In yet another iteration of the media's account of the Obama administration's probable intentions toward school reform, Jonathan Alter at Newsweek has come down from the mountain after his interview with his expert on education, with the proclamation that "we know by now what works for at-risk kids. The challenge is trying to replicate it." That expert? None other than Bill Gates. And what works? Teacher merit pay. Or what Gates euphemistically calls "effectiveness-compensation systems."

That anyone would turn to Bill Gates for advice on how to guide America's schools is not so bad. His involvement in the funding of technology initiatives in schools is highly commendable. But that all of the rhetoric on school reform is coalescing around one idea for solving all our education problems is the height of reductionist folly. As I explain on the flip . . .

In major newspapers and in op ed columns by Washington DC insiders, Obama's choice for Secretary of Education, and thus a signifier of the potential direction for education reform, is being portrayed as a continuation of the ongoing struggle between "the reformers" and the teachers' unions. In an article appearing in the Boston Globe and a column by The Washington Post's David Brooks, the real choice for education reform basically comes down to this:

Either pick a "real reformer," such as New York City superintendent Joel Klein, who espouses teacher merit pay, strict accountability based on test scores, pro NCLB, and all for parent choice (i.e., charter schools). Or pick Linda Darling-Hammond, who Brooks dismisses as " the establishment view" and Seyward Darby at The New Republic contends is "vexing education's boldest change agents."

And then there's Arne Duncan, Chicago Public Schools chief, who has been positioned as the Goldilocks candidate who is potentially "just right" for everyone, even though he has previously espoused many of the same beliefs (sub required) as Klein and other "reformers."

It's a convenient narrative that adheres to the longstanding rightwing frame. This frame maintains that the real problems with America's schools are due to teachers' unions and a "bureaucracy" that is immune to the purifying force of the "free market." So basically, there's only two sides to this argument: the "reform minded" who adhere to continuation of NCLB-like "accountability" and the "establishment" which is always framed as an ally of the teachers' unions.

What is totally left out of the picture is that there is a real alternative to this frame that is rarely reported in the MSM and whose voice is rarely heard in the debate that leaks from the Obama transition team. Join me on the flip to explore what that is . . .