that system can provide the momentum for change in education and sometimes in the broader society” (p. 115). This statement serves as the launching pad for the concluding chapter of the book that discusses broad-ranging policy struggles of urban schools. Chapter ten asks the question, if Oakland has a solid history of civil rights commitment, why doesn’t it have great schools throughout its system? The answer lies in (critical race theory that) “the harmful fictions of colorblind liberalism, the web of rights afforded to whites because of their race, and the unwillingness to acknowledge racism as a factor in both the conditions and the policies surrounding urban school districts” (p. 120). This question and answer leads Epstein to devise A People’s Program for Educational Change that lays out a thorough plan of how educational change can be achieved through a list of do’s and don’ts that challenges assumptions and myths and provides direction to current reform efforts. Epstein argues that the most important educational standard is “a love of learning, a spirit of community, and a sense of joy in individual and collective accomplishments” (p. 124) and this standard should be kept in mind for any proposed reform. A Different View of Urban Schools: Civil Rights, Critical Race Theory, and Unexplored Realities (2006) is a call to action for anyone remotely interested in the democratic nature of public education. It strives to offer a different approach to the study of urban school districts by looking at the struggles of the elected school board officials. As a result this is not your conventional presentation of urban schools. While highlighting what others call the problems of urban schools, Epstein uses the Oakland school district to show the resiliency of administrators dedicated to providing education based on equality, quality, and academic standards. It is Epstein’s belief in educational standards that she has crafted a book that serves as a practical guide for social change in education. She also lays out a historical roadmap to remind us that there are not any new educational problems; the old problems are just reformulated, recycled, and repackaged. By acknowledging the institutionalized racism of the education system, Epstein has succeeded in crafting a book that intricately explores the accepted myths of urban education and in turn reveals a strategic plan of action for making education a civil right. About the Reviewer Ishwanzya "Kisha" Rivers Department of Educational Policy Studies University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 360 Education Bldg, MC 708 1310 S. Sixth Street, Champaign IL 61820

Glickman, Carl D. (Ed.). (2007) Letters to the Next President: What We Can Do About the Real Crisis in Public Education. 2008 Election Edition. Reviewed by Kenneth J. Bernstein

Glickman, Carl D. (Ed.). (2007) Letters to the Next President: What We Can Do About the Real Crisis in Public Education. 2008 Election Edition. NY, NY: Teachers College Press. Pp. xvii + 279     ISBN 978-0-8077-4809-1 Reviewed by Kenneth J. Bernstein October 8, 2007 In his “Note on the 2008 Election Edition” Carl Glickman explains why a book released only three years ago needs a new edition: Why a new edition? Because we are beginning a new era of possibilities about what it means to be a well-educated American and because no issue is more important to America’s future than quality of education for its next generation of citizens. Only an informed and engaged citizenry can revitalize American democracy, so this time we have to get it right. (p. xi) “So this time we have to get it right.” The first edition of the book came out more than two years after the signing of No Child Left Behind, and this updated edition was released in the middle of the ongoing debates over reauthorization of that law. Many from across the political and educational spectra have called for significant changes to that law which so drives educational policy in this country. Addressing such a document in 2004 to ”the next president” implied that the current president, who was after all running for reelection, was probably not amenable to the suggestions being offered. Now we face an election without an incumbent, and perhaps the title is more appropriate. Given that four of the Democratic candidates (Kucinich in the House, Dodd, Clinton and Obama in the Senate) sit on the committees responsible for reauthorization, this is a book that has some immediate relevance, and might well be useful not only for them but for all the other candidates of both parties, that is, if they are willing to listen to some real truths from people who are intimately involved with education and understand the impact of the policy decisions a president can make or can influence. I begin with the appropriate level of disclosure. I am a classroom teacher, in my case high school social studies, and also an education advocate, with strong views on many of the issues addressed in this book. I have lobbied on issues related to No Child Left Behind, especially in conjunction with the director of the Forum on Educational Accountability. That organization’s Joint Organizational Statement is one of the key resources provided to the reader. Further, I have corresponded with several of the contributors, and am an open admirer of several more. In other words, I come to this book predisposed to be favorable to what those authors have to offer. And in general I found myself in agreement with most of what the authors presented. Having recently written a number of online pieces examining the educational proposals of four of the Democratic candidates, I note both overlap from some of those plans and the materials in this book, and some issues addressed more clearly by the writers of the letters than I have yet to see on the part of any major American politician. Before getting into the specific suggestions offered, let me describe the structure of the book. It begins with a dedication that is worth repeating: To all children, who deserve an education steeped in wisdom, engagement, and public purpose. Besides the previously mentioned Note on this edition, the book begins with a foreword by Bill Cosby (who has masters and doctoral degrees in education from the University of Massachusetts), acknowledgements, and the introduction that was part of the original 2004 edition. The book is then divided into five parts: Schools for All Learning for All Teaching for All Standards for All Education for All There is a conclusion, written by Linda Darling-Hammond, a list of organizations for parents, educators and activists, the organizational statement from FEA, and notes about the Editor and Contributors. At the end of his original introduction, Glickman provides a list of sources and suggested readings. And within the five parts are 37 letters, the authors of which range from nationally known figures in education such as Deborah Meier, John Goodlad, James Popham, and Ted Sizer, to the director and present and former students of the Little Singer Community School, a solar-powered charter school in Northeastern Arizona set up to allow children of the Navajo nation to get rooted in their own culture before moving on to more traditional public education. Even in an extended review, it is impossible to explore all of the riches contained in this book. As Glickman notes, some of the letters have been updated for this edition, and there is a letter on Crafting Legislation by Elizabeth Debray-Pilot that is new for this edition. That letter urges our next president to attempt to take the partisan elements out of educational policy, and notes that only Congressional hearing for the authorization of No Child Left Behind, and the only witness was then Secretary of Education Rod Paige. Debray-Pilot reviews the history of how the old coalition of groups that had influenced educational policy in Democratic congresses and administrations was replaced when Republicans took power at the same time that education was becoming more important for governors as well as presidents. Unfortunately, that led to the voices of ideological think tanks being heard often to the exclusion of practitioner groups, and as led to increased hostility on the part of such groups to educational mandates being imposed through the Congress. There is no doubt that there are serious issues facing America about our schools, but if we are going to be successful in addressing them, if we are going to able to openly ask the difficult questions and examine the hard challenges, if we cannot remove partisanship we are unlikely to reach conclusions and agree on actions that will be able to improve our schools. Having this letter as the final one before the conclusion reminds us that regardless of our own views on education, we need to acknowledge the importance of including a wide diversity of voices if the policies we seek to craft for education are going to gain the support necessary if they are going to have significant and salutary effects on our schools. It is impossible in a review of this length to cover fully the riches of this book. Let me touch on a few examples that I hope will illustrate just how rich it is. In a letter entitled “How Our High School Makes A Difference” George Wood, principal of Federal Hocking High School in rural Stewart, Ohio, notes that the school is built around long class periods, with teachers having fewer than 80 students a day. I note that teacher load is the maximum level recommended by Ted Sizer in his Horace books that led to the Coalition of Essential Schools, of which Federal Hocking is a member. Wood previously founded a school in Los Angeles, served as an elected school member and as a professor of education at Ohio University before embarking on his current role, which also includes his serving as director of the Forum for Education and Democracy. As is typical in CES schools, Federal Hocking has a great focus on the use of portfolios to evaluate students for graduation. They also, as he notes, “have developed an advisory system than ensures every student is closely followed throughout high school by an adult who knows him or her well” (p. 86). He views this as important because “students are more willing to take risks in front of adults whom they know well, and change certainly involves risk. They are also more likely to model productive adult behavior when they have the chance to be near productive adults” (p. 89). While not necessarily arguing for exact replication of his school, Wood draws a number of lessons he thinks should be applied and which he recommends to the next president: The president leads by providing a vision of our goals and the methods we will use to achieve them. Funds are made available for innovations and multiple approaches are welcome. Decision-making authority is localized and decentralized. Regulations are limited or waived. Outcomes are broad, with multiple measures of success embraced.” (p. 91). Such lists of suggestions occur in a number of other letters. Deborah Meier, who also founded several schools that were part of the Coalition of Essential Schools (and who is along with Wood among the conveners of the Forum for Education and Democracy) includes in her list focusing on smaller schools, encouraging local decision making, getting good information, providing choice for parents, providing resources for improving facilities and supporting professionals, providing time including for parents to be more part of the lives of their children, using a language of respect (about which more anon) and closing the gaps. Former Senator Jim Jeffords, who titles his letter “It’s Past Time to Fund What We Mandate” asks for serving every Title I eligible child, meeting all of the mandates of NCLB, increasing funding for Pell grants and other sources of post-secondary financial aid, providing quality professional development for all school personnel with an emphasis on science and math, and finally providing the full 40% federal share of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Reynold Levy, president of the Lincoln Center for the Arts, presents a list of arguments on behalf of the role of arts in education. Rachel Tompkins, president of the Rural School and Community Trust provides two lists, one with the ways research shows small schools to be more effective, as well as a list of things the Federal government can appropriately do to improve education, including continued support for the E-rate and making greater investment in appropriate technology and its use. Her “Nine Million Voices” points out that 40 percent of the nation’s public schools are in rural communities or towns with a population under 25,000, and these schools contain 28% of our nation's school children. She also explores the ways much of our educational policy seems to ignore the particular needs of our rural schools, which contrary to public opinion are often as diverse as are our inner city schools, with blacks in Mississippi, Native Americans in South Dakota, and, Hispanics in New Mexico illustrating that diversity. Beyond lists, there are many insightful comments. I want to quote the beginning of Deborah Meier’s 7th point, which is entitled “Use a Language of Respect”: Since kids cannot learn from teachers or schools that they neither trust nor respect, the way we publicly talk about teachers and schools matters. Disrespect comes in many forms, but it starts with our leadership. Our children learn by example: It’s hard to be taught by people whom powerful people look down upon. Keep this in mind when you think about how little teachers are paid and what that pay differential says to kids. I have seen too many parents act out the disrespect they read in their local newspapers and hear from their local and national politicians and then act surprised when their kids act up. Please, be careful how you speak of schools and teachers when you address the nation in press conferences and public speeches. (pp. 24-25) I wish those words would be read by every politician, officeholder, or aspirant to office, before they bloviate further on the failings of our public schools and our teachers. They need to realize the impact of the words they speak, and how that impact makes improving our schools that much more difficult. But then, I am a public school teacher who regularly encounters precisely what Meier describes, so perhaps you, dear reader, will therefore discount my words. Be careful, because without dedicated teachers no reform will work. That is why a book like this, which includes the voices of professional educators, is such a valuable resource. In recent years our educational policy at state as well as national levels has focused on accountability. I have in the past described approaches such as those upon which NCLB is based as “the beatings will continue until the morale improves.” I often wonder how many dictating educational policy truly believe that public shaming is an effective way of improving education. Thus, when I read an essay entitled “The No-Win Accountability Game” by one of America’s great experts on testing, W. James Popham, I find moral comfort beginning with his opening paragraph: Few Americans will deny that our public schools urgently require improvement. However, few Americans realize that a test-based accountability strategy that originally intended to improve our schools is now having precisely the opposite effect. (p. 166) Popham, now emeritus at UCLA, has served as President of the American Educational Research Association, where, as the biographical information about him on p. 275-76 notes He was the founding editor of AERA’s quarterly journal, Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. In 2002, the National Council on Measurement in education presented him with its award for Career Contributions to Educational Measurement. Policy makers have no more listened to the professional measurement experts like Popham than they have to classroom teachers and administrators. Popham’s “letter” is one of the most important of the contributions to the book. He discusses the limitations of testing in a way that is easily accessible to those without a background either in education or in psychometrics. He reminds us that even tests aligned with state content standards have a shortcoming that “they attempt to measure far too many content standards” because “Most states’ officially approved content standards are little more than well-intentioned curricular wish list because the curriculum specialists who identified those content standards wanted the state’s students to learn all sorts of wonderful things” (p. 171). Popham warns us that at best we can measure a modest number of the most significant skills we want our students to master. He closing paragraph is potentially chilling, if we consider our recent forays into national educational policy making, although it also offers hope to the president who will listen to Popham, and the other authors in this book: Democracy will not survive in any nation whose future citizens are poorly educated – and a poorly educated citizenry is what we will get if we impose a wrongheaded accountability strategy on our schools. Test-based educational accountability cannot work if it relies on inappropriate tests. A president who understands this situation – truly understands it – can set out to fix it. I truly hope you will. (p. 173) Linda Darling-Hammond’s “Conclusion” is further entitled “Schools That Work For All Children.” Perhaps because some people like Eric Hanushek have challenged the idea that spending more on schools makes any positive difference, Darling-Hammond devotes part of her essay towards the costs of not spending on education. At a time when there are fewer unskilled jobs without education, that lack of education is linked to crime and welfare dependency. And yet over the two decades of the 1980s and 1990’s we increased spending on corrections over 900%, seeing our incarcerated population triple. She continues: During the 1990s, there were more African American citizens in the criminal justice system that there were in college. During the same period, per pupil spending for schools grew by only about forty percent in real dollar terms, and less in the cities which have fallen further behind their suburban neighbors in acquiring the resources to educate a growing population of students, more of whom speak little English, live in poverty, lack health care, and have special educational needs. Children who receive inadequate education are increasingly unlikely to be able to become productive citizens, yet many schools – especially those that serve large numbers of students of color – lack the courses, materials, equipment, and qualified teachers that would give students access to the education they will need to participate in today’s and tomorrow’s world. More than half the adult prison population has literacy skills below those required by the labor market, and nearly forty percent of adjudicated juvenile delinquents have treatable learning disabilities that went undiagnosed and untreated in the schools. In short, because we did not invest enough in their education, we have had to pay at least five times as much each year to keep them in jail. (pp. 244-245) Quality teachers are a necessity if we are going to improve our schools. Perhaps Darling-Hammond’s penultimate paragraph on p. 257 can put into context what it might cost to significantly increase our pool of such teachers: For the cost of one percent of the bush administration’s tax cuts in 2003, or the equivalent of one week’s combat costs during the war in Iraq, we could provide top-quality preparation for more than one hundred and fifty thousand new teachers to teach in high-need schools and mentor all of the new teachers who are hired over the next five years. With just a bit of focus and a purposeful plan, we could ensure that all students in the United States are taught by highly-qualified teachers within the next five years. Now that would be real accountability to children and their parents. I hope that I have been able to give some sense of the power of this book. It is not that expensive, nor will it take all that long to read. It contains as much good and rational thinking about schools as I have encountered in one volume. There is a wealth of ideas, derived from the experience of committed people. Some are educators in schools and universities. Others are students, or parents, or like Jim Jeffords worked on legislation dealing with education. I do not deny that many of the authors have similar views on educational matters. Nor do I deny that I concur with many of their analyses and suggestions. Some who bring a different philosophy to the making of education policy might be tempted to argue that the book is therefore imbalanced. I would suggest that most voices from within education will disagree with those from think tanks and political consulting firms, and agreement with most of what is offered in this book. That one might have a different perception is largely because the voices of people from within education often do not get the audiences that others have had. It is not that we educators are either unwilling to be held accountable for those things we can control nor do we fail to recognize the many problems in our schools as they currently are. But it is those of us within the classroom and the school building offices on whom any meaningful change will depend. One would think those wishing to alter our schools for the better might therefore consider including more voices from those of us whose efforts you will need for those alterations to work. Perhaps you will argue that you have a different opinion than do I, or the authors of this book. My response would be that offered in a similar situation by the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan, who informed someone asserting his different opinion that while he was entitled to his own opinion, he was not entitled to his own facts. The facts about America’s schools are fairly represented by the letters in this book. Even if you disagree with all the suggestions, that alone makes the book not only worth reading, it may make it essential reading for anyone who would presume to play a major role in reshaping educational policy in this country. It is equally useful for those who care about educational policy, whose lives and the lives of their children will inevitably feel the impact of any changes in educational policy, as so many have already felt the impact of No Child Left Behind. Read the book. You will find it time and money well spent. About the Reviewer Kenneth J. Bernstein is a National Board Certified Social Studies teacher. He holds degrees in music from Haverford, Religions from St. Charles Seminary, and teaching from Johns Hopkins University. He did extensive doctoral studies in educational administration and policy studies at The Catholic University of America, and additional studies in reading education at the University of Virginia. He has served as a peer reviewer for a number of professional publications, including Current Issues in Education and Teachers College Record. He is coauthor of Rotberg, I; Bernstein, K. J. & Ritter, S. B. (July, 2001). No Child Left Behind: Views about the potential impact of the Bush administration's education proposals. Washington, DC: Institute for Education Policy Studies.