BCT Editorial – 8/29/10

The phenomenon seen in the PDK/Gallup poll is nothing new.  We saw something similar during the Bush administration with polls about the economy.  When asked about the economy in general, respondents were negative, but when asked about their own economic situation, respondents were positive.  The reason for the disconnect was media coverage of the economy.

You likely remember during the Bush administration leftists constantly described the economy in Hoover-/FDR-esque terms and the press was happy to pass along the propaganda without question.  This mainstream media coverage of the economy explains respondent negativity regarding the economy as a whole.  The facts told a different story, however.  From the 4th quarter of 2001 through the 4th quarter of 2007 we had 25 straight quarters of GDP growth, and unemployment gradually dropped to 4.5% during the 2nd quarter of 2007.  That’s why respondents were more positive about their own circumstances.  They based their judgment about themselves on actual personal experience, not what the media told them.

That brings us to the results of the PDK/Gallup poll.  To start with, the editorial appeared to provide some cover for the poll with the following: “The news service reports that in the past, the PDK/Gallup poll has been criticized for framing its questions so as to get back answers that support the organization’s agenda.  But that does not hold regarding the double vision in the results cited above.”  The editorial presents nothing to support the “does not hold” conclusion (The subject AP article doesn’t draw this conclusion.) and ignores the final six paragraphs of the subject AP article relating the criticisms of “Phi Delta Kappa critic Jeanne Allen, president of the Center for Education Reform.”

Without knowing the polling details, there are several things that could explain the results.  To start with, we constantly hear stories about how U.S. students as a whole lag the rest of the world and about high dropout rates and poor student performance in many school districts.  Now, what if the demographics of the poll were skewed to people living in “good” school districts?  The current results of the poll would be completely predictable because the respondents would base their response about schools in general on media reports and their response about the local “good” district on personal experience.  You would likely not get the same result if the demographics were skewed to people living in “bad” school districts.  You may also get a similar disparity in results based on other factors such as family income, parents’ education, et cetera.

It’s hard to believe the Times doesn’t know there are all kinds of reasons that could explain the results.  For the Times to conclude, “Apparently, all education, like politics, is local.  The closer it gets to home, the better it looks.” smells of polling ignorance or someone with an agenda.  Remember, the Times is very protective of traditional public schools, opposing any K-12 education alternatives to the traditional one-size-fits-all, brick-and-mortar public school system.  Editorials since at least 2002 spoke out against charter schools and vouchers for private schools.