RE: Wrap up Questions: Implementation of a Plan

I was disappointed by the process. Nothing was more indicative of my disappointment than the question by Panelist Oakes asking not just today, but in day 2 " how to hold firm to the ambitious recommendations in the draft plan" The implicit presumption is that the plan represents good policy.  To me a good process would have been one that sought to invite testing of that presumption. The goal I would have sought would be to identify, discuss and refine the objections to the plan. There seems to already be quite a body of written documents accompanying the plan that make the supporting case. Creating a coherent corresponding body of thought that could be used for deliberating on the master plan would have been a worthwhile if seeking the best policy on education is the goal.  


To do that I would have sought out panelists not associated with the plan that represented cogent opposing views. For example I read the dissenting comments submitted to the committee by Professor Gary Blasi on Governance and wondered why he wasn't asked to participate. Too many people who were panelists seemed to me like they might be entrenched in the education/government power structure.  And the discussion participants seemed to be disproportionately drawn from those sources. This is not unusual. As I said in an early post, those interested in such a process tend not to represent a cross section of the population and often are self-interested as well. This is how most public policy is formed but I don't think it is a good thing. I value dis-interest, meaning an open-minded, neutral approach to deliberation. 

Worse yet the participation by politicians, with a couple of exceptions,  was really discouraging. I have little hope for what can happen within the political processes where opposing the initiatives of the education establishment is portrayed as opposing education.  But even though politics may have nullified anything produced here, I would've still liked to seen an honest effort at creating a critical analysis of the Master Plan.