Proactively Serving Our Disenfranchised Youth 67believe that statewide efforts to bring forth accountability, even if tragically flawed, were
worth recognition or acclaim? Certainly that is possible but I doubt that such is/was the case.
This reviewer, in my humble opinion, was merely acting as an apologist for his/her state
officials. Knowing that these state leaders want accountability to be a smooth and easy
process, this individual feels that, in turn, we (as academics) must be willing to deliver on
that desire. How tragically unfortunate—and how far removed from Rushdie’s thoughts on
heterodoxy could these beliefs be!
In addition to heeding Posner’s words about the importance of public intellectualism and
Rushdie’s thoughts on heterodoxy, I believe that we must move these concepts even a bit
further. As faculty members who work almost exclusively with graduate students, we have a
unique “add on” that I believe should not be overlooked. That “add on” relates to use of our
graduate students. If we know that our research findings indicate an opposite course of
action to that taken by a state or district leaders, how can we best deploy our graduate
students to shed light on this situation? Professor Wildman, the 2006 Living Legend for this
organization, has been doing this type of field-based work for years. Wildman poses
questions to his graduate students—these questions mirror the problem-based learning model
and, thus, frequently culminate with the development of a document or presentation that can
be used for years to come. How many of us have known, for years now, precisely what
Wildman (2004) published in the Northwest Voice? (In Kern County, California, the higher
the school test score, the lower the percentage of students qualifying for free and reduced
price lunches.) The larger question here, though, should be focused on how best to deploy
our graduate students to change that statistic. How might we use the power of our students’
intellect, individually and collectively, to change this statistic? With careful planning, I feel
certain that we could enable our students to undertake one or a series of action research
projects that would reverse the following famous, and now becoming ubiquitous, quote from
Kohn (2000): “Research has repeatedly found that the amount of poverty in the communities
... accounts for the great majority of the difference in test scores from one area to the next”
(p. 7). Two examples of this type of deployment come to mind immediately. First, our
graduate students could be involved in a series of district-wide school integration projects
that do not focus on race—rather, they could use the work of Wildman and Kohn to serve as
the base around which they strive to integrate our schools through a series of socioeconomic
metrics. And, secondly, students could be charged to work with area districts to make
Krueger’s aforesaid dream of summer vouchers a reality. In both cases, the change outcomes
would be valuable and meaningful and the spirit of heterodoxy would be alive as well.
Two final elements of our work (i.e., to engender real and lasting P-12 school reform)
must be included here. First, as we strive to become public intellectuals, we should not
overlook the power of politics in today’s world. Many of the conservative agendas discussed
throughout this presentation are truly driven by an ideological perspective that manifests
itself in the ultra right-wing of certain large and smaller political parties. To oppose those
agendas, in my opinion, is as fundamental as any issue in this debate can be. Simply stated,
education leaders must endorse the political parties and politicians themselves who will
legislate based on salient research outcomes. For example, we must investigate the voting
record of Senators and Representatives to see how they voted on Head Start. If they voted to
reduce funding, we might want to support their opponent aggressively in upcoming elections.
We must consider the voting record of state legislators on issues of class size and overall
school funding. Those who oppose opportunities to embrace real reform should no longer be