Fwd: Incoherent article by Sen. Kennedy

[Susan Harman <susanharman@igc.org>]

Begin forwarded message:

  From: James Crawford <jwcrawford@COMPUSERVE.COM>

  Date: Mon Jan 7, 2008 10:54:42 AM US/Pacific

  To: ELLADVOC@ASU.EDU

  Subject: Re: Incoherent article by Sen. Kennedy

  Reply-To: James Crawford <jwcrawford@COMPUSERVE.COM>

  Contrary to Ken's claims, I don't believe "we" have won anything as yet. What
  form the Elementary and Secondary Education Act will take in the future
  remains quite murky and that question seems unlikely to be resolved by the
  presidential race. Thus far, the candidates' discourse on education has yet
  to rise above the level of sound bites and bumper stickers.

  ESEA's current form, NCLB, is such a blunt instrument that it has generated
  opposition from many quarters and many viewpoints. While this has had a
  welcome impact on Congress, neither "we" nor any single group of critics can
  claim credit for the current gridlock over reauthorization. Politically
  speaking, the complaints of powerful interest groups -- the NEA in particular
  -- appear to have exerted a major influence on Miller and Kennedy. But while
  such groups have long laundry lists of complaints about NCLB, none has
  advanced a coherent alternative vision of the federal role in K-12 education.

  This leaves us with a Congress that's ideologically wedded to
  test-and-punish, yet unable to solve the myriad of problems that NCLB-style
  "accountability" creates. It also provides progressive educators an
  opportunity to develop a whole new approach that would truly improve schools.

  Without such an alternative vision, it's hard to see how anything
  significantly better than NCLB could emerge. As I've said before, this is
  where we should be focusing our energies. An increasing number of
  progressives are thinking along these lines, and I hope that members of the
  Institute will join in. It's a time for reflection, discussion, and
  coalition-building.

  It's not a time for rabble-rousing. Calling for "massive resistance" is not
  the kind of leadership that's needed at this point. Large numbers of
  educators, parents, and even politicians have already figured out that NCLB
  is part of the problem. The question is: what's our solution?

  Jim Crawford

  Ken Goodman wrote:

  The Lesson from Kennedy's OPed is that we've won our first objective which is
  to raise the issues necessary to forestall a renewal of NCLB in an even worse
  form. We also succeeded in making it an issue in the election which will
  leave a Democratic president with a commitment to end or change the law or at
  the least lesson its impact. It's now Bush's education policy and Kennedy and
  Miller have to distance themsleves from NCLB in its present form. To really
  achieve change and force the politicians to listen we need massive resistance
  to NCLB- by parents, educators, and students at every level- local, state and
  national.

  Ken Goodman

  James Crawford wrote:

  Like George Bush, who's scheduled to speak at a Chicago school today, Ted
  Kennedy just seems to be going through the motions in observance of NCLB's
  6th birthday.

  His oped in today's Washington Post doesn't make too much sense. One the one
  hand, he claims "positive changes" as a result of the law; on the other, he
  embraces most of the major indictments. Meanwhile, he attacks both NCLB
  supporters (Bush) and critics (Democratic presidential candidates) for their
  "simplistic rhetoric."

  Not a great plan for building a new coalition for reauthorization. You have
  to wonder whether there's any point to this article, other than
  self-justification. It's hard for politicians to admit making fundamental
  mistakes in legislation they coauthor. And, of course, it's hard to turn down
  an invitation to appear in the Washington Post.

  How To Fix 'No Child'

  By Edward M. Kennedy

  Monday, January 7, 2008; Page A17

  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/06/AR2008010601828.html0000,0000,0000

  With renewal of the No Child Left Behind Act high on the agenda for the new
  session of Congress, it's no surprise that the 2002 law -- the Bush
  administration's signature domestic initiative -- has become a political
  football in this intense campaign season. The administration continues to
  speak glowingly of the law while Democratic candidates blast it. But
  simplistic campaign rhetoric hardly reflects what's actually happening on
  school reform.

  Tomorrow is the sixth anniversary of the law's enactment. It's a good time to
  take realistic stock of things. Obviously, the results are mixed. Many
  elements of the reforms have produced encouraging progress for young children
  in public schools across the nation, and they deserve to be supported. Other
  aspects of the law have not been satisfactory, and some have been failures.
  These must be changed.

  The stakes are high. At issue is a goal that Democrats have long embraced as
  a fundamental principle of our party -- opportunity for all Americans.
  Strengthening the nation's schools is essential for preparing our citizens to
  compete and win in the global economy. We in Congress have an obligation to
  parents, to teachers and, most of all, to schoolchildren across America to
  draw the right lessons from these past six years with the No Child Left
  Behind Act and put school reform on a stronger path for the future.

  On the plus side, the law demands that all children must benefit -- black or
  white, immigrant or native-born, rich or poor, disabled or not. Before its
  enactment, only a handful of states monitored the achievement of every group
  of students in their schools. Today, all 50 states must do that. Across the
  country, schools are poring over student data to identify weaknesses in
  instruction and to improve teaching and learning. All schools now measure
  performance based not on the achievement of their average and above-average
  students but on their progress in helping below-average students reach high
  standards as well.

  The positive changes are evident in the National Assessment of Educational
  Progress, better known as "The Nation's Report Card." The improvements are
  still modest, but they're noticeable, particularly among students who
  formerly were low achievers. We're beginning to see a narrowing of the
  achievement gap between white students and other students.

  All of this is good news. But the law still needs major changes to bring out
  the best in all children. The process for rating troubled schools fails to
  reward incremental progress made by schools struggling to catch up. Its
  one-size-fits-all approach encourages "teaching to the test" and discourages
  innovation in the classroom. We need to encourage local decision makers to
  use a broader array of information, beyond test scores, to determine which
  schools need small adjustments and which need extensive reforms.

  The act doesn't do enough to support teachers as the professionals they are
  by training and mentoring them and by placing good teachers in the schools
  that need them most. It fails to deal with the dropout crisis, which puts
  large numbers of young students beyond the reach of the American dream. It
  doesn't involve parents enough in helping their children succeed. It falls
  short in achieving smaller classes so that teachers can give children the
  one-on-one attention they need.

  Most of all, the law fails to supply the essential resources that schools
  desperately need to improve their performance. We can't achieve progress for
  all students on the cheap. No child should have to attend crumbling schools
  or learn from an outdated textbook, regardless of where he or she lives. It's
  disgraceful that President Bush has failed to include adequate funding for
  school reform in his education budgets. Struggling schools can do only so
  much on a tin-cup budget.

  Four decades ago, my brother Robert Kennedy asked at a Senate hearing on
  education: "What happened to the children?" That question is as appropriate
  today as it was in 1966. We're still not doing enough for the nation's
  schools and children.

  As Democrats and Republicans choose their nominees in our democratic process,
  and as President Bush prepares to deliver his last State of the Union
  address, let us all remember that we owe it to our children and our
  children's children to put progress ahead of politics and support what is
  working in school reform, and to work together to fix what is not.

  The writer, a Democratic senator from Massachusetts, was a lead author of the
  No Child Left Behind Act.

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!