Maybe I'm cynical and suspicious by nature, but Carver seemed to be using the topic of student achievement to make a completely different point. If you recall from the article, he was making comment regarding the suitability of student achievment as a measuring stick for policy governance. While he did address this issue, he spent a great deal of time making comments about the interference of state, provincial, and federal legislative bodies in the school board governance business. He even went as far as to say he doubted there were any school boards left that were able to do their jobs as intended. Now, this is interesting because Carvers' life work has been the development of a governance model, and it seems to me he may be capitalizing on the stated issue to make points about another issue entirely. As my stepson would say: "its kinda cheap". Did anyone else notice this?
Carver: What is he really trying to say?