What Nikole Hannah-Jones Misses About Public Education.
In my view, given her profile, previous writing and past statements, Hannah-Jones deserves credit for doing this in public rather than sweeping it under the rug one way or another. Few would have noticed if she didn’t revisit her choice this way, or if she quietly used the various carve outs available to people with power to get her kid into a better situation and move on. Much of the criticism coming at her since the article published is just people who don’t like her taking the chance for an easy dunk. It’s about priors, not the case she’s making here.
I get it. Even besides the various internal Timesdramas she’s had a hand in, the stealth revisions The Times did to 1619 Project text as well as the walk back of its central claim are a problem. Some aspects of that project are questionable—is there really a direct line from plantation economics to Excel spreadsheets?—even as overall it raises questions people should reckon with. (Sloppy consumption of that work helped fuel the debilitating performative adult politics circle jerks in education non-profits that shoved a focus on improving academic outcomes for underserved kids to the sidelines not to mention actual public policy activity in the same vein). And Hannah-Jones has been no friend of many school improvement efforts anyway. (I don’t have a dog in the, in my view reductionist, 1619 v. 1776 fight because I think America wasn’t truly one country until 1865 when the issues of slavery and secession were settled.) Still, it never hurts to have some grace, and this is a noteworthy article for her to write. You should read it.
That said, there are problems with it worth exploring. The article is less compelling for what it says than for what it doesn’t. (And on the theme of credit where it’s due, Derrell got there first. In 2017.)
Broadly, yes, this is a first-person testimonial not an analysis of the system, but she does nonetheless implicate the system and its structural issues in ways familiar to anyone with even a passing acquaintance with her work. So it’s odd and fair game that she then fails to discuss reform or the broader context in New York City schools. Successful models in the public system that aren’t simply the result of skimming never come up. Neither do the successful and popular charter schools (some so successful officials are fighting to squelch their data.).
———
“Did you know my school was bad like this when you decided to put me here?” she asked.
