Fwd: [ndsgroup] Both Clinton and Obama attack No Child Left Behind Act

[Susan Harman <susanharman@igc.org>]

Begin forwarded message:

  From: "Monty Neill" <monty@fairtest.org>

  Date: Wed Apr 9, 2008 7:23:20 AM US/Pacific

  Subject: [ndsgroup] Both Clinton and Obama attack No Child Left Behind Act

  Reply-To: "Monty Neill" <monty@fairtest.org>

  This is as detailed reporting on what C & O are saying on NCLB as I have seen
  recently - Monty

  http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08100/871524-298.stm

  Both Clinton and Obama attack No Child Left Behind Act

  Wednesday, April 09, 2008

  By Eleanor Chute, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

  The No Child Left Behind Act has been a flash point in education circles for
  five years, with critics saying schools have become obsessed with testing
  math and reading and supporters saying the law has helped prevent some
  students from falling through the cracks.

  In the Democratic presidential primary campaign, there are more similarities
  than differences in the criticisms of the act made by Sens. Hillary Rodham
  Clinton and Barack Obama, both of whom are members of the Senate Committee on
  Health, Education, Labor & Pensions, which plays a key role in education
  legislation.

  When they criticize NCLB on the campaign trail, both can count on hearty
  applause.

  Neither quarrels with the law's intent to see that all children have a good
  education, but both have zeroed in on some of the common criticisms of the
  law -- such as the complaint that the federal government has allocated too
  little money to make it work and that it overemphasizes math and reading
  tests, causing other subjects to be neglected.

  Mrs. Clinton, who voted for NCLB in 2001, has toughened her language on the
  law recently, moving from a pledge to "reform and fully fund" the act when
  she answered an American Federation of Teachers questionnaire in July to
  saying in recent months, as she did in Lancaster, that she will "put an end
  to the unfunded mandate called No Child Left Behind."

  Her campaign staff says the changes she wants are so extensive that they
  would amount to doing away with No Child Left Behind.

  Mr. Obama has suggested extensive changes as well and called for fully
  funding the act. In his AFT questionnaire, Mr. Obama said the law "has
  significant flaws that need to be addressed."

  When it was approved in 2001, No Child Left Behind received widespread
  bipartisan support -- 87 senators and 381 representatives voted for it.
  President Bush signed it in 2002.

  The law is up for reauthorization, but it is so controversial that a vote is
  unlikely until after the presidential campaign is over.

  No Child Left Behind requires all public school students to take state
  standardized tests in math and reading in grades 3 through 8 and once again
  in high school, prompting critics to dub it "No Test Left Behind." The
  required test outcomes gradually increase until all students score at least
  proficient on state tests by 2014.

  Schools deemed not to be making adequate yearly progress -- for students as a
  whole or for a measurable subgroup of students, such as low-income or special
  education students -- face sanctions.

  When President Bush signed the act into law, Mrs. Clinton's office issued a
  press release crediting her with writing provisions to promote the
  recruitment of high quality teachers and principals.

  The statement said the act would provide significant new money for education,
  including nearly $176 million in new education funds for New York City alone.

  "The education funding included in the bill could not come at a better time
  for hard-pressed school districts throughout New York," she said in a
  prepared statement at the time.

  However, less money came through than she expected. In January last year,
  Mrs. Clinton's office issued a news release saying that New York state alone
  had received $6.7 billion less than promised under the law.

  In the release, Mrs. Clinton said a lot had been learned over five years and
  pledged to try to improve "accountability and standards in education,
  particularly in math and science, increase quality and professional
  development for teachers and principals, [and] improve instruction for
  English language learners."

  Her campaign remarks have focused on criticisms of the tests.

  When she answered the AFT's question on No Child Left Behind in July, she
  said, "I will work to reduce the teaching to the test and bring back a
  well-rounded curriculum and change the one-size-fits-all approach to
  addressing the challenges facing struggling schools."

  Mr. Obama joined the Senate in 2005, three years after No Child Left Behind
  was signed.

  Speaking to the National Education Association, another teacher union, in
  July, Mr. Obama called No Child Left Behind "one of the emptiest slogans in
  the history of American politics."

  He said the law left the money and common sense behind.

  He also has criticized the tests.

  In a CNN-sponsored debate in Texas in February, Mr. Obama said, "One of the
  failures of No Child Left Behind, a law that I think a lot of local and state
  officials have been troubled by, is that it is so narrowly focused on
  standardized tests that it has pushed out a lot of important learning that
  needs to take place."

  In his answers to the AFT, Mr. Obama said too much time is spent "preparing
  students for tests that do not provide any valuable, timely feedback on how
  to improve a student's learning. Creativity has been drained from classrooms
  as too many teachers are forced to teach fill-in-the-bubble tests."

  He said teachers should be able to teach a rich curriculum rather than teach
  to a once-a-year test. He favors tests that measure progress as students go
  along.

  Neither candidate is suggesting that changing No Child Left Behind
  constitutes a complete education strategy. Their plans cover a wide array of
  education issues. On many of them, the two candidates' views also are more
  similar than dissimilar.

  Both are strong supporters of early childhood education. Mrs. Clinton
  proposed spending $10 billion in matching funds to states to expand access to
  pre-kindergarten programs. Mr. Obama included expanded pre-K in his $18
  billion education plan.

  Both want to encourage high quality teachers in the classroom.

  Both have spoken against vouchers and say there is no evidence they improve
  education.

  Controversy, however, was generated by some who saw an opening for vouchers
  in Mr. Obama's answers to Milwaukee Journal Sentinel editorial board
  questions in February.

  Vouchers are a hot-button issue, especially with teacher unions, which
  generally oppose them.

  Mr. Obama said that he has been a "skeptic" of school vouchers, saying they
  wouldn't generate the necessary supply of high-quality schools.

  He noted that there were not even studies of the value of the long-standing
  voucher program in Milwaukee.

  Asked if a longitudinal study now underway in Milwaukee ultimately showed
  that vouchers were beneficial, he replied that was a "loaded question,"
  adding: "What I don't want to do is start saying if the study shows it works,
  I'm all for it."

  He said he would have to find out if the study were legitimate and whether it
  considered whether voucher parents were more attentive than other parents,
  adding: "Here's what I'll say: I will not allow my predispositions to stand
  in the way of making sure our kids can learn. We're losing several
  generations of kids and something has to be done."

  In her answer to the Milwaukee newspaper, Mrs. Clinton said she would be open
  to new evidence, but she thought vouchers would be hard to implement because
  some might want vouchers for schools of the "church of white supremacy" or
  jihad schools.

  She said she would be "open" to any evidence because she is an
  "evidence-based decision-maker," but she said, "I have never been able to get
  over the problems I think would be caused if vouchers were widely
  implemented."

  The two candidates differ on another hot-button issue, performance pay for
  teachers.

  Mrs. Clinton has opposed merit pay for individual teachers but favors merit
  pay that would go to all staff members -- including custodians -- in a
  successful school.

  Mr. Obama told the NEA that teacher salaries need to be raised across the
  board and complimented the work teachers and the governor in Minnesota did to
  craft an incentive pay system.

  Both favor charter schools and school choice.

  Mr. Obama's two daughters, Malia, 9, and Sasha, 6, attend a private school,
  the University of Chicago Laboratory Schools. His wife, Michelle, is a vice
  president at the University of Chicago.

  Mrs. Clinton's daughter, Chelsea, is a graduate of a private school, Sidwell
  Friends School in Washington, D.C., and previously attended a public
  elementary school in Little Rock, Ark.

  The National Education Association has not endorsed a candidate. The American
  Federation of Teachers in October endorsed Mrs. Clinton, citing her stand on
  a wide range of issues.

  Education writer Eleanor Chute can be reached at echute@post-gazette.com or
  412-263-1955.

  First published on April 9, 2008 at 12:00 am

  ---------------------------------

  Monty Neill, Ed.D.

  Deputy Director

  FairTest

  342 Broadway

  Cambridge, MA 02139

  617-864-4810 x 101;  fax 617-497-2224

  monty@fairtest.org

  http://www.fairtest.org

  Donate: https://secure.entango.com/servlet/donate/MnrXjT8MQqk

  __._,_.___

  To Post a message, send it to:   ndsgroup@eGroups.com

  To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: ndsgroup-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
  Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional

  Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)

  Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully
  Featured

  Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

  __,_._,___

Vote in the National Cheney Impeachment Poll

http://www.usalone.com/blogvoices.php?Cheney%20Impeachment%3F

Add this text to your own email and blog signatures!