Educating America
I had some interesting conversations with current and former teachers and school administrators recently. There is a tremendous unhappiness with the No Child Left Behind education program passed by the Congress and the President. One common complaint is that the emphasis on standard tests has been a big boon for the testing companies, but not for the students. Typical elementary school children now spend ten percent or so of their total instructional time sitting for standardized tests.
The real source of bitterness, though, is the sense that the public schools are being held to an impossible standard. In particular, for a school to be successful, it has to succeed with every category of its students (race, sex, and some other distinctions). One example brought to my attention - in order to succeed, schools need to have 95% of the students in each category show up for the exam. In some categories, the absence of one or two students on test days could fail the school. This bitterness is compounded by the fact that private schools, home-schooled children, and some others (charter schools?) are not held to any such standards.
Many so-called conservatives, like former Reagan Education Secretary Bill "gambling man" Bennett, make no secret of the fact that they want public education to fail and be replaced by private education. The NCLB education bill is the not so secret weapon for implementing this radical plan. So why did liberals like Ted Kennedy sign off on and endorse this bill? I have two explanations, each of which can be summarized as stupidity. First, they saw a laudable goal, educating every child, and more money for education but failed to read the fine print carefully enough to see how destructive the program would become for public education. Second, they underestimated the malice and radical ideology behind the Bush agenda. They just couldn't bring themselves to believe that a President of the United States would set out to destroy public education.
There is a deep similarity here to the radical ideology that has made such a disastrous mess of the Iraqi economy. Apparently the neo-cons really believed that imposing a flat tax and opening up the Iraqi economy to outsiders was a program for rebuilding Iraq. Or maybe they just saw a chance to make a fast buck.
In their way, these radicals are the flip side of the Islamic fundamentalism of bin Laden and company. Having rejected science and given free reign to magical thinking, they are undeterred by the reality they don't even see. Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy Secretary of Defense who had no clue as to how many American casualties Iraq had cost is but the shadow of his leader, a man who lives in a bubble so profound that he never needs to face an honest opinion.
The real source of bitterness, though, is the sense that the public schools are being held to an impossible standard. In particular, for a school to be successful, it has to succeed with every category of its students (race, sex, and some other distinctions). One example brought to my attention - in order to succeed, schools need to have 95% of the students in each category show up for the exam. In some categories, the absence of one or two students on test days could fail the school. This bitterness is compounded by the fact that private schools, home-schooled children, and some others (charter schools?) are not held to any such standards.
Many so-called conservatives, like former Reagan Education Secretary Bill "gambling man" Bennett, make no secret of the fact that they want public education to fail and be replaced by private education. The NCLB education bill is the not so secret weapon for implementing this radical plan. So why did liberals like Ted Kennedy sign off on and endorse this bill? I have two explanations, each of which can be summarized as stupidity. First, they saw a laudable goal, educating every child, and more money for education but failed to read the fine print carefully enough to see how destructive the program would become for public education. Second, they underestimated the malice and radical ideology behind the Bush agenda. They just couldn't bring themselves to believe that a President of the United States would set out to destroy public education.
There is a deep similarity here to the radical ideology that has made such a disastrous mess of the Iraqi economy. Apparently the neo-cons really believed that imposing a flat tax and opening up the Iraqi economy to outsiders was a program for rebuilding Iraq. Or maybe they just saw a chance to make a fast buck.
In their way, these radicals are the flip side of the Islamic fundamentalism of bin Laden and company. Having rejected science and given free reign to magical thinking, they are undeterred by the reality they don't even see. Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy Secretary of Defense who had no clue as to how many American casualties Iraq had cost is but the shadow of his leader, a man who lives in a bubble so profound that he never needs to face an honest opinion.
Comments
Post a Comment