Corruption in the Classroom 

  In the fall , I mentioned the debate over teaching kids to read using whole language versus phonics methods. The heavily funded  Reading First  program, part of No Child Left Behind, is intended to promote phonics and relies on  research  published by the National Reading Panel (which  I don’t completely trust , but today that’s beside the point).   

 The latest is a  report  by psychologist Louisa Moats claiming that instead of changing their curricula to focus on phonics, reading programs are sprinkling key phonics catchphrases throughout their marketing materials and selling the same old whole language lessons. The  press release  for Moats’ report contrasted the situation with the F.D.A.’s oversight of drugs. The government authority approves the treatment; companies marketing the treatment rely on public trust in the authority. The difference is that education companies get away with much more than the drug companies ever could. 

 Reports like this highlight for me the differences in how natural and social science results become policy. I see that medical dishonesty can kill people while the effects of corruption in education are less direct. But how does it happen that New York City public schools spend anti-whole language funding on thinly disguised whole language curricula? What other social programs are subject to this kind of deceit?