[ Date Prev][ Date Next][ Thread Prev][ Thread Next][ Date Index][ Thread Index]
Fwd: Re: Incoherent article by Sen. Kennedy
- To: ca-resisters@interversity.org
- Subject: Fwd: Re: Incoherent article by Sen. Kennedy
- From: Peter Farruggio <pfarr@cal.berkeley.edu>
- Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2008 20:37:12 -0600
James Crawford is an ELL advocate and the founder of the Institute
for Language and Education Policy. Here he weighs in on "what to do
now" about NCLB...
From: 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.html>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/06/AR2008010601828.html
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.
Post a Message to ca-resisters:
|
