Hard to believe with so many problems, complaints, and resistance to No Child Left Behind, but this is
the word from Washington. And he isn't just any Dem, but George Miller of Califronia, ranking member of the education committee. Such is life in the Beltway, I guess, that decisions are made before hearings are held, and Democrats line up like sheep behind Republican "consensus", which is then dutifully annointed as Gospel reality by mainstream media outlets.
Now pardon my French but "Fout le camp, la". Just what do the Democrats stand for? I mean, help me on this. It's not like NCLB is popular, with both a solid Blue State (Connecticut) and a solid Red State (Utah) fully prepared to give up Federal Aid rather than follow the death march of endless testing, distorted curriculum, and improvement by threat and intimidation.
You know, it used to be that a party articulated a vision, and then, stuck to that through thick and thin.
For example, guess who said this?
We who live in free market societies believe that growth, prosperity and ultimately human fulfillment, are created from the bottom up, not the government down. Only when the human spirit is allowed to invent and create, only when individuals are given a personal stake in deciding economic policies and benefitting from their success -- only then can societies remain economically alive, dynamic, progressive, and free. Trust the people.
Yeah, that's right, Ronald Reagan. Strong, easy to visualize, understand and remember. And how the Republicans got from
I believe a case can be made that the decline in the quality of public school education began when Federal aid to education became Federal interference in education.
in the 1980s, to the extreme Federal intervention of NCLB only twenty years later, is one of the great flip-flops of recent American history. Yet, what is the price they've had to pay politically for abandoning their core position on education?
Nothing.
Why? Because Democrats do not clearly articulate a vision of where they stand. In a way, Bush pulled a Clinton by embracing, or seeming to embrace, a Democratic position: concern for poor inner-city children, increased Federal aid, mobilizing the bureaucracy to right an historic wrong.
Unfortunately, as with all Bush policies, he baited and switched. Schools got the tests, threats and dumbed down curriculum--which most impacts America's underprivledged children--but none of the funding, training or freedom to produce truly well-educated students.
And because Democrats do not know where they stand on education, other than "high standards and accountability", (which happens to be the Republican position), they don't offer even feeble resistance to what is obviously a disastrous policy--one deeply unpopular with the public.
There are two things here: 1.) The failure of NCLB on multiple fronts; 2) The inability of Democrats to develop a vision so the public knows what they stand for.
On number one, it's fatiguing to list NCLB's failures. But, back of the napkin, it looks like this:
1.) NCLB distorts the curriculum in 71% of America's schools, eliminating classes such as civics, art, music, physical education, even recess, in some cases.
2.) The testing, which has grown exponentially, is neither fair, nor accurate, nor ever been proven by a major reseach study as an effective educational practice--particularly for children as young as 8 years old. Mistakes are made, numbers are gamed, corporations run amok with cash--cronyism with no real oversight.
3.) The so-called achievement gap is not being closed, but rather, exacerbated by NCLB. Why? Suburban kids with suare-footage have much less difficulty passing the low-level tests and thus, more time and resources to visit planetariums, attend summer camp, pursue the kind of enriching experiences which make them whole instead of just a terrified kid at a desk, pencil in hand, wondering what possible reason they have to actually try on this one.
4.) And there's this quote, by an education author:
The truly fundamental problem behind No Child Left Behind is this: What is joyful about learning, and what therefore makes us want to learn as much as we possibly can, are the intangible qualities of creativity, curiosity, compassion, wonder and joy.
You don't get that kind of engagement by telling students:
You have to learn this now boys and girls; it will be on next week's test. That's why it's important.
In point of fact, of the consensus for education reform in the late '80s and early '90s--high and uniform standards, world class curriculum/pedagogy/facilities, a highly motivated and dynamic teaching corps, and system-wide accountability through testing, we really only ended up with one: system accountability.
But this is vintage George Bush: the one thing he wants in a policy is what he gets. And he wanted system-wide testing accountability with ridiculous goals (100% proficiency by 2013) so that increasing doubt and discredit would fall on the back of public schools. All the better to enact vouchers with, my friend.
But, at least Bush is Bush and we can see what he's up to. The Dems leave me even more puzzled. Just what does the Democratic party stand for, apart from the Republican meme of "standards and accountability"?
I suppose that is the job of YearlyKos to figure out. But let me forward one thought: instead of the emphasis being placed on the "system", and reaching some abstract goal (test scores), which, in the end, is wholly unsatisfying to parents, children and teachers, has nothing to do with excellence and does not prepare students for a life of work, why not put the focus on students, and make the benefit of an education much more tangible.
That is, provide a guarantee that every child in America will receive a world-class education--not just endless tests. Every child will be guaranteed a certain set of supports and opportunities: stimulating classes in a wide variety of subjects, meaningful relationships with adults, a chance to pursue college education upon successful completion of high school, vocational training and apprenticeships, an individualized plan and goals developed in conjunction with parents and experienced professionals.
We need to put the focus back on the people who are supposed to be benefitting from education: our youngsters. If it's time for consumer-driven health care (cough, cough), then it is cedrtainly time to look at the individual consumers in education and empower them. We need to develop this idea and make it a kind of G.I. Bill for kids. That's where the Dems need to go, and they better do it before the Republicans, who, no doubt will cast themselves as the true education reformers.
Check out what Republican Mark Kennedy said on Friday night after accepting the nomination to capture Minnesota's lone Democratic Senate Seat.
And with a dad who was on the school board and a wife who was a teacher, I also believe that the decisions about educating our kids need to be made by people who know their names - parents, teachers, local school board members - not by Washington bureaucrats.
That's why I opposed the No Child Left Behind law. And I will oppose others like it if it takes dollars and decisions away from Minnesota and puts them in Washington D.C.
Is anyone out there? Is anyone listening? The Republicans are working the negative impacts of NCLB and running against big-government Washington bureaucrats--a page out of Ronald Reagan's book. Guess who will be left holding the bag of No Child Left Behind? Yup, the Democrats who think fighting any of this is "a waste of time."