Left Behind?

I have been exceedingly disappointed with the Obama Administration's stance on education. Rather than reaffirming support for public education, this president -- with former "CEO" of Chicago schools Arne Duncan at his side -- has been pushing harder for so-called "school choice" and reinforcing the more punitive pieces of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA, formerly No Child Left Behind.) As an educator this upsets me so much, but it is difficult to articulate all of the ways in which I find it abhorrent.

I subscribe to a listserv called Public Education Network (PEN) but I rarely make the time to look at it. Sneaking a peek this morning, I was reminded why I should be paying attention. There was a link to the Washington Post's education column "The Answer Sheet", with the headline Christian Churches Oppose Race To The Top, Obama Blueprint: 

Here is an extraordinary letter that should erase any doubt that opposition to the Obama administration's $4 billion Race to the Top is wide and deep.

Sent recently to President Obama and U.S. lawmakers by the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the USA, a community of 36 communions with a combined membership of 45 million people, this letter expresses deep concern about the education priorities of Race to the Top and of Obama's “blueprint” for education reform.

It criticizes the administration's effort to push states to increase the number of charter schools, its plan to turn some of the federal money used to help poor children into competitive grants, its punitive approach to dealing with low-performing schools, and the "ugly" demonization of public school teachers.

This Pastoral Letter is so absolutely spot-on, I wanted to stand up and cheer. I urge you to read it in its entirety. The thing is though, it came out on May 18, and this is the first I have seen it. Its content needs to be shouted from rooftops. Members of Congress need to read it. Dismantling public schools not only undermines our alleged democracy, but Obama's blueprint for education hurts the very children that everyone claims to care the most about.

What's so bad about No Child Left Behind?

I've been meaning to do a post about this for a while ... but this isn't it. (Sorry.) Until I get to write my post, read this article from The Progressive, written by a colleague in my school district.

Yesterday we opened our school year with a kick-ass general assembly of the entire instructional staff in the district. We were addressed by our brand new superintendent, who has been getting rave reviews from everyone who has already worked with him for the last two months.

There was live music -- lots of live music, including one of the payroll secretaries singing a somewhat incongruous country song. I'm hoping against hope that this signals a new era of support for the arts in the district. (Our previous superintendent, although his name is Art, once infamously said something to the effect of, "I grew up without arts instruction and I turned out fine.")

There was a promise from the new guy -- a promise that brought tears to my eyes -- that he would work to bring 4-year-old kindergarten to our district. You see, we used to have an excellent 4-Year-Old program; I was a teacher in it, briefly. The only thing was, it wasn't universal, meaning it was not offered to every single child in the city -- a state mandate. The powers that be (in their infinite wisdom) thought that the expense of expanding the program to be in compliance with state law was too high and canned it. The truly bizarre thing is, they are very tight-lipped in talking about it. Whenever the issue of 4K comes up in the media, the program we had for 15 years is not mentioned at all. We are one of the only municipalities in the state -- including many small towns -- that doesn't have a 4K.

So my hope is that, with a commitment to 4K will come a commitment to developmentally appropriate early childhood education in general. I have made a private commitment this year to make my kindergarten classroom much more play- and language-based. I've tried what Susie Hobart refers to in her excellent Progressive article -- the heavy doses of targeted literacy instruction that are supposed to "close the achievement gap" and bring up our test scores to meet our AYP (that's "Annual Yearly Progress", a NCLB term; if you don't meet it, you are designated a "failing school" subject to increasingly harsh sanctions.) I've tried it, and you know what? It's not working, because those 5 and 6-year-olds will persist in acting like, well, 5 and 6 year-olds. Hopefully I will be teaching appropriately with the support of my administrators.

Back to yesterday's meeting. We were also addressed by the honorable John Matthews, the executive director of our teachers' union for the last 40 years. His words to us were unabashedly political: This is an election year. Pay attention. At the state level, for 15 years we have had horribly damaging anti-education laws brought to us by ex-Gov. Tommy Thompson and the Republican-majority legislature. At the national level, NCLB. Vote for the party that supports education, supports teachers, supports kids. He said, pointedly, "It's not the Republicans." Yay, John! He is as tenacious as a bull dog when it comes to standing up for Madison's educators (and children. Because in education, the old adage definitely applies: "If mama ain't happy, ain't nobody happy.")

Anyway, the whole thing was inspiring. The words rang true. I hope that this change at our local level is a harbinger of more widespread change.

Man, did this get lengthy! Read the article. That's all.

Pinch Me

I agree with Condoleeza Rice??

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said yesterday that the United States still has trouble dealing with race because of a national "birth defect" that denied black Americans the opportunities given to whites at the country's very founding.

"Black Americans were a founding population," she said. "Africans and Europeans came here and founded this country together -- Europeans by choice and Africans in chains. That's not a very pretty reality of our founding."

As a result, Miss Rice told editors and reporters at The Washington Times, "descendants of slaves did not get much of a head start, and I think you continue to see some of the effects of that." Read the rest...

What I disagree with here, is her statement that she supported Bush because of No Child Left Behind. If she really believed it would help poor and minority children, she was very ignorant. From the time it was first proposed, professional educators (and not just rank and file teachers) criticized it as bad policy that would hurt low income children the most. Frankly, I think Condi's being disingenuous making this claim.

(One of these days soon I am going to write a post specifically about NCLB.)

Anyway, this article makes me wonder who Condi supports for president. Interesting.