Andrea Batista Schlesinger

The Wink Wink Op Ed as mastered by the Manhattan Institute

If Sol Stern submitted this Daily News Op-Ed to me in a writing class, I'd fail him.

But because he comes with a fancy title like Fellow of the Manhattan Institute, he not only gets a passing grade, he gets an audience of thousands who read the paper each day.

Mr. Stern's supposed thesis is that "New York City's ideal of public schooling as a means of assimilating all children into a common civic culture is under assault." The culprit: "social justice education." His evidence: an anecdotal look at three schools. His conclusion: "Social justice teaching is a frivolous waste of precious school hours, especially for poor children, who start out with a disadvantage. School is the only place where they are likely to obtain the academic knowledge that could make up for the educational deprivation they suffer in their homes. The last thing they need is a wild-eyed experiment in education through social action."

Let me clear from the beginning: I'll take on the Manhattan Institute and their views on how to best create public policy any day. But this piece is not about politics, it's about ideology. And what's the surest test: the absolute lack of rigor demonstrated through this piece. If I were Mr. Stern's writing teacher, here's what I would say:

Mr. Stern:

Good start. But unfortunately, this essay doesn't convince me, the reader, of your argument. Here's why:

1. Your thesis is that "New York City's ideal of public schooling as a means of assimilating all children into a common civic culture is under assault." You do not justify this statement throughout your piece. Instead, you rely on an anecdotal examination of three schools out of a system that educates millions. Please do some additional research. I fear that your readers will be disappointed when such a provocative and far-reaching opening statement is not backed up by similarly provocative and far-reaching pieces of evidence.
2. You do not define "social justice education." Your entire piece is dependent on the understanding of what "social justice education" is. IF you do not define your terms, how can a reader understand them?
3. Though your thesis is that the function of NYC's public schools is to assimilate all children into a common civic culture, your conclusion suggests that your real critique of "social justice education," which as of yet is undefined, is that it undermines academic achievement. Nowhere in the piece do you offer any evidence that backs up this claim. There is no examination of test scores at schools that practice "social justice education" (again undefined) versus those who don't. Your examples are similarly unconvincing. What does children wearing "Ghetto garb" and chewing gum have to do with their academic success?

Please re-write, making claims that you can substantiate, defining your terms, and making sure that your opening corresponds to your conclusion. Thank you.

- Any teacher

**
Look. What Mr. Stern is trying to do is obvious. This isn't an OP-Ed, it's a 600 word wink. Someone really interested in making an intellectual argument would use evidence to substantiate their claims. Stern lazily gives examples to define his claim, as if to say "see see. Can you believe it? It's outrageous!" Whatever "it" is. It's like using the word in its definition.

Of course, that's because Stern is only interested in advancing a knee-jerk ideological argument where you don't prove things because they are supposedly "obvious." The danger in these pieces is that so many people read them, and because no wants to be on the wrong side of the "obvious" argument, they allow these views to shape their understanding of the world.

If I were Mayor Bloomberg or Chancellor Klein, trying desperately to build up the public will to improve the schools, I would be frustrated to no end by this kind of lazy and irresponsible "wink wink" argument. I would wonder why it is that the Manhattan Institute is New York City's largest and best funded think tank. And I would think about how to change that situation, because as long as the Manhattan Institute is around to bless such intellectual laziness and insert it into the lives of thousands of New Yorkers, their jobs will continue to be harder than they should be.

Andrea Batista Schlesinger: Author Bio | Other Posts
Posted at 10:58 AM, Jul 22, 2006 in Education
Permalink | Email to Friend