Obama Talks About NCLB, But Not Enough for the Experts
Barack Obama broke the presidential candidates' silence on NCLB. In what his campaign promoted as a major education policy speech, he uttered the phrase "No Child Left Behind." To precise, he said it five times. See the excerpts below.
The headline on most stories about the speech highlighted Obama's promise to double funding for charter schools. That was indeed the news; as Michele McNeil points out, Obama's education plan doesn't mention charter schools.
What's more, everything Obama said yesterday about NCLB is similar to what he's said before. (See samples from this entry or this one.)
Yesterday's speech, left some policywonks wanting more. Checker Finn suggests that Obama's speech (given in Checker's hometown, no less) fails to address the major issues facing the law. In the world according to Checker, those issues are "who sets standards, what constitutes adequate progress, what exactly to do about failing schools, etc."
And Kevin Carey chastises Obama for focusing so much on money: "Even a 'fully funded' NCLB would provide less than five percent of what it costs to run the nation's K-12 school system. The debate is about how best to measure educational success and what do when we determine that success is insufficient."
Carey and Finn are right. Then again, one could say the same things about McCain's plans related to NCLB. They don't systemically address Checker's "to do" list, and they focus on the issues to choice and tutoring—a set of issues that is as narrow as money.
You wouldn't expect candidates discuss the big picture in stump speeches, but past candidates have explained their ideas in other ways. Both Bill Clinton and George Bush campaigned with comprehensive ideas of how to shape federal policy, using the Elementary and Secondary Education Act as the lever. Neither Obama nor McCain is doing that. What will that mean for NCLB's reauthorization? Comments welcome.
Here are the quotes from Obama's speech yesterday:
"You don’t reform our schools by opposing efforts to fully fund No Child Left Behind."
"Of course, we also have to fix the broken promises of No Child Left Behind. Now, I believe that the goals of this law were the right ones. Making a promise to educate every child with an excellent teacher is right. Closing the achievement gap that exists in too many cities and rural areas is right. More accountability is right. Higher standards are right.
"But I’ll tell you what’s wrong with No Child Left Behind. Forcing our teachers, our principals, and our schools to accomplish all of this without the resources they need is wrong. Promising high-quality teachers in every classroom and then leaving the support and the pay for those teachers behind is wrong. Labeling a school and its students as failures one day and then throwing your hands up and walking away from them the next is wrong."
"We must fix the failures of No Child Left Behind. We must provide the funding we were promised, and give our states the resources they need, and finally meet our commitment to special education. But Democrats have to realize that fixing No Child Left Behind is not enough to prepare our children for a global economy."
Comments
Has anyone ever stopped and asked, "what are the customers expectations in the education process?" Customers being parents and students of course. What if a parent is satisfied that his/her child finally received a high school diploma after 5 years of high school? What if a parent is satisfied their child drops out and at least gets a GED, after all, the child can join the millitary, right? What if too many parents don't care if their child exceeds minimum standards, which can affect a school's overall average?
What if parents just want their child to grow up and obtain the "American Dream," but the parent does not see enough jobs in the US to accommodate such dreams?
Folks at the top of the educational decision making tier are so far removed from the ground troops, that they are ignoring vital feedback as to what the customer wants or expects. The top tier will fail to market education, especially in our poorest areas of rural and urban America.
Without hope of a better future, what is the light at the educational tunnel for our children? Perhaps the goal is not to actually educate everyone, but just enough to maintain the status quo, which I believe is what we have been doing for decades. As long as the US can manage a certain number of illiterate and ignorant citizens, the few on top will remain on top and social mobility will simply be the ideal instead of the real.
BTW: I would like to be given a voucher to let me decide what school I want my child to be enrolled at. I support inter and intra school district choice for parents and primary caregivers.
Posted by: Kathy | September 11, 2008 2:01 PM
I don't have children but I am still a customer of our educational system. Why? Because the children in community today will be the doctors, lawyers, teachers, mechanics, etc. of my community tomorrow. I want them to be the best, the brightest and the ones ranking Number 1 international.
We will not survive as a country if we cannot provide an exceptional public education for our children.
Posted by: Elizabeth from Virginia | September 15, 2008 9:31 AM
I will try to keep this short, I taught high school math and I am also a father of a child who receives special education. I feel that our public schools can do more, but they also need help doing this. We cannot just give them a list and walk away. We need to be involved in our children’s education and make it happen. I feel that one very important far reaching goal of any teacher is to inspire our youth to want to learn, to quest learning throughout life! This learning can take many forms, not just sitting at a lecture. To give them a passion for learning, asking questions, getting answers, participating in their lives fully with peers, as children and eventually adults. Children need an education that also gives them strategies or tools to succeed in life by developing meaningful relationships, being responsible for their own decisions. This will increase our trust in schools and will produce better prepared citizens who will fill many jobs in the future.
I recently heard a story of a school in need that went to a local company and asked the company if they could provide some volunteers. The school said these students are your future employees, could you help us out, and that company did. The company had so many people wanting to help volunteer that they needed a volunteer coordinator. The company also paid them for those hours of volunteering to help those students who are potential future employees. This type of partnership with the community works and gives everyone a voice to increase the academic goals and future success for the students.
School relationships and decisions should not end at the school doors. This requires passionate teachers who want to relay this drive to their students, while still teaching them with a quality research based curriculum. Finally just throwing money at schools, while it is needed, is not enough, NCLB needs a committed community or nation to be effective. To that end, everyone, politicians, administrators, teachers, parents, community members need to be helping to shape the way we educate our children.
Posted by: Joe Hatch | September 18, 2008 9:08 AM
Kathy, the "customers" in the education system have never been students and parents. It makes perfect sense, but it's wrong. I've been a teacher for years. The customers have always been corporate America, as their lobbyists such as the Business Roundtable have been influencing policy decisions for years. If schools are the way they are, it's because the true customers are satisfied.
Posted by: DaveSmith | September 18, 2008 3:20 PM
Kathy:
The debate is all wrong. Either we have national and high levels of proficiency at significant points in education or testing will continue to be a farce. Each state making up its own standards and using a variety of tests, can only serve to keep our schools in a state of confusion. This leads to the oerception that oublic education is a dismal failure- just as the suppoirters of school vouchers anbd private charters want!
Posted by: Jill | September 18, 2008 4:16 PM
Kathy:
The debate is all wrong. Either we have national and high levels of proficiency at significant points in education or testing will continue to be a farce. Each state making up its own standards and using a variety of tests, can only serve to keep our schools in a state of confusion. This leads to the oerception that oublic education is a dismal failure- just as the suppoirters of school vouchers anbd private charters want!
Posted by: Jill | September 18, 2008 4:16 PM