Criticism assumes too much about public schools

The essence of the Daily Pilot's Feb. 12 editorial is that the school board is a failure ("It's time for the school board to take a new tack"). The reasons given are, to paraphrase: the Newport-Mesa Unified School District board of trustees doesn't make major policy moves; it never seriously questions itself or the staff; and too many schools did not meet the mandated performance progress last year even though Newport-Mesa is a "rich" area.

The paper asserts that new blood is needed to fix the board, and call for serious opposition candidates to challenge the incumbents, forcing them to at least justify themselves.

As an elected representative ? a member of the board of trustees ? I take the paper's criticisms and suggestions seriously and appreciate the paper's concern for the community. While education culture ordinarily prefers not to confront critics publicly ? unlike, say, city politics ? the disparaging and dismissive tone of the editorial hints at important frustrations and anger that I should try to address.

I believe there are at least three major dynamics beyond the familiar religious and ideological ones that help explain why people can go over the top when critiquing public kindergarten through 12th-grade education. These dynamics usually aren't talked about in public. Consequently, this letter will necessarily be quite candid about some uncomfortable truths, both on the education side and the public side.

Two of these dynamics are so embedded in national culture that few people are aware they exist, and fewer still are aware of their importance. The third dynamic is a politically incorrect one and is usually talked about only in private.

The first major dynamic is gross over-promising by those in public education. Since at least the end of World War II, educators have promised more than they could deliver. It started out innocently enough when America was flush with newfound wealth and confidence after winning the war.

Public education did not hold back from its dreams. For example, before the war, it was OK in America for only half of high school students to graduate. After the war, that changed. The new can-do attitude said all kids should finish high school.

This optimistic attitude has escalated to the point that now California's education establishment holds that every high school student should also be academically qualified to enter the University of California system.