Sections 1 through 4 of this report should make it clear that teacher organizations and those who support public schools are currently fighting a losing battle against organizations like Heartland Institute, Pacific Research Institute, and the many others that are united in their efforts to destroy public education. The Right is working to end public education, fighting unions, and is even fighting against the idea of government itself (their tactics include tax cuts as a way to "de-fund" the government, which in turn impacts public education). Teacher organizations are fighting this battle with very few other organizations helping, or backing them up.
The goals of those who favor a vigorous public education system might be stated as follows:
This section presents strategies that are designed to accomplish the two goals. As stated in the Introduction section, these strategies fall broadly into two categories: (1) those that could best be done by those organizations and individuals that are independent voices for public education, and (2) those that education organizations can do solely for themselves, or in concert with independent voices for public education. Moreover, also as stated in the Introduction section, these strategies can enable public education organizations and others who advocate a robust public education system to take the initiative in advancing an education agenda that is in the public interest.
It should be noted that this strategic approach is a process by which both the independent voices for education as well as the education organizations can address any particular education related issue. For example, independent voices could address the issue of the public’s negative and frequently false perception of teacher unions by employing a number of the strategies presented in this Section. The strategies and associated background research could work to alter public perceptions to more accurately reflect reality. Background research findings could also be shared with education organizations to inform their efforts toward the same end.
One of the keys to developing strategies that will advance public education is to recognize that much of right-wing strategy is based on marketing and communicating an ideology, a way of thinking about the world, rather than addressing single issues one at a time, in isolation. What is done with regard to a specific issue is usually part of a broader underlying ideology.
The strategies and tactics presented here are not intended to be all-inclusive. Actions by public education advocates take place on a regular basis throughout the nation. Many of these could be characterized as being strategies or tactics. Some of these are undertaken by ad hoc citizen groups, some by progressive organizations such as People for the American Way, and of course many by public education organizations and educators themselves. These include a diverse array of activities such as lobbying for or against specific legislation, public demonstrations, and public relations. It is expected that some of the strategies presented herein will enhance or work synergistically with a number of these existing activities. It is also recognized that there may already be activity related to some of the suggested strategies and tactics.
Developing strategies is an ongoing process. Thinking strategically is a mindset that, like other mindsets, improves with practice and experience. As certain strategies are employed, the responses to those strategies may suggest modifications to the strategy and/or additional strategies and tactics. The overall objective is to be as effective as possible in protecting and strengthening public education.
Creating an Infrastructure with Independent Voices for Public Education
Section 2 of the report showed that a major strategy of the Right for changing public attitudes and gaining political support has been their creation of a network of advocacy organizations—an infrastructure that supports and advances the conservative movement. It was also shown that this network of advocacy organizations has focused on building an ideological movement and is continually advancing its goals.
An essential step in responding to the attack on public education is creation of an infrastructure, comprising a network of moderate to progressive advocacy organizations that support public education as well as other progressive issues. The model established by the Right demonstrates that some components of an infrastructure, particularly multi-issue policy organizations, can function as independent voices while others serve additional valuable functions. For example, the progressive Center for Policy Alternatives develops policy and model legislation for state legislators. All the infrastructure organizations function as advocacy organizations, whether they operate as independent voices or not, because they are all advocating for a cause in one way or another.
Teacher organizations and public education supporters need organizations that can serve as independent voices that advocate public education positions. It is almost always more effective to have a credible “independent voice” make your case rather than for you to try to make your own case. Studies from independent organizations will carry more weight than PR from teacher organizations, as the latter are likely to be perceived as self-interested. The right wing knows this and uses the independent voice approach to great effect.
In the long term, the independent voices may be the single most effective available strategy. As with a number of other strategies presented herein, it can be used without limit in addressing the whole range of education issues, from the most minor to the most significant. For example, the independent voices can address the critical issue of the “achievement gap” of certain minority student groups compared with higher-achieving groups. The independent voices could counter the view that puts the blame for the persisting achievement gap on teachers and the schools where they work and could call attention to the larger social factors involved. In doing this, the independent voices would be perceived as both authoritative (for example, well-researched information from a non-partisan think tank) and truly independent. On the other hand, when teacher unions, schools, school districts, or others closely aligned with these entities try to make this case, they are often viewed as self-serving and lacking in candor, even when being completely accurate.
What is the nature of infrastructure?
Infrastructure comprises the organizations and functions that support a movement which is based on underlying ideologies or principles. Infrastructure organizations are able to advance positions that are consistent with the ideology for a range of public issues. Being multi-issue and focused on principles/ideology is also characteristic of an infrastructure organization as opposed to a single issue organization. However, once a number of components of an infrastructure are established, and with proper coordination, single issue organizations can play a role in the infrastructure. Some well known infrastructure organizations on the Right are the Heritage Foundation, Pacific Research Institute, and the Federalist Society. Other organizations aligned with the Right that are not generally considered as infrastructure organizations but clearly function as such are the Washington Times and Fox News. Media personalities that work closely with others to advance the Right’s ideology, such as Rush Limbaugh, also function as part of the Right’s infrastructure. For the purposes of this report, the focus is on infrastructure other than media and media personalities.
What types of things do infrastructure organizations do?
The following is a partial list of the types of things that infrastructure organizations do, and of course that leads directly to the nature of the strategic role they can play. These functions are all important for mounting an effective response to the attack on public education.
Some First Steps
The initial strategies are directed to creating an infrastructure that will be needed to defend against attacks by the Right and to improve public and political support for public education and other issues and groups that have been jeopardized because of the actions of the Right.
The infrastructure of independent voices for public education will initially likely consist of a few organizations that have the capability of crafting effective messages and getting those messages out to various media and the public. Ultimately, these independent voices will have to be augmented by a broader infrastructure of organizations that together will have the capacity to change public attitudes and the political environment to be supportive of public education, and many other moderate-progressive resources, issues, and policies. The initial strategies will be facilitated by the involvement and cooperation of issue organizations that are under attack by the Right, including education organizations.
Public education and teachers unions are not the only ones being attacked by the Right. Organized labor, trial lawyers, environmentalists, family planning organizations, and government employees, along with a wide range of what are generally considered as progressive interest groups and organizations, are also under attack. Moderate to progressive politicians tend to be supportive of most or all the issues associated with interest groups. What these interest groups also have in common is that they are being attacked by the same foes, using the same underlying ideologies. It therefore makes strategic sense for public education advocates to develop and/or strengthen relationships with organizations representing these constituencies for the purpose of countering the attacks by the Right. Strategic allies perceive their common interests and can cooperate in their fight against right-wing ideology and actions to mutual benefit. Specific strategies that will benefit public education and teacher unions can be executed as a result of having created these alliances.
Teacher organizations, along with other groups attacked by the Right, have an incentive to work together building and funding an infrastructure that can counter the Right’s underlying ideology as well as fighting more narrowly-focused school-privatization battles. Additional financial resources can be available from foundations, wealthy individuals (many with family foundations), and a growing number of business persons who care about progressive issues and who are starting to recognize the need for allying themselves with other moderates and progressives. Business persons can lend vital expertise in addition to helping to fund the infrastructure.
Benefits
Some of the specific benefits of creating an infrastructure are as follows:
· Using marketing and communication technology, certain infrastructure organizations will be able to reach the broad public with positive messages about public education.
· Communication will also be geared to changing the overall public attitudes to be more supportive of progressive values. That would have benefits across the spectrum of interest groups and the interests they support. People and politicians who understand the value of public schools are also likely to be pro-environment, pro-choice, and supportive of other issues, because these positions at a deep level are anchored in a common world view. Similarly, pro-environment, pro-choice, etc. voters are very likely to be supportive of public schools, the interests of teacher organizations, and organized labor generally.
· Owing to the principle of interconnected–ness, which has been so well developed by the Right, a funded moderate-progressive marketing/communications infrastructure will, over time, be able to support a growing network of credible individuals writing books, articles and commentar–ies, appearing on television and radio news and issues programs, speaking to public interest groups, and using their skills in many beneficial ways. This network will create a favorable political climate for the types of candidates, judges, and policies that will be beneficial to public education and teacher organizations.
Funding is a critical issue and a motive for cooperation. As indicated above, the responsibility for creating and funding an infrastructure will not be borne by teacher organizations alone. Responsibility will be shared by a broad community of those who have a common interest in creating a moderate to progressive infrastructure. In addition, teacher organizations and those with whom they will be allied should encourage others, such as progressive foundations and wealthy individuals, to join in the effort.
Building this external infrastructure of independent advocacy organizations is an essential strategy, because without independent voices serving as advocates for public education, both the public and the politicians can be expected to be responsive to continued privatization efforts. But with a network of organizations working to reinforce ideals of community, sharing, nurturing, cooperation and public service, we can expect to see the shift necessary to achieve increased investment in public education.
These infrastructure organizations will require general operating support grants. This is how a lasting infrastructure is built.
The Right’s recognition that an underlying ideology binds them together allows them to be comfortable proving general operating support funding. The right-wing Philanthropy Roundtable coordinates their funding efforts, making sure that money is distributed to a variety of organizations. As a result of this approach, the Right has a diversity of organizations working on a number of approaches. These organizations do not perceive each other as competition for support, but rather as using multiple approaches toward achieving common goals, with some targeting one audience, and others trying different approaches. The acceptance of diverse approaches does not force the Right’s organizations to waste time and energy competing with each other for narrow short-term program grants.
Underlying ideological principles must be incorporated into most strategies for those strategies to be fully effective. Therefore developing unifying principles is considered here as part of creating an infrastructure. The unifying principles would be developed through the involvement of a wide range of experts including those in such fields as framing, language, and cognitive linguistics. The wording used in principles, as well as the principles themselves would be evaluated and tested using techniques such as polling, focus groups, and cognitive interviews. An example of a unifying moderate to progressive principle might be something such as “community responsibility.” Just as the a number of the Right’s underlying ideological principles provide a basis for attacking public education, it can be expected that a number of moderate to progressive principles will provide a basis for supporting public education.
To be most effective, the new organizations and the whole infrastructure will have to operate in a business-like manner, with clear objectives, appropriate staffing, and professional management. Respected progressives and moderates with business expertise could be recruited to take a lead in creating what essentially will be a new industry: the promotion and support of progressive to moderate values and policies. The involvement and imprimatur of respected business leaders can encourage funding support from many sources, including foundations as well as individuals.
It is necessary to establish coordination mechanisms, assign responsibilities, and provide financial support for the coordination functions. Coordination includes, but is not limited to, ensuring consistent use of language, dissemination of language, communicating plans of action, and assigning responsibilities. Those involved in the coordination include all parts of infrastructure, i.e., infrastructure organizations, media individuals, and single issue organizations such as those that advocate for public education.
Independent Voice/Infrastructure Strategies for Strengthening Public Education
The strategies in these subsections are ones that can be better executed by multi-issue infrastructure organizations than by teacher organizations themselves. Their function as independent voices can be particularly helpful for executing some of these strategies. Each skirmish in the ongoing battle will advance pro-public educations positions to some extent, because it will provide another opportunity to expose the public to concepts and language that frame privatization in a negative manner. This will be true even if public education advocates lose on a specific piece of legislation or referendum.
A long-term approach means developing long-term strategies that will make it possible to be proactive on a short-term tactical basis as well as to advance a long-term agenda. As an example, the right has taken a long-term approach to privatization. It has run multiple pro-vouchers campaigns, created but not funded NCLB, and used its network of advocacy organizations to attack teacher unions and public schools. The Right has used framing and language repeatedly, consistently, and over time in an effort to achieve their privatization goal. The key to using a long-term strategic approach is to recognize that it is not usually possible to go directly to your end point, but rather it is necessary to have a number of intermediate steps that can readily achieve public and political acceptance.
Once independent organizations establish long-term plans, the short-term tactics can be designed to work toward the long-term goals.
Many of the strategies presented in this section are examples of intermediate steps or strategies we expect the network of advocacy organizations will develop, for achieving the two goals stated at the beginning of the section.
The marketing approach used by a moderate to progressive infrastructure would likely be similar to that used by the Right (as described in Section 3), except that it will have to be adapted to different communication resources. For example, recognizing that the Right has better access to the major media, one of the efforts to make up for their advantage would be to reach specific audiences through media other than the major media. That could be accomplished through extensive use of psychographic segmentation, which focuses on how the audience thinks and how they perceive the world. Various audiences would be characterized through the use of polling, focus groups, and cognitive interviews. These techniques would be used to identify such things as the issues that are of greatest concern to a given audience, the cultural language of that audience, and what media in addition to major media might most effectively reach that audience.
A major focus of Marketing is to get broad public support for underlying ideology as well as for specific issues such as public education. Ideology is the subject of the following paragraphs.
Section 2 introduced Focus on Ideology as being one of the two major strategies of the Right. It stated that much of the success of the Right has been that they are organized around ideology rather than specific issues. For example, the mission of the leading conservative think tank, Heritage Foundation (according to its website) is to formulate and promote conservative public policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense. As it is a think tank that addresses almost every issue, it is instructive to note that no specific issues are cited in the Heritage Foundation’s mission statement, but rather a set of principles, which is in essence another name for underlying ideology. As stated above in the paragraph titled “What is the nature of infrastructure?” being multi-issue and focused on principles/ideology is characteristic of an infrastructure organization as opposed to a single issue organization.
In addressing ideology, the approach of progressives and moderate organizations would likely be both to weaken the ideology arguments of the Right and to substitute underlying ideologies that can be used in support of public education as well as the whole range of moderate to progressive issues. The application of ideology to multiple issues provides reinforcement to each single issue.
Ideology underlies and is expressed by framing and language. Being able to articulate a fundamental ideological position that can best be used to support progressive to moderate issues will require development. Work on articulating underlying progressive to moderate ideologies has started, but it needs to be completed. It can be expected that multi-issue think tanks and communication organizations will take the lead in this effort. They will be joined by leaders in cognitive linguistics and framing, and additionally will likely use focus groups and other research techniques to validate the selected underlying ideologies. This effort can proceed in parallel with the framing and language efforts.
It must be realized that moving public attitudes will take some time. However, because of the nature of the diverse and powerful communication tools available today, that can be a dynamic process that can proceed fairly rapidly if events are favorable and sufficient resources are available.
A society conditioned to accept the primacy of corporate free enterprise is not one in which labor unions will thrive. A population that believes in limited government and free enterprise is one that will be inclined to agree that schools should be private businesses rather than public institutions. And a public that buys into a right-wing version of “traditional American values” will certainly be unaccepting of “different” life styles and will probably think that there is no harm in compulsory prayer in schools, and that in fact it is proper.
The words that describe underlying ideologies by themselves may appear bland. But these words are given meaning by the context in which they are used. For example, the Right has promulgated the concept of “limited government” to mean that almost any service that government provides, with the exception of the military, should be left to “free enterprise.” The term “limited government” as used by the Right is readily interpreted to mean no government and no taxes. “Free enterprise”, in the Right’s lexicon, means corporate enterprise free of any government regulation or interference. So what is really being promoted by the Right is not only privatization of education but a corporate education system free of any government regulation (and that would surely include the NCLB act) or restriction. Essentially, we could expect that private enterprise would be free to operate in any manner they chose, regardless of the public welfare.
Once these ideologies take on specific meaning, they become powerful tools for moving the public to support a broad ultra-conservative agenda. School privatization, for example, is only part of a larger privatization movement that includes privatization of Medicare, Social Security, and most functions of city, county, state, and the Federal government. And such changes can occur rapidly.
Part of the response to this attack must be to counter the Right’s underlying ideologies. If the Right’s underlying ideologies are not countered, they will continue to be able to appeal strongly to the public and elected officials. Teacher organizations, for example, have tried to explain to the public the truth about public education, in response to the current attacks from the school-privatization movement and the Right. But, because so many of the privatization arguments rest on the Right’s ideology, the effort to combat privatization must also work to diminish public accep–tance of the underlying ideology itself. Just as blackberry vines in the garden keep reappearing until the root system is removed, school-privatization arguments will continue to thrive with the public until the underlying ideology loses strength.
Much of the effectiveness of the Right has been due to their having used carefully-tested frames and language over time that, with repetition, have effectively advanced their agenda. Much of this language, either directly or indirectly, reflects their core principles or ideology.
Moderates and progressives have many of the linguistic and other resources needed to create the framing, words, and metaphors to create a positive perception of public education and teacher organizations. However, to be most effective, these resource organizations and individuals should work cooperatively, which is not always the case at present. In addition to framing and language that is issue-specific, some frames and language should be applicable across issues. For example, metaphors relating to “community” could be used to describe public education or protection of animal and plant species (Public education is like have a caring, supportive, and inclusive community for all children in our society. Or, every plant and every animal is part of a natural, interdependent community, and as such they all deserve our respect, admiration, and protection.).
As is the care with the Right, one of the ways in which framing and language will benefit public education is if it succeeds in changing public attitudes related to underlying ideology. For example, it will benefit public education if the public, including decision makers, have a positive view of government. The following several paragraphs provide more information about “issue framing. ”
Issue framing is an essential part of language development. Issue framing, as used by the Right, is described under “Strategy: Marketing Approach” in Section 3. Here we will expand on framing as a concept. The website of the FrameWorks Institute [97] describes framing:
[…] “framing refers to the construct of a communication — its language, visuals and messengers — and the way it signals to the listener or observer how to interpret and classify new information. By framing, we mean how messages are encoded with meaning so that they can be efficiently interpreted in relationship to existing beliefs or ideas. ”
More simply, people have mental images in their minds that help them interpret what is going on around them. Our automatic impulse – a mental short cut - is to attempt to relate new information to the concepts we already have. The way an issue is framed triggers in our minds the shared and durable cultural models that help us make sense of our world.
George Lakoff, a professor of linguistics and cognitive science at the University of California Berkeley , describes framing as "using language to evoke ideas." [98] In an interview discussing the political use of framing, he said:
“The first thing to know about language is that it expresses ideas and thoughts. Every word is defined with respect to what cognitive scientists call a frame. A frame is a conceptual structure of a certain form. Let me give you an example. Suppose I say the word "relief." The word "relief" has a conceptual frame associated with it. Here's the frame: In order to give someone relief, there has to be an affliction and an afflicted party – somebody who's harmed by this affliction – and a reliever, somebody who gives relief to the afflicted party or takes away the harm or pain. That reliever is a hero. And if someone tries to stop the person giving relief from doing so, they're a bad guy. They're a villain. They want to keep the affliction ongoing. So when you use only one word, "relief," all of that information is called up. That is a simple conceptual frame.
Then there's metaphorical thought. We all think metaphorically. When you add "tax" to "relief" to give you the term "tax relief," it says that taxation is an affliction. That's a new metaphor. Then, using the metaphor, anyone who gets rid of the taxation – the affliction – is a hero, and anybody who tries to stop him is a bad guy.
[. . .] [if you are asked] “Are you in favor of the President's tax relief program or are you against it?” – it doesn't matter what you say. If you say, “I'm against tax relief,” you're still evoking that framing. You're still in their frame, and all that it automatically brings with it: what kinds of policies are good, who is bad, and so on. That's how Fox News works. It frames the issues from a conservative perspective. Once the issue is framed, if you accept the framing, if you accept the language, it's all over. [emphasis added]” [99]
There is an urgent need, therefore, for teacher organizations to become more aware of the role of language and metaphor in supporting the present frames, which work to their disadvantage. The push for school privatization needs reframing to a metaphorical model that will benefit teachers and public schools, rather than undermining them.
Framing development is an area of specialization that can be done by infrastructure think tanks with this orientation and type of expertise in-house and/or in conjunction with specialty organizations. As part of the total process of frame and language development, alternative framing and wording would be drafted with the input of experts and then appropriately tested before being put into use, to be sure that it will evoke the desired responses in the public mind. The organizations that develop framing will lead the way, showing what language and metaphors/images should be used with respect to specific issues, e.g., vouchers, privatization, teacher organizations, testing, “no child left behind”, school funding, and to be sure that the frames work together synergistically.
In addition to establishing specific language and new frames (to replace or weaken the present ones being used by the opponents), the new framing and wording should be widely disseminated to supporters, other independent-voice organizations and individuals, as well as to teacher organizations to ensure consistency of messaging. Consistency of messaging through multiple channels has contributed enormously to the success of the Right and should prove to be just as powerful a tool for advocates of public education and allied causes.
Framing is a community resource for use by many organizations. By having an infrastructure that includes specialist organizations in place to develop framing, the frames and language become a “community resource,” available to teacher organizations, environmental organizations, etc. Additionally, with different types of organizations sharing the framing language, the underlying themes and ideology are reinforced. By hearing the same frames coming from a number of sources and interest groups, they will be reinforced in the public mind and come to be accepted as “conventional wisdom.”
These infrastructure organizations will incorporate the new framing, language, and metaphors for use in specific issue campaigns like state and local voucher battles, and funding and various other provisions of NCLB. This means using the framing and language in press releases, articles, public speeches, media presentations, court cases, and all other discussions of the issue, as well as in providing information to government officials.
Infrastructure organizations will develop and promulgate alternative framing, metaphors, and language (including sound bites) about the proponents of “school choice”, which could be used consistently to portray them as self-interested and acting against the public interest. The potency of frames is reinforced if they are used across issues. The aim is to have the casual listener respond by thinking, for example, “Oh, the Religious Right is at it again, trying to get out of having to pay to send their kids to church schools,” every time a new voucher initiative is proposed by the opposition.
Repetition of a frame reinforces it. Every mention of “children trapped in failing schools” or use of language or images that reinforces the opposition’s frame, even if the intention is to try to negate it, strengthens the political and strategic position of school privatization advocates. Consistent use of properly-framed messages through multiple channels is necessary before a concept will lodge firmly in “the public mind.” One of the benefits of independent voices is that they can reinforce favorable frames and language in their own work product and public communications.
Repetition of simple, effective messages through multiple channels will work for public education and other moderate to progressive issues. A message is not necessarily heard the first time it is uttered. Repetition increases the chance that (1) a given individual will hear it, (2) more individuals will hear it, and (3) more individuals will hear it multiple times, thus reinforcing it. This principle is used all the time in advertising, and the Right has used it effectively in creating “conventional wisdom” and getting much of the public to buy into their ideology.
Use multiple channels to disseminate messages
Repeating coordinated strategic messages through multiple communication channels is a technique that has been successfully by the Right and can be emulated by a progressive to moderate infrastructure. Individual infrastructure organizations could specialize in specific channels such as major media, film productions, ethnic publications, progressive churches, and live entertainment venues. Some organizations might focus on specific audiences such as youth, Latino, or geographic area such as the Heartland. In addition there will be individual efforts such as op-ed journalists, authors, TV writers, well –established public speakers, media personalities that regularly appear on TV or radio, Internet sites, and organizations that use email as their basic communication tool. Messages can even be introduced in product advertising.
Develop a series of the “problems with privatization” articles that could be put into the media via independent voices. These articles could include those that make the case why, based on the history of corporations, privatization will not be in the public interest. By addressing illustrative problems that have arisen as a result of privatization in multiple areas such as prisons and health care systems, a basis will be established for a more powerful case regarding privatization of public education. Multi-issue think tanks that have language and framing capabilities would likely be the most qualified of the infrastructure organizations to execute this strategy.
Regularly prepare short articles, research digests, and press releases for the media, local and ethnic, as well as national. Let their reporters and editors pick up the information to use in their own venues
Develop a bank of favorable stories about public education—examples of single individuals, schools, and communities in which public education was an important positive element. Classify these stories by the types of lessons learned or the points they make, and then have them available as resources to speakers and writers. Develop an education-focused version of Bartlett ’s Famous Quotations, for the same purpose. Use ones that are consistent with the desired framing/language. This strategy could be coordinated teacher and other public education advocates that could be a source of material.
It should be noted that moderates and progressive scholars, representing independent voices, should do a certain amount of research, analysis, and purely intellectual work to define the areas in which private industry works well and why, and those areas in which public organization are preferable. Having a strong intellectual basis could add credibility to the premise that areas dealing with social, needs such as education, are not well-served by the corporate model, as that model is presently defined. This research could clearly show that the education of entire generations of children, of widely differing backgrounds and capabilities, is not well accomplished by profit-oriented organizations.
A number of infrastructure organizations can be expected to establish speakers’ bureaus that have a stable of speakers covering a broad range of issues, including public education. These speakers would be provided with the latest framing and language to incorporate into their presentations.
Under the “Internal Strategies” subsection, there is a more in-depth discussion of the speakers’ bureaus that teachers’ organizations could help to establish. Speakers’ bureaus are an area for close cooperation between teacher organizations and infrastructure organizations.
Speakers in the speakers’ bureau, as well as writers who appear in public and others, could benefit from training which would enable them be effective spokespersons for public education as well as for a moderate to progressive movement. Speakers and writers appearing in public (for example, when promoting a newly published book) will be provided with framing and language to be incorporated into their presentations. The speakers’ training will include how to stay on message, how to anticipate and respond to questions, how to use sound bites (being selective in the use of nuance), how to take advantage of opportunities to advance specific points, and effective use of presentation materials, along with attention to voice, diction, and nonverbal behaviors in the presentation situation. These techniques, routinely taught to clients by PR agencies, can bring about impressive improvements in a speaker’s performance.
Because speakers on behalf of public education and other moderate and progressive causes not infrequently find themselves dealing in public settings with those who differ with them ideologically, they must also learn how to deal with these situations. Techniques employed by many conservative speakers include staying on the offensive, and being confrontational or belittling. Dealing effectively with these techniques does not come naturally for many moderates and progressives. Speakers also need to learn specific techniques for reframing issues and resisting verbal bullying, as these techniques are much needed in dealing with today’s right wing pundits and media figures.
Weblogs, colloquially referred to as “blogs”, are Internet-based public journals, or diaries. Blogs are typically updated daily using software that allows people with little or no technical background to update and maintain them. Blogs have become a major tool for influencing thinking for many people. Some bloggers have become major personalities, attracting hundreds of thousands of readers every day. A number of major writers, political commentators, and columnists also have blogs. Bloggers cover the entire political spectrum. Those who have become part of the Right’s messaging machine get support via accepting advertising and other forms of support from some of the core funders on the right. There are also a number of progressive blogs.
Bloggers have the potential to be a significant channel for spreading positive messages about public education. Some bloggers can already be considered independent voices that address certain progressive issues. Frames and language regarding public education issues, as well as underlying progressive ideology, can be disseminated to these bloggers as this language becomes available. Individuals who are already public education advocates can be encouraged to start blogs as an additional way of communicating pro-public education perspectives.
In addition to bloggers, there are a number of other independent voices who have access to the media and/or certain audiences such as actors, musicians, cartoonists, columnists, novelists, etc. A number of these already are advocates for progressive causes/issues, but their efforts are not well coordinated, and they do not use consistent frames and language as do their counterparts on the Right. A well-functioning progressive infrastructure would continually seek to expand the community of independent voices for progressive issues. It would have processes for identifying such individuals on an ongoing basis, and for providing them with information about critical issues such as the NCLB act, and the frames and language progressives and moderates should use in addressing those issues. These individuals would then be better able to incorporate pro-public education themes into their creative analytic work.
The “school choice” movement has developed, and is using, a variety of low-profile techniques to influence ordinary members of the public to believe that “public schools are failing,” etc. The tactics used by the other side can be countered by the moderate-progressive network of independent voices by employing creative tactics and by pointing out the illogic of the Right’s propaganda whenever it is identified. Some examples of tactics that we expect might be developed by an infrastructure of moderate/progressive organizations are:
- Non-profit organizations (this would include most of the infrastructure organizations) could sponsor essay, drama, video, or music (e.g., rap) contests for high school and college students on topics such as the benefits of public schools, etc. Of course, the contests themselves, the winners, and their winning entries should be given major publicity in mass media and on the Internet.
- Create a network of citizen scholars who can write letters to the editor in response to media stories (positive or negative) dealing with public education, vouchers, NCLB, etc. These writers would use their own writing skills but could, at their discretion, incorporate the new effective framing and language.
- Create and promulgate counter-messages to respond to hostile e-mail messages circulating on the Internet.
- Create and maintain a website that reveals the specific anti-public school propaganda pieces and how one can recognize them. This could provide public education advocates with tactical information and counter messages they could use for fighting “school choice” propaganda.
Humor can be used as a positive force. Appropriate infrastructure organizations could provide material to well known progressive cartoonists and humorists who might wish to incorporate such material into their work. For example, a Dave Berry-style article might start off by stating in exaggerated terms how much money parents are saving by not having to pay taxes that fund all sorts of special programs. Then the article would describe a parent running all over the place taking his/her kids to all sorts of outside activities that could have been provided by the schools. One parent has to either quit their day job or hire a taxi service because there is a conflict between the timing of activities for two of the children. Then both parents have to take time off work to do fund-raising projects and act as classroom assistants in the kids’ schools, because of the funding cuts. The idea of the article would be very clear--parents definitely will not benefit by cutting public school programs.
The strategies in the preceding paragraphs are those that would be executed by qualified independent voices as ways to respond to the Right’s multi-pronged attack on public education. The strategies would also be intended to help strengthen and secure the role of public education in our society.
Along with the above-stated importance of developing an external infrastructure of independent organizations to combat the Right’s ideological attacks, it is also important to recognize that internal steps can be taken. We expect that some of these internal steps, or strategies, will utilize framing and language materials developed by infrastructure organizations with that capability. Other strategies are made possible through the development of alliances. Finally, some strategies will be primarily internal. But even in some of these cases, the execution of the internal strategy will be aided by the infrastructure of independent voices. Some of the suggested strategies may not be new, but the language and communication resources from the progressive to moderate infrastructure has the potential for improving the effectiveness of existing strategies. The following describes internal strategies for teacher organizations.
This was the fist strategy listed under the subsection “Creating an Infrastructure with Independent Voices for Public Education.” It was shown that cultivating allies was an essential element in helping to form an infrastructure that included independent voices. But it was also mentioned that specific strategies, other than creating an infrastructure, can be executed as a result of having strategic allies.
Teacher organizations can develop strategic allies, such as librarians, with whom there might exist a special relationship. Additionally, education organizations can benefit by working directly with a broad range of strategic allies that can help them achieve their goals. However, although teacher organizations and other public education advocates can work directly with certain strategic allies, for the most part, infrastructure organizations will take a lead both in cultivating strategic allies and in working with these allies, a number whom may ultimately become part of the moderate to progressive infrastructure.
As strategic allies become familiar with processes such as use of framing and language, marketing, and multi-issue coordination, their activities will further amplify and extend the infrastructure. With regard to public education allies, It should be noted that allies would include groups and causes with which public education organizations share political interests, even if the groups issue is not necessarily privatization; e.g., women’s issues, civil liberties.
To be effective, cultivating allies has to be a well-organized effort that includes multiple steps over time. Potential allies have to be identified. There have to be communications to potential allies that fully convey the necessity for working together to achieve mutual goals. Also, to the degree possible, there should be a structure, so the allies operate as an alliance. Education organizations should be involved in working with strategic allies, but, as indicated above, since some of these allies would be part of the infrastructure, the infrastructure organizations can play important roles in maintaining the alliance.
Meeting with allies
Teacher associations and their allies could plan to meet for a number of purposes including but not necessarily limited to the following:
Potential allies for teacher organizations include public institutions and many private institutions of higher education, unions representing university staff, and the community of liberal educators. Since they also represent the education community, and train teachers who become (for the most part) public school educators, it will be particularly important to find opportunities for mutual support. It should be noted that the Right has an ongoing attack against “liberal” professors. It is instructive to do an Internet search using the terms “liberal professors” and “conservative professors.” Most of the citations involve attacks on liberal professors and, by implication, the institutions that employ them.
There already exist close relationships between teacher organizations, public education administrator and non-teacher employee organizations, school boards, and others with an interest in public education. However, new language and strategies will offer opportunities for working together to strengthen public education.
This makes sense from a purely educational perspective. The issues of those that could potentially be allied with public education are, for the most part, issues that are of historical and social significance. For example, courses could provide information about history and science of environmental regulation, and the role that regulations have played in safeguarding the health of citizens and contributing to the quality of life. This not only makes academic sense, but it will encourage many organizations and those associated with certain interest areas, such as health and the environment, to realize what a vital role public education can play in helping to create a better society. The important thing to recognize in implementing this strategy is that it requires maintaining a high level of objectivity and balance so that the main purpose is always to educate, not to propagandize. Introducing new curricula has to be done strategically and over time. Infrastructure can provide the independent voices needed to help make the case for introducing new curricula, and may also help produce new pedagogical material.
As stated previously, the new infrastructure organizations will develop specialized framing and wording. Teacher organizations and their allied advocacy organizations should incorporate the new framing, language, and metaphors into their specific issue campaigns like state and local voucher battles, and their legislative lobbying, such as that against NCLB. This means using the framing and language in press releases, articles, and all other discussions of the issue, as well as in lobbying and communications with government officials. Every time the correct new framing and language is used, it will reinforce the overall power of that frame and act to negate the opposition’s frames.
Teachers are believers in public education, community and supporting our kids, bringing up the next generation, raising good citizens – good functions for a democracy. The values of people who support public education are progressive values. Community, nurturance, supportive government, and democracy – public education rests on those values. So it is those values that should be reinforced to preserve public education. Each individual teacher can model these values and be a spokesperson for public education.
Teacher associations would disseminate the new framing and language to their members. This information can reach teachers through publications, seminars, lectures, student teacher training, personal letters, short videos, professional websites and professional organizations. Teachers would be encouraged to act as ambassadors for public education
Also, teachers and their organizations should understand the frames used against them. They should never refer to “failing schools,” “school choice” or any of the other “frames” per se. When these words are written, they should always be put into quotation marks or referred to as “so-called failing schools.” Alternative framing phrases would be developed for use to project a pro-public school mental image.
Teachers would learn how to respond to people who tell anti-teacher and anti-school jokes or anecdotes. Use of anti-teacher-union “humor” would be treated as being as prejudicial as racial epithets or sexist remarks: not funny, but rather insulting and denigrating. Further, teachers could practice having a couple of quick repartees they can use easily whenever such remarks are made.
Teachers would BE and ACT proud of public schools—talk about the good things they do. A number of public school teachers, though, currently feel discouraged by the endless attacks on public education. They need to have their morale boosted, and giving them specific tips about how to communicate their passion for education more effectively may be one good way to accomplish this.
Teacher associations might consider facilitating the creation of “Best Practices” teams that would be made available to low performing schools. As major media, such as Newsweek magazine, have shown, there are public schools serving both higher and lower social/economic student populations that have excellent performance. Sending “Best Practices” teams to low performing schools could, with appropriate PR, demonstrate public education’s commitment to excellent education. This in turn could improve support for public education. “Best Practices” workshops (in-service training), Internet-based seminars and programs, and publications could complement or derive from the actions of the “Best Practices” teams. Obviously, such best practice teams would be introduced in a way that they will be welcomed by their fellow educators rather than seen a punishment for poor performance. As with any suggested change, it is vital to get buy-in.
Teacher associations at all levels could consider cultivating a speakers’ bureau or list of potential speakers/writers who have pro-public education perspectives. Associations that already have speakers’ bureaus might consider expanding the scope of the bureau. The associations would make available prepared speaker materials such as presentation outlines, PowerPoint slide presentations, short videos, handouts and other graphic materials using the optimal framing and language as it is developed by the independent infrastructure organizations, to be used by speakers who want to make presentations to various audiences in their communities. Included in the speakers’ training materials would be specific suggestions about how to respond to audience and reporters’ questions, including recognizing adverse frames and responding by reframing.
As a resource for speakers publish (in print and online) “fact sheets” of information about public education, including how to rebut, accurately, derogatory comments or false statements about public education and teacher organizations. Also, consider making these available to public school teachers, officials, and parent-teacher organizations, through a wide variety of channels.
In addition to presentation materials, associations could provide standard formats for press releases and press packets, plus guidelines for how to publicize any talks that are scheduled in this way. Teacher associations might also take on the event publicity function themselves, so that they would only need information about the upcoming event from the speaker in order to prepare and send out announcements to the media.
Teacher associations would offer speaker training workshops; if continuing education credits are required, offer them for such training. Such training may also be available through progressive-moderate infrastructure organizations. Although speaker training is available through many sources, the training required for being effective spokespersons for public education is a specific training that would incorporate language, framing, and other elements mentioned in the paragraphs above in this subsection. It might also include tactics for countering specific attacks and allegations that might be vocalized by opponents.
It would be useful for teacher associations to identify public school officials and teachers who are good public speakers (or want to be trained as such) and support them to give talks in their communities. Back them up with connections to local media and, as possible, to larger audiences and media. Provide them with audiovisual materials to augment their presentations (e.g., PowerPoint presentations, slides, charts and graphs, good quotations). As part of their training/orientation, be sure such speakers are fully conversant with the best framing and language to use about public education issues. Encourage teachers to do outreach to community organizations in their local region, such as Chamber of Commerce, religious organizations, service organizations (e.g., League of Women Voters, Lions, Rotary, Masons, Veterans of Foreign Wars), offering to be speakers on topics such as the positive things about public schools and teachers, and the good they have done.
A strong argument could and should be made that a populace that thinks critically is essential to the successful functioning of a democracy. Some conservatives oppose critical thinking, as they believe that it leads to relativism and other evils. Focusing on its connection to promoting democracy should be able to successfully counter this type of opposition. Critical thinking is, of course, an extensively researched area, and there are numerous books on the subject.
Promoting the concept of critical thinking as core curriculum can benefit public education in the short-term as well as the long-term. As an immediate benefit, it can show public education organizations as being innovative, creative, and actively promoting democracy. This is particularly important at a time where the Right is trying to make the case that all the innovation and creativity is in private schools. The Right says that public school organizations oppose progress and operate to promote their narrow self-interest. In the long term, teaching critical thinking might be expected to result in a higher percentage of the population being well informed, objective, and capable of evaluating complex issues. One would expect that an objective and well-informed populace would not only be better citizens, but would also value public education and be more than willing to provide the financial support to make it as good as possible.
Students who learn how to think critically will be more likely to see the nuance and complexity of issues rather than thinking in terms of black and white. This type of thinking can be expected to produce an educated populace that will be more objective and more supportive of a public and secular versus religious education, and thus public schools rather than voucher-supported private schools, which are often operated by religious groups. As an example, think of the subject of evolution versus creationism being taught using critical thinking as a process.
We live in a complex and rapidly changing world. Critical thinking is a help for dealing with complexity in a way that does not overlook important points. It also can be a basis for helping students become more inclusive of a variety of points of view and types of people. As a larger portion of society becomes capable of critical thinking, that will be reflected in the ability of citizens to make more informed decisions, and will require that elected officials be capable of appealing to that type of citizenry.
Incorporating critical thinking into core curriculum will obviously not be easy. It will require changes in new teacher training and likely some training for practicing teachers. On the plus side, critical thinking may enliven the classroom experience for both teachers and students. For the most part, critical thinking would likely be incorporated as a method of teaching rather than as separate subjects. Therefore, it can be promoted as not being an additional burden on either teachers or students. Nevertheless, like any significant change in a process, implementation will have to be well thought out so that the changes are not perceived as unreasonable burdens, but rather as something desirable. Obviously, a shift as major as this one would have to be accomplished over time.
Independent voices could help introduce and sell the concept of critical thinking to the public and decision makers. This is vital, since if teacher organizations only try to bring about this change, they can expect opposition from the Right. On the other hand, as indicated above, the network of independent voices can anticipate objections and counter them before they are raised. As a cautionary note, language research may show that the use of the term “critical thinking” has negative connotations, and the use of a term such as “good thinking” may be more appealing to the public and decision makers.
As is true with any change process, the important question is: What is the cost versus the benefit? In the case of incorporating critical thinking into the teaching process, it would appear that the benefits can be expected to far outweigh the costs.
As mentioned in the Introduction, school facilities have a history of serving as a significant community resource. Teacher organizations might consider working with school boards to open up public school facilities to the community to the greatest degree possible for general community use, for after-school recreation (particularly for economically challenged families who can’t look after their children in the afternoon, and don’t have close safe recreational areas close to home), for adult education, for evening and weekend movies and plays, etc. In some cases this may require additional tax revenues. In every case, public education advocates should make it clear that these facilities are public education facilities that are being provided to the community, thanks to the public educators. As a result, the public is getting an additional benefit from their tax contributions that have been used to build and maintain these community resources. Independent voices for public education can help make the case that public education facilities are a good community investment.
Infrastructure organizations may be able to suggest new possibilities for teacher organizations to present public education and teachers unions in a positive ways. This might include using more media channels, getting messages out through organizations of public education allies, and keeping independent voices aware of developments and special needs. Media channels, in addition to major media, could include college and university related media, such as radio, community access TV, magazines, and campus newspapers. In addition, infrastructure organizations will serve as independent voices for improving the image of public education and teacher unions in conjunction with most of their strategies.
Another possibility might be to introduce and/or expand tours and programs for college students, civic groups, and the general public that highlight positive aspects of public education
There are a number of persons in the public that are naturally allied and/or can be expected to be supportive of public education. These would include members of PTAs, those on school boards, parents who are involved in fund raising or other school related activities, and self-proclaimed public school advocacy groups. By making persons from the speakers bureaus available to all these groups, and by providing them with effective framing and language, they can become even more powerful voices for public education.
Campaigns that mobilize the public around education issues can increase the base of support. However, to be most effective, these supporters also need to be informed about the nature of the opposition to public education. Language and metaphors supportive of public education should be used consistently to reinforce allegiance to public education and the underlying values on which the desirability and benefits of public education are based.