n a sense, we are defined by the other opposition—we are resisting “reforms” that don’t make education “better” and don’t remove “faults.” We are “anti-privatization, “anti-business model,” “anti-market-based model” and anti teacher-deproffesionalization. Defining us in oppositional terms may makes sense—the “anti-war” movement had its appeal. But is there a positive, visionary and universal definition that would serve us better; one that would denote our belief in educational excellence, equity, and democracy?

We are against all of those things, but should we define ourselves that way, or should we define ourselves according to what we are FOR?

I am FOR:

Fully funded, fully staffed schools.

Educators in charge of education policies.

A fully public system.

To begin with.

I'm also for:

Less testing, and ethical, appropriate uses of standardized tests and every kind of assessment.

Inquiry based education that teaches higher-level thinking and learning skills used for a lifetime.

Small schools, small class-sizes, and flexible structures that create environments that more closely fit the way people learn.

Abolishing poverty, and building deep safety nets in every community for all.

Universal, FREE, PUBLIC pre-school through college and/or trade school.

How do I define all of that?