Was Obama Right?

I can't speak for the other half of the Teaching Underground (but I'm guessing he agrees), but I am not a fan of the Presidents education policy. The democratic platform's comments on education in general are not very appealing either. Without a Republican plan for education that looks any better, it looks like education may be in for another tough four years regardless of the election.

I used to think that the President didn't matter to public education in America. After all, state and local governments oversee the education of children. But, unless I didn't know any better before the mid-90's it looks like that balance began to shift under the Clinton administration and certainly tipped during the Bush years to the point where today, what the President says (or perhaps more importantly, who he appoints) makes a significant difference in the way we do public education in the fifty states. We've gotten used to the rhetoric.

Obama says repeatedly that we shouldn't over test our children, yet still creates and enforces policy that drives the testing craze. The Administration's words speak highly of public education and educators, but actions increasingly follow the path of corporate reform instead of educator initiated improvements. I know that the words don't always reflect the reality, but one single sentence uttered last night by the President made me think that on some level he gets it:  

Government has a role in this. But teachers must inspire; principals must lead; parents must instill a thirst for learning, and students, you’ve got to do the work.

1) Government has a role- we can't continue to short-change education under the guise that we're throwing money at a failing system.  We can't deny the responsibility, the "rightness" of government to provide for the education of our children and the long term benefits of this investment for our nation.  But Government has a role, and especially the federal government should take care to ensure that states and districts are adequately providing education without encumbering them with excessive regulations that may not apply across the board.

2) Teachers- to inspire must be inspired.  We've heard enough empty thanks and platitudes of how important we are.  It's not just about money, but we are more than a pool of workers.  Evaluation methods should be fair, we need to stop inflating the idea of "bad teachers" ruining education, and teachers need more influence and input in policy and decision-making.

3) Parents- this thirst for learning will look different for different families.  This is the part where government may play a larger role.  I do a good job of working with kids, but add responsibilities with parents and my job gets tougher.  I can't do the job of a parent and I can't make parents do their job.  I'm not talking about laws and punishments.  Most parents are doing exactly what they need to.  Opening schools and creating access often just makes active parents more active.  We need to figure out the best ways to engage the unengaged and that solution might not be found within the wall of the school.

4) Students- do the work.  We need to hear this more often from our leaders.  I take responsibility for the job I do, but I can't take 100% responsibility for the performance of others.  I teach students, I don't "learn" them.  Learning is what you do yourself and what I learn is my responsibility.  Until student responsibility re-enters the national narrative on how to improve schools, schools will not improve. 

Last night Obama set forth a pretty decent rhetorical formula with these words.  I only wish it could translate into effective and reasonable policy.  Unfortunately, based on the record of the last four years, I don't have much hope in that.

Bush on NCLB- Ten Years Later

Time Magazine, January 23, 2011.  Andrew J. Rotherham gives us George W. Bush in his own words on the tenth anniversary of "No Child Left Behind."

Bush: "So I'm pleased with the progress and concerned about efforts from people in both parties to weaken it."

Rotherham: "What do you think is driving those efforts?"

Bush: "Some on the right think there is no role for the federal government in education.  Some on the left are saying it's unfair to teachers--basically, union issues.  People don't like to be held to account."

Both parts of Bush's response define a clear divide among first, left and right politics regarding education and second, the yet-to-be-labeled opposing sides in the education reform debate.

First, if we could make policy with all of our biases on the table, perhaps everyone would understand each others goals a little better.  But, I have a hard time accepting policy decisions made by those who have limiting the government role in public education as their primary goal.  What better way to pull the government out of education than to convince the American public that money spent on public education is money wasted?  If successful in this effort, any number of agendas are guaranteed (vouchers, school choice, private/public charters).  I gravitate away from conspiracy theory, but when those who wish to undo the system play a vital role in making policy for the system, bad things are likely to happen.

Second, I do like to be held accountable.  It makes me a better person.  I learned long ago that one of the best ways to avoid bad practice is through openness.  Letting others in on what's happening in the classroom.  Parents, administrators, peers, all serve to hold me accountable for what I do.  I don't like thinking that I've been doing something ineffective, but I do appreciate knowing that I've done it versus continuing to fail without ever realizing it.  This statement indicates that Bush begins with the understanding that I want to teach in the shadows, without any oversight or input into my work.  If you believe that I'm this type of person, then you probably don't respect me enough to listen to my professional opinion.

I don't think Bush or any of the corporate reformers want to be held accountable.  It's like when your zipper is down, or you've got food on your face.  I like a person with the courage to let me know so that I can avoid further embarrassment.  I suppose some people prefer to go through the evening not knowing any better.  Instead of listening to feedback (they'd prefer to call it complaining), corporate reformers prefer to demonize the source of the feedback-- teachers, who stand behind protection of their unions in order to protect themselves from having to do honest work for honest pay.

How have we devolved to this national narrative that teachers who care enough about children to spend hours of time with them for average pay are the one's who are holding our children back while profit driven reformers and corporate educational companies pushing for more testing and accountability are the great hope for our public school system?

(I recommend this great reply from John Spencer's Education Rethink to the Time article that accompanies the interview)

The Teaching Underground on Virginia's State of the Commonwealth

Virginia Governor, Bob McDonnell, delivered his "State of the Commonwealth Address" this evening, part of which includes highlights of his education plans for the next two year cycle.  Below are highlights from his speech with the Teaching Underground comments in italics.

States are competing against each other, and the world, for job-creating businesses.

When deciding where to move or expand, businesses look for a well-educated and well-trained workforce. We owe every student the opportunity to be career-ready or college-ready when they graduate from high school. A good education means a good job.

This is how McDonnell begins his comments on education.  It is unfortunate that economics is quickly becoming the only measure of value in American society. 

 

I have proposed an increase in funding for K-12 education of $438 million over this biennium to strengthen the Virginia Retirement System for teachers and school employees, increase dollars going to the classroom, hire more teachers in science, technology and math, improve financial literacy, and strengthen Virginia’s diploma requirements.

I appreciate the contribution to VRS, but it doesn't cover increases enough to keep from impacting local budgets.  I know this is an area where public employees are often compared to the private sector.  I won't complain about the benefits, but I know from friends in the private sector that I'm not getting any significant retirement benefits over them.  

I haven't seen any indication that the new budget really adds dollars directly to the classroom.

STEM is certainly important, but I think it is quite over-stated as of late.  We should stay competitive, but not so much that we sacrifice and devalue HEAR (History, English, Arts, and Recess).  O.K.- lame attempt at humor.

As for financial literacy, perhaps there should be a remedial effort aimed toward adults who make public policy considering they demonstrate such a deficiency in this area. 

We will also provide new funding for the successful Communities in Schools program, as well as funding for all 10th graders to take the PSAT, and for the start up of new health science academies.

Thank goodness we're making another standardized test possible for students.  It's about time.

However, while we will put more funding into K-12 in this budget, more funding alone does not guarantee greater results.

Of course not, we need to stick it to the bad teachers.

Over the past decade, total funding for public education increased 41 percent, while enrollment only went up 6 percent. This budget will provide new funding, but we will also seek more accountability, choice, rigor and innovation.

Is the increase any wonder?  How much more do we spend on testing, data collection, and reporting?  Federal and State mandates and partially funded programs and policies just like what you're proposing tonight have bloated local expenses.

Providing flexibility to local school divisions is important. It is time to repeal the state mandate that school divisions begin their school term after Labor Day unless they receive a waiver. Already, 77 of the 132 school divisions have these waivers, so that the exceptions have become the rule.

DoubleSpeak- If providing flexibility to local school divisions is important, then provide flexibility to local school divisions.  You meant to say 'even though our tourism industry is against it, repealing the Kings' Dominion law is a great leverage point for me to get folks on board with my less popular points like continuing contracts for teachers.'
 

Local communities can best balance their teaching and calendar needs with the important concerns of local tourism and business. They know their situations far better than Richmond.

And our next big initiative can be longer school years since that obstacle is out of the way.
 

Our teachers are well educated and motivated professionals who deserve to be treated as such.

Then do it.
 

Just like workers in most other jobs get reviewed every year, and are therefore able to be more accurately promoted and rewarded for their success, so too should our teachers.

When is your annual review Gov. McDonnell?  Oh, that's right, it's a four year term.

I am asking that we remove the continuing contract status from teachers and principals and provide an annual contract in its place. This will allow us to implement an improved evaluation system that really works and give principals a new tool to utilize in managing their schools. Along with the merit pay pilot program we approved last year, we will provide more incentives and accountability to attract and retain the best and brightest teachers.

Can you REALLY ignore the mountains of research that show incentives and merit pay don't improve student learning?  Data-driven, huh?  Dan Pink save us please.

We’ve got so many great teachers in Virginia, teachers like Stacy Hoeflich, a fourth grade teacher at John Adams Elementary School in Alexandria, who was recently named the National History Teacher of the Year.

I happen to think my sister Nancy, a public school teacher in Amherst County, is a great teacher.

Your House Majority Leader, Kirk Cox, is a great teacher.

We all know strong teachers who deserve to be better recognized for the invaluable roles they play in the development and learning of our students.

Yes, and we all know racists who say "I've got lots of (fill in the group) friends."  Picking a handful of teachers to praise doesn't excuse the disrespect toward all teachers communicated by your proposal. 

We will also fund policies to ensure all young people can read proficiently by third grade, so they are ready to become lifelong learners. Social promotions are not acceptable. When we pass a student who cannot read well and is not ready for the next grade, we have failed them.

But we won't invest more in pre-school and real early intervention.  I guess they have to be officially tested before we can justify intervention.

Our public education system must also embrace multiple learning venues and opportunities.

I agree with President Obama that we need to expand charter schools in our nation. I am proposing that we make our laws stronger by requiring a portion of the state and local share of SOQ student funding to follow the child to an approved charter school, and to make it easier for new charters to be approved and acquire property.

A Republican governor evoking the name of Barak Obama-- bad education policy knows no party.  But why can't we give greater flexibility to traditional public schools and let them innovate and provide choice.  In our county, we already do this with a Math, Engineering, and Science Academy and will add a Health Sciences Academy next year.  Charters have no proven track record of out performing public schools.

We need a fair funding formula for the fast growing virtual school sector. I will propose that a portion of the state and local share of SOQ student funding should follow the student in this area as well, and that we implement new regulations for accrediting virtual schools and teachers.

i.e., reduce barriers and make it easier.  While clamping down on teacher tenure and accountability for traditional public schools, you're going to make it easier to operate virtual schools.  I bet K12 loves this.

We should also create effective choices for low-income students, so I’m asking you to provide a tax credit for companies that contribute to an educational scholarship fund to help more of our young people, and I thank Delegates Jimmie Massie and Algie Howell, and Senators Walter Stosch and Mark Obenshain for their leadership on this issue. A child’s educational opportunities should be determined by her intellect and work ethic, not by her neighborhood or zip code.

CREATE A TAX CREDIT FOR COMPANIES!!! Forget the public responsibility to provide equal opportunity regardless of economic status, let's add incentives and trust the goodwill of the private sector.

We will also propose innovations to promote greater dual enrollment in high school and community college, so motivated students can get a head start on their college educations.

The goal of all of these proposals is simple: at high school graduation, every student who receives a diploma must be college- or career-ready.

And there you have it.  At least we have a simple goal. 

What Republicans Think About Education

Thursday night's Republican Presidential Debate included a question about education.  Candidates were given thirty seconds each to respond. (Does that say something about the value of education?)  We've included the question below, candidate responses, and a brief commentary from the Teaching Underground for each.  Enjoy.

QUESTION: I've taught in both public and private schools, and now as a substitute teacher I see administrators more focused on satisfying federal mandates, retaining funding, trying not to get sued, while the teachers are jumping through hoops trying to serve up a one-size-fits-all education for their students. What as president would you seriously do about what I consider a massive overreach of big government into the classroom? Thank you.



FORMER GOV. GARY JOHNSON, R-N.M.: I'm promising to submit a balanced budget to Congress in the year 2013. That's a 43 percent reduction in federal spending.

I am going to promise to advocate the abolishment of the federal Department of Education.

The federal Department of Education gives each state 11 cents out of every dollar that every state spends, but it comes with 16 cents worth of strings attached. So what America does not understand is that it's a negative to take federal money. Give it to 50 laboratories of innovation, the states, to improve on, and that's what we'll see:

dramatic improvement.

Abolish the Federal Department of Education?  That sounds pretty Anti-Education to many folks, but maybe not.  If Johnson is right, it's costing more than it's worth.

FORMER SEN. RICK SANTORUM, R-PA.: Yeah, 20 years ago, the federal contribution to education was 3 percent. It's now at 11 percent, and our schools are doing worse, and it's exactly what Gary Johnson just said. It's because the federal government's meddling.

The bottom-line problem with education is that the education system doesn't serve the customer of the education system. And who's the customer? The parents, because it's the parents' responsibility to educate the children.

It's been that responsibility -- from the moment they were born, they began the education of their children. And at some point, we have-- the government has convinced parents that at some point it's no longer their responsibility. And in fact, they force them, in many respects, to turn their children over to the public education system and wrest control from them and block them out of participation of that.

That has to change or education will not improve in this country.

I can't say that I totally disagree, but we have a public trust.  Sometimes parents will not live up to their responsibility and with this attitude I fear the children suffer.  How do we adjust education to make sure we're responsive to parents?  I must say, I don't think the feds can do much for us there.

FORMER SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE, NEWT GINGRICH: I think you need very profound reform of education at the state level. You need to dramatically shrink the federal Department of Education, get rid of virtually all of its regulations.

And the truth is, I believe we'd be far better off if most states adopted a program of the equivalent of Pell Grants for K-through-12, so that parents could choose where their child went to school, whether it was public, or private, or home-schooling, and parents could be involved. Florida has a virtual school program that is worth the entire country studying as an example.

I'm always a little leery of the baggage associated with vouchers and choice talk.  And technology should facilitate education, but this virtual school example sounds too much like technology as a solution to education problems.

REP. RON PAUL, R-TEXAS: If you care about your children, you'll get the federal government out of the business of educating our kids.

In 1980, when the Republican Party ran, part of the platform was to get rid of the Department of Education. By the year 2000, it was eliminated, and we fed on to it. Then (inaudible) Republicans added No Child Left Behind.

So the first thing a president should do is -- the goal should be set to get the government out completely, but don't enforce this law of No Child Left Behind. It's not going to do any good, and nobody likes it. And there's no value to it. The teachers don't like it, and the students don't like it.

But there are other things that the federal government can do, and that is give tax credits for the people who will opt out. We ought to have a right to opt out of the public system if you want.

O.k. Ron, I'm with you on decreasing federal involvement, but you lost me at "business of education."  It's not a business, and we need some form of government guarantee of access to education.

GOV. RICK PERRY, R-TEXAS: There are a lot of good ideas here on the side and whether it is cutting back on the Department of Education, making those types of reductions.

I happen to believe we ought to be promoting school choice all across this country. I think school -- the voucher system, charter schools all across this country. But there is one person on this stage that is for Obama's Race to the Top and that is Governor Romney. He said so just this last week. And I think that is an important difference between the rest of the people on this stage and one person that wants to run for the presidency.

Being in favor of the Obama Race to the Top and that is not conservative.

Tell us what you think about education Mr. Perry, not your opponents.  I'll slam Race to the Top right along with you, but you need to tell us more about what you're for than what you're against.  Once again, the voucher and choice talk can mean many things, and too often on this side of the isle it means harm to public education.

FORMER GOV. MITT ROMNEY, R-MASS.: Nice try.

Let me tell you what I think I would do.

One, education has to be held at the local and state level, not at the federal level. We need get the federal government out of education. And secondly, all the talk about we need smaller classroom size, look that's promoted by the teachers unions to hire more teachers. We looked at what drives good education in our state, what we found is the best thing for education is great teachers, hire the very best and brightest to be teachers, pay them properly, make sure that you have school choice, test your kids to see if they are meeting the standards that need to be met, and make sure that you put the parents in charge.

And as president I will stand up to the National Teachers Unions.

You're dead on about state and local control Mitt, but you've fallen for the teacher union myth.  Do you really think that a group of average income teachers paying dues to a union has more clout than the multi-million dollar multi-national corporations like Pearson and Rupert Murdoch's educational ventures.  I want a president who will encourage governors to work with Teacher's Unions (who represent the folks who deal with students day in and day out) and stand up to the corporate interests who are driving school reform today.

REP. MICHELE BACHMANN, R-MINN.: We need that to do with education what has always worked historically, and that's local control with parents. What doesn't work is what we see happen right now.

I'm a mom five biological kids. We've raised 23 foster children in our home. The reason why I got involved in politics was because of the concern I had about our foster children and the education they were getting. What I would do as president of the United States is pass the mother of all repeal bills on education. I would take the entire federal education law, repeal it. Then I would go over to the Department of Education, I'd turn off the lights, I would lock the door and I would send all the money back to the states and localities.

Maybe not a bad idea, but again, we do need a government to at least guarantee that localities and states are living up to their responsibility to educate the children of America.

HERMAN CAIN, BUSINESSMAN: A lot of good ideas, I won't repeat them.

All of the programs at the federal level where there's strings attached, cut all the strings. We have got to encourage parents to take advantage of choices, but provide those choices and we must find ways to empower the students. This is how we are going to improve education, but primarily get the federal government out of trying to educate our kids at the local level.

Sounds great to me.  I'd like to know more specifics.

FORMER GOVERNOR JON HUNTSMAN, R-UTAH : This is a key question, because it has so much to do with our nation's competitiveness. I feel like I've run my own clinical trial in my home, raising seven kids. We've seen every option. We've experienced everything out there. But as governor I learned some important things. I signed the first -- or the second voucher bill in the United States, Carson-Smith. I've actually done something about this.

We actually worked on early childhood literacy. If you can lock in the pillars of cognitive development around reading and math before age six, you are giving those kids the best gift possible as they then proceed through education.

Finally, you've got to say no to unfunded mandates coming out of Washington. They are totally unacceptable. No one loves their schools more than parents and local school boards, and local elected officials.

Again, not sure about vouchers, but kill the unfunded mandate.

There you have it folks.  The republican take on education in thirty seconds or less (per candidate).  Here's to informed decision-making and an educated electorate.

(thanks to Fox News for transcript details from the debate)