“After three years at one middle school, a student still didn’t know how to use a bilingual dictionary”
So read a recent headline on the “front page” of the Washington Post web edition, leading the reader to a story by Theresa Vargas with the headline, “Arlington Schools has agreed to improve how it supports English learners. These parents and teachers want you to know why changes are needed.”
Now, a perverse reading of the “After three years” head might be, “the Arlington schools’ program for English language learners is so good that only one student doesn’t know how to use a bilingual dictionary.” But, of course, that’s not the point of the headline, or the article. The point is, this horrible example is typical! That’s how bad Arlington County is!
But, in fact, the second reading is more perverse than the first. There’s no reason to believe that this unhappy student’s plight is typical at all. The entire article is based on statements from a few anonymous teachers and one parent who read a public statement at a school board meeting. The article offers no data on the actual performance of English language learner students in the Arlington County Schools, and only quotes critics of the school system. Nor are there any “success stories”. Is it possible that there were none?
Of course not. But what “makes” a story is not information about “average” performance, which is always boring, much less success, which takes away from the “real story” already selected by the reporter—that “we” are failing, that “the kids” are suffering. What “makes” a story is an account of an outrage that proves how terrible things really are, so thqt the more outrageous a story is—the more unlikely it is—the “truer” it is, leading occasionally to such disasters as the Rolling Stone fake rape story,1 but 99% of the time accepted by readers as “shocking but true” because “shocking is true”.
All of this started with Herodotus, author of The Persian Wars, and one of the greatest historians who ever lived—the “father of history” and the “father of lies” all rolled into one.2 Herodotus loved a good story, and we do too. We forgive Herodotus for his stories of gold-digging ants smaller than dogs but larger than foxes. But we should object to the same beasts showing up in the Post in the present day.
Afterwords
It is, naturally, utterly verboten to suggest that poor student performance could actually be the “fault” of the students, or their parents, themselves. Are you crazy?
1. The author of this infamous story, for which no one lost his job, undoubtedly rejected any number of true stories because they weren't awful enough. Only a false story could prove how terrible things were on campus.
2. Herodotus wrote to "preserve in memory the great and marvelous deeds of Greek and barbarian alike".
