CB>top management.  Only the leaders of the 
CB>educational system can establish
CB>the commitment to quality and prescribe the definition of quality.
 RM> Didn't you just say (a couple messages back) that only the
 RM> CUSTOMER can define what quality is?  Aren't these 
 RM> contradictory?
Yes and no 
The leaders have to build a valid working relationship to the customers to 
determine what the customers want from the system.
 RM> It does this, but it also identifies "drift" in the process
 RM> of education so that we are aware if something changes.  
 RM> Only in this way can we adjust as needed.  The third thing
 RM> it does is to modify the behavior of the students, who are
 RM> not the passive and non-interactive entity Deming appears
 RM> to believe they are.  
The drift will show if the test remains static, no?  Should a test remain the 
same forever?  
If I have led you to believe that Deming assumes that students are "empty 
vessels", (as our current system does), then I have miscommunicated something 
somewhere.  Actually Deming does not deal with educational theories--other 
than to state that for the system to improve there must be continuous 
learning from those in charge of the system, (teachers, admin, janitors, 
secretaries, etc.).  Deming does give tools for people to improve the 
management of the system.  
 
Deming gives far higher authority to the teacher, because of the front line 
status each of us has.
 RM> More and more, I'm coming to believe that Deming simply 
 RM> doesn't understand this, and subscribes to the "student as 
 RM> an empty vessel" philosophy of education.  Though you 
 RM> probably DON'T, you might consider the complete absence of 
 RM> any concern as to the students' point of view, beliefs, 
 RM> values, etc in Deming as raising a small red flag.
Hmmmmm, since he stated the student is a customer and the customer's needs 
must be answered within the system -- I am not sure where you got this idea.  
Maybe from some of my late night ramblings? 
 RM> Perhaps he believes that the process can modify their
 RM> behavior, and, properly done, I think there may be some
 RM> validity in that - PROVIDED - the process include some
 RM> consequences for poor effort, and some rewards for 
 RM> excellence.  The "process" has to include acceptance to
 RM> college, good jobs for successful candidates, etc.  It must
 RM> also include steps to bring entering students to a level
 RM> where they can be successful.  If Deming is defining 
 RM> "process" in this way, then maybe there's something there.  
 RM> OTOH, if he considers, say, education through hs as the 
 RM> process, then my criticisms remain....
 RM> ___
I think that your definition of this process would be one that he would agree 
with.  His focus is on making people successful by getting rid of obstacles 
that interfere with this "process".  
 
The book I have been quoting from is really meant for managers of education.  
As a level three teacher, I can be put in management position at the request 
of an administrator.  Yet, I see much in the book that applies to the 
classroom--some of which I want to try this year.
--- Maximus 2.02
---------------