Ruben Navarrette: Keep Bush's school standards

[George Sheridan <learn@jps.net>]

Recently Ruben Navarrette devoted a column to defending California's High 
School Exit Exam. His most recent column suggests that the so-called No 
Child Left Behind Act is a good thing, whose purpose and effect is to 
expose racism in public education. He quotes President Bush on "the soft 
bigotry of low expectations," implying that the main reason many students 
of color are not succeeding is the attitude of their white teachers, 
administrators and school board members ("and anyone who turns a blind eye 
to the mediocrity of public schools.")

Reality check: Has Navarrette dedicated his life to improving the 
opportunities of poor people of color? Is he personally acquainted with 
many of the students and families whose cause he pretends to be 
championing? People like Jonathan Kozol, who have dedicated their lives to 
justice, are clear that racism manifests itself in the actions of 
politicians who are unwilling to give adequate resources to the schools 
serving black and brown children. For President Bush and his allies and 
sycophants to call their opponents racist turns the meaning of words inside 
out.



Ruben Navarrette: Keep Bush's school standards
By Ruben Navarrette
Published  Wednesday, March 1, 2006
Story appeared in Editorials section, Page B7
http://www.sacbee.com/content/opinion/story/14223938p-15048805c.html


SAN DIEGO - You have to hand it to critics of No Child Left Behind. In 
trying to preserve the status quo, they're wrong. But at least they're 
persistent. In fact, they're persistently wrong.

Made up of teachers, administrators, school board members and anyone who 
turns a blind eye to the mediocrity of public schools, the critics are 
relentless in their attempts to discredit the education reform law.

They'll get another chance to blast away over the next several months as a 
bipartisan commission holds public hearings across the country. The 
commission will send recommendations to Congress, which is expected to 
renew the law in 2007.

It's easy to see why those who prefer the status quo detest No Child Left 
Behind. Under the law, children in every racial and demographic group in 
every public school must improve their scores on standardized tests in math 
and science. No excuses. Schools that fall short of that goal can be shut 
down, and their students can transfer to another public school.

The critics hate requirements like that for one reason - because good tests 
not only tell you if kids are learning, but also if teachers and 
administrators are holding up their end. If the truth comes out, 
disgruntled parents might go from demanding accountability from schools to 
demanding it from the individuals who work in them.

The critics are nothing if not versatile. First they insisted that No Child 
Left Behind was unfair to schools because it was a one-size-fits-all 
approach with no flexibility. Then they said the law was unfair to teachers 
because it tied them to student performance when not all children learn at 
the same pace.

Now they're insisting the law is unfair to some students because it 
benefits middle-class white kids and hurts Latinos and African Americans. 
At least that is the conclusion of a troubling new study by the deceptively 
named Civil Rights Project at Harvard University.

Troubling because the agenda it advances is dangerous and the thinking 
behind it is backward. Deceptively named because if this group cared about 
civil rights, it would push in the opposite direction.

It goes back to the flexibility the critics requested and eventually 
received. Now that 49 states have either amended the law or waived some of 
its provisions, the critics have the chutzpah to insist that the thing they 
wanted has produced a result they find unacceptable. They claim that 
schools that educate white and middle-class students are more likely to 
take advantage of loopholes and dodge accountability than those that teach 
poor kids and Latinos and African Americans. As a result, they say, schools 
with poor and minority kids are more likely to report low scores on exams 
and are thus more likely to incur sanctions. That is, according to the 
critics, an education law intended to help black and brown kids is, in 
fact, racist.

That criticism is half-right. There is racism here, but not in the law. 
Rather, it is built into the educational system that the law seeks to reform.

It begins when a teaching corps that is three-fourths white approaches 
minority students with what President Bush calls the soft bigotry of low 
expectations. It continues as those teachers, at a loss to explain why 
these students don't do as well in school, cling to the racist assumption 
that minority parents don't value education. And, finally, it is compounded 
when those who want to preserve the status quo do everything they can to 
undermine testing - not to protect black and brown children, but to protect 
the adults who are disenfranchising them.

The No Child Left Behind law didn't create racism in education. But it just 
might be helpful in exposing it.

About the writer: Ruben Navarrette Jr. writes for the San Diego 
Union-Tribune. His column routinely appears in The Bee on Wednesday and 
occasionally on other days. Reach him at ruben.navarrette@uniontrib.com. 
Distributed by the Washington Post Writers Group.



George Sheridan