Today's LA Times story on teachers

This time, the LA Times describes the most sensational examples of molesters in the classroom.

Once again, the LA Times' seems to be confused about what constitutes journalism, or maybe I'm confused about what constitutes the Fourth Estate's job.

While I am not disputing the few facts presented in the story (when there are any), it's what is missing that is troubling.

First up, the story is part of a series, which the LA Times describes as being about "California public school districts' effectiveness in removing teachers and other educators who harm or poorly serve their students."

But, so far it has been concentrating exclusively on LAUSD (Los Angeles Unified School District). What's missing is the rest of the state of California. What's also missing is any review of the system that the series is purportedly about; it only seems to be all about teachers and how bad they are and how the LA Times is sure are out there everywhere. No mention of privatization or superstitious belief, just teachers as the sole problem facing public education.

Secondly, the stories don't really prove their argument--not that a real investigation has an agenda going in, mind you--but an assertion is made and examples are then given to back it up.

Again, it's not what is presented that is in dispute. This kind of "reporting" fails because it excludes more than it includes.

What's missing is any context.

The first story in the series discussed teachers who are accused of some kind of misconduct but who are paid while the investigation is conducted. The even-handed title for this piece? L.A. Unified pays teachers not to teach. Not "School Administrators Take Fucking Forever to Do Fitness Assessment" (thank you DUer MrModerate) or "Fewer Than 4/10th of 1% of LAUSD Teachers Are Investigated For Misconduct". Of course not. Instead, the LA Times bashes teachers with their lopsided "report" going so far as to include the phrase "FAILURE GETS A PASS" as part of the title. Another missing part of the LA Times' coverage is that this practice is common. So common that The New Republic published a piece about the same program in New York.

Now, on to today's part of the series. The LA Times takes on molesters. I'm not going to make excuses for that kind of behavior; it's disgusting and people who prey on children should be in prison.

But, this is no excuse for the LA Times' lousy reporting. Again, too much is missing from their "investigation" to elevate it above the tabloid. By relying on the sensational aspect of the story, they forget to mention how often this happens and if it is more or less frequent than in past years. With this kind of information, the reading public can know how effective (or ineffective) the current administrators are at enforcing policy. In other words, readers can find out how effective LAUSD is when it comes to removing teachers and other educators who harm or poorly serve their students.

As it is, the LA Times story leaves their readership believing their assertion that all Los Angeles public school teachers are molesters who get paid for doing nothing and that they represent all of California.

Here's the link to the editorial, and here is the excerpt to today's piece ...

best for the kids just isn't an interesting story.

... for crap when they started their "investigation" and they wrote something to confirm that.

It's too bad reporters can't just report all that they find, not just the bad stuff.

BTW, you're welcome for the kick.