I love this clip of Neil Young talking with David Letterman. Neil jokes that he is working on a new song, “Just Singing A Song Won’t Change The World.” He banters with Paul Schafer and finally says, “You can keep trying, though.”

It’s a good question: what can change the world? Americans, generally speaking, believe the answer is democracy.

I keep writing posts saying in different ways that “Democracy is the Answer.” Name a problem — more democracy is the answer.

• Raising America’s standard of living — more democracy is the answer.
• Transforming our system of public education — more democracy is the answer.
• World peace — more democracy is the answer.

In response to a recent post, Stan Hirtle replied and said the “Waiting for Superman” movie delivers this message: “America’s standard of living arguably depends on having a higher skilled, higher educated work force than in the past, and therefore we can be less tolerant of the education results of the past.”

The movie doesn’t suggest that for our failing economy more democracy is the answer, it says a more highly trained work force is the answer. Diane Ravitz calls the movie “propaganda.”

The idea that the focus of our system of public education should be to maintain and improve the American standard of living is an idea so often expressed, we don’t recognize it as propaganda.
Here are two recent statements by President Obama:

• “Make no mistake: Our future is on the line. The nation that out-educates us today is going to out-compete us tomorrow. To continue to cede our leadership in education is to cede our position in the world.“
• “When countries that out-educate us today, they will out-compete us tomorrow. Giving our kids the best education possible is an economic imperative. That’s why, from the start of my administration, we’ve been fighting to offer every child in this country a world-class education”

Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, says: “Nothing — nothing is more important in the long-run to American prosperity than boosting the skills and attainment of the nation’s students.”

But, if American test scores were at the top of the chart, and our students were outscoring students of other nations in science and math, our current unemployment figures would be substantially unchanged.

Alfie Kohn notes:

“ For nations, there’s little correlation between average test scores and economic vigor. The late Gerald Bracey, for example, found 38 countries whose economies had been rated on the Current Competitiveness Index calculated by the World Economic Forum and whose students’ test scores had also been assessed. There was virtually no correlation between countries’ scores on the two lists. … Consider Japan’s outstanding test scores in the 1980s and its dismal economic performance in the 1990s.”

Low test scores didn’t cause our current economic crisis, and high test scores will not solve our economic problems. Blaming public education for our poor economy is effective propaganda — a way for the ruling oligarchy to manage public opinion — but, raising test scores will not improve the economy. It is illogical that, if our system of public education could succeed in dramatically accomplishing Duncan’s goal of “boosting the skills and attainment of the nation’s students,” sufficient good jobs would somehow materialize.

Citizens in the old Soviet Union demonstrated greater academic accomplishment than citizens in the United States. But academic accomplishment in the old Soviet Union did not translate into prosperity.

The Soviet Union had a system problem, and, it is the system that matters most — not the individuals in the system. It was impossible that the Soviet system could produce wide-spread prosperity, because it was never the purpose of the system. The point of Soviet Union system was not to produce prosperity, but to give more power and privilege to those already privileged.

America also has a system problem. Our central problem is not that school children can’t understand the quadratic formula or can’t comprehend photosynthesis. The problem is our system of democracy is failing. In practical terms, we have an oligarchic system, not a democratic system. To solve our economic malaise we need to vitalize our system of democracy. More democracy is the answer.

The idea that More Democracy Is the Answer is a fundamental idea with great power. But where are the documentary movies that make that case? Where are the talk radio programs that are working day and night to stir people up so they begin to express passion for this fundamental idea?

The need to vitalize our democracy seems so obvious to me that I keep predicting that eventually it will be obvious to many others as well. My prediction, that I keep returning to, is, The Ascending Issue In Our Democracy Is Democracy Itself

Maybe it is just wishful thinking, but, I believe the grassroots is awakening. Stable, prosperous communities such as Kettering, where I live, whose public education is deemed “Excellent,” have the greatest capacity for creating an authentic democratic grassroots movement. Such a movement will be a nonpartisan effort to build community. The core of this movement, initially, I believe, will be the conviction that local control of public education must be returned to local communities.

A grassroots’ movement requires that people begin to act on their convictions. Note to self: Changing the world means getting off one’s duff and actually doing something. Neil’s right — just singing a song won’t change the world — even if the song is about democracy.

Governor Ted Strickland, two years ago, in his public forums on reforming Ohio’s system of public education, challenged participants to attempt to think afresh.  He challenged his listeners to imagine: Suppose the present system could be wiped clean, and we could start anew, what would the new system look like? He said:

“This is our opportunity for us to think together and to think boldly — I want to think about transforming our schools. Now, we are not an artist looking at an almost finished painting and wondering where to put that last brush stroke in order to make it a little better. What we are is an artist looking at a blank slate and asking what is the best thing we can create here.”

I doubt the governor ever got many serious proposals for systemic change.  When Strickland finally revealed his education plan, I was disappointed with the results.  I wrote,“Strickland is basically saying that the present system is OK, but, that it needs more money, more rules, that the bureaucrats in the system need more authority, etc..” Wiping a slate clean and transforming a system of public education is a daunting task, and, because Ohio’s educational establishment is one of Strickland’s biggest political supports, it is not surprising that Strickland failed to follow through with his blank slate idea.

As the President of the Kettering Foundation, David Matthews, points out, the quality of public education in a community depends on the vitality of the community’s democracy.  The transformation of public education, I believe, is possible through an awakening of democracy — via the exertion of grassroots’ local control.  A middle American community like Kettering, where I live, where public schools are now deemed “Excellent with Distinction,” I believe, is the most likely place for a new model of public education to emerge.  Social improvements are best built on stability and strength.

I love the idea from W. Edwards Deming that most every improvement we can wish for in this world depends upon our figuring out how to imagine and how to implement better systems.  Every system is built around an aim or mission.  What does a community seek to accomplish when it willingly taxes itself to finance a system of public education?  In Kettering, a K-12 education costs more than $150,000. A community should ponder:  What is the common good that justifies this taxation?

Citizens in a democracy willingly tax themselves to finance a system of public education because they believe that every citizen deserves an equal opportunity for a good life.   To maintain a democratic society, there must be a sufficient consensus that the system is fair, so the opportunity for an education is equated with the opportunity for prosperity.

The problem is, it is impossible for a system of public education to create opportunity.  Regardless of doing everything asked on them, many young people who showed proficiency in a curriculum and graduated from Ohio’s schools are floundering with little hope for economic success.  And it is doubtful that their plight is temporary.  All evidence points to the conclusion that if the purpose of the resources given to public education is to create opportunity, then, how those resources are spent should be reconsidered.  And if the purpose of resources given to public education is to create engaged and thoughtful citizens, it is shocking that only 20% of voters ages 18 – 30 voted in the recent election.

Tinkering, making a more rigorous curriculum with stiffer accountability — more rewards and punishments — will not matter.

Suppose we take up Governor Strickland’s challenge and wipe the slate clear. It would be fun to imagine a system built on principles that we know have power — free enterprise, entrepreneurship, personal responsibility, mutual cooperation. Suppose we design a system whereby each child, through a responsible guardian, has access, over 13 years, to $150,000. And, suppose to each parent is given these instructions: “Please spend this money in the best way to provide this child with the foundation for a prosperous adult life, and the foundation to become as an adult, a  thoughtful, informed, and active citizen.” Such a system, of course, would need to include a structure for accountability, based on an Individual Education Plans, that abundantly would satisfy taxpayers.  It would be fun to think through what such a system might look like

One push for success is the reality that we live in an exciting time for school renewal. The whole world seems to be looking for good solutions to how to design an effective system of public education. A community that chose to exert control over its local system of education, in its efforts to make systemic change, in the current climate, I believe, would be financially rewarded via much outside support and encouragement. There would be a lot of rewards for a community to show leadership and point the way to meaningful transformation and the promise of such rewards might, in a community like Kettering, help move the process along.

I hope to get the ball rolling in Kettering via a series of public meetings in March / April of this next year. The idea is that the output from these meetings would be included in a book — “Kettering Public Education In the Year 2022” — posted on line. The thought is to attempt to make a plan for the transformation of Kettering public education the basis for community discussion in the 2011 school board election campaign.  It’s an ambitious thought.