As the last article that we posted around the selection of the new secretary of education, Barack Obama's choice in a chief of America's educational system will be hotly scrutinized. Obama is playing his true intentions close to the vest largely to see how the media may play out the possible choices.
You can probably rule out all of the front runners, including Linda Darling-Hammond, the Stanford University Professor, Arne Duncan, the City of Chicago's school chief, and Joel I. Klein, who is the Chancellor of New York City public schools. Why would these folks not be considered in the running for this much contested role? Since Barack Obama does not like being second guessed or figured out when it comes to education, he and his team of rivals will pick a relative unknown for the seat.
Picking an unknown for the Secretary of Education would indicate that President-elect Obama wants to break away from the expectations that come with this crucial hire. While Senator Ted Kennedy is still alive, Obama would be unlikely to whole-sale dismantle No Child Left Behind. Kennedy was one of the movers and shakers behind the first NCLB law.
Obama is no idiot. He knows that the law is badly damaged. With all of the talk of accountability, the law is not having the intended effects that people wanted, which was to have all students working at grade level within the next four to five years or else risk having nearly all the nation's schools on the dreaded "watch lists," and eventually taken over by the state governments, which would be worse.
Because lawmakers make laws--rather than educate children--the unintended consequences of having so many of the nation's children in failing schools looms large.
This is why the next education czar will have her hands full. Oops! Did I give it away?
Obama will pick an unknown to lead the nation's K-16 schools because that person can wield her power outside of the glaring eye of the critics in and out of the educational reform movement. The person selected will have a great deal to do with little to no money in which to do it, which makes this position like the Wizard of Oz.
Hey, now that's not a bad idea. Perhaps Rod Blagojevich can pull some strings.
Showing posts with label No Child Left Behind. Show all posts
Showing posts with label No Child Left Behind. Show all posts
Sunday, December 14, 2008
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Who Will He Choose?--By DAVID BROOKS
As in many other areas, the biggest education debates are happening within the Democratic Party. On the one hand, there are the reformers like Joel Klein and Michelle Rhee, who support merit pay for good teachers, charter schools and tough accountability standards. On the other hand, there are the teachers’ unions and the members of the Ed School establishment, who emphasize greater funding, smaller class sizes and superficial reforms.
During the presidential race, Barack Obama straddled the two camps. One campaign adviser, John Schnur, represented the reform view in the internal discussions. Another, Linda Darling-Hammond, was more likely to represent the establishment view. Their disagreements were collegial (this is Obamaland after all), but substantive.
In public, Obama shifted nimbly from camp to camp while education experts studied his intonations with the intensity of Kremlinologists. Sometimes, he flirted with the union positions. At other times, he practiced dog-whistle politics, sending out reassuring signals that only the reformers could hear.
Each camp was secretly convinced that at the end of the day, Obama would come down on their side. The reformers were cheered when Obama praised a Denver performance pay initiative. The unions could take succor from the fact that though Obama would occasionally talk about merit pay, none of his actual proposals contradicted their positions.
Obama never had to pick a side. That is, until now. There is only one education secretary, and if you hang around these circles, the air is thick with speculation, anticipation, anxiety, hope and misinformation. Every day, new rumors are circulated and new front-runners declared. It’s kind of like being in a Trollope novel as Lord So-and-So figures out to whom he’s going to propose.
You can measure the anxiety in the reformist camp by the level of nervous phone chatter each morning. Weeks ago, Obama announced that Darling-Hammond would lead his transition team and reformist cellphones around the country lit up. Darling-Hammond, a professor at Stanford, is a sharp critic of Teach for America and promotes weaker reforms.
Anxieties cooled, but then one morning a few weeks ago, I got a flurry of phone calls from reform leaders nervous that Obama was about to side against them. I interviewed people in the president-elect’s inner circle and was reassured that the reformers had nothing to worry about. Obama had not gone native.
Obama’s aides point to his long record on merit pay, his sympathy for charter schools and his tendency to highlight his commitment to serious education reform.
But the union lobbying efforts are relentless and in the past week prospects for a reforming education secretary are thought to have dimmed. The candidates before Obama apparently include: Joel Klein, the highly successful New York chancellor who has, nonetheless, been blackballed by the unions; Arne Duncan, the reforming Chicago head who is less controversial; Darling-Hammond herself; and some former governor to be named later, with Darling-Hammond as the deputy secretary.
In some sense, the final option would be the biggest setback for reform. Education is one of those areas where implementation and the details are more important than grand pronouncements. If the deputies and assistants in the secretary’s office are not true reformers, nothing will get done.
The stakes are huge. For the first time in decades, there is real momentum for reform. It’s not only Rhee and Klein — the celebrities — but also superintendents in cities across America who are getting better teachers into the classrooms and producing measurable results. There is an unprecedented political coalition building, among liberals as well as conservatives, for radical reform.
No Child Left Behind is about to be reauthorized. Everyone has reservations about that law, but it is the glaring spotlight that reveals and pierces the complacency at mediocre schools. If accountability standards are watered down, as the establishment wants, then real reform will fade.
This will be a tough call for Obama, because it will mean offending people, but he can either galvanize the cause of reform or demoralize it. It’ll be one of the biggest choices of his presidency.
Many of the reformist hopes now hang on Obama’s friend, Arne Duncan. In Chicago, he’s a successful reformer who has produced impressive results in a huge and historically troubled system. He has the political skills necessary to build a coalition on behalf of No Child Left Behind reauthorization. Because he is close to both Obamas, he will ensure that education doesn’t fall, as it usually does, into the ranks of the second-tier issues.
If Obama picks a reformer like Duncan, Klein or one of the others, he will be picking a fight with the status quo. But there’s never been a better time to have that fight than right now.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company
During the presidential race, Barack Obama straddled the two camps. One campaign adviser, John Schnur, represented the reform view in the internal discussions. Another, Linda Darling-Hammond, was more likely to represent the establishment view. Their disagreements were collegial (this is Obamaland after all), but substantive.
In public, Obama shifted nimbly from camp to camp while education experts studied his intonations with the intensity of Kremlinologists. Sometimes, he flirted with the union positions. At other times, he practiced dog-whistle politics, sending out reassuring signals that only the reformers could hear.
Each camp was secretly convinced that at the end of the day, Obama would come down on their side. The reformers were cheered when Obama praised a Denver performance pay initiative. The unions could take succor from the fact that though Obama would occasionally talk about merit pay, none of his actual proposals contradicted their positions.
Obama never had to pick a side. That is, until now. There is only one education secretary, and if you hang around these circles, the air is thick with speculation, anticipation, anxiety, hope and misinformation. Every day, new rumors are circulated and new front-runners declared. It’s kind of like being in a Trollope novel as Lord So-and-So figures out to whom he’s going to propose.
You can measure the anxiety in the reformist camp by the level of nervous phone chatter each morning. Weeks ago, Obama announced that Darling-Hammond would lead his transition team and reformist cellphones around the country lit up. Darling-Hammond, a professor at Stanford, is a sharp critic of Teach for America and promotes weaker reforms.
Anxieties cooled, but then one morning a few weeks ago, I got a flurry of phone calls from reform leaders nervous that Obama was about to side against them. I interviewed people in the president-elect’s inner circle and was reassured that the reformers had nothing to worry about. Obama had not gone native.
Obama’s aides point to his long record on merit pay, his sympathy for charter schools and his tendency to highlight his commitment to serious education reform.
But the union lobbying efforts are relentless and in the past week prospects for a reforming education secretary are thought to have dimmed. The candidates before Obama apparently include: Joel Klein, the highly successful New York chancellor who has, nonetheless, been blackballed by the unions; Arne Duncan, the reforming Chicago head who is less controversial; Darling-Hammond herself; and some former governor to be named later, with Darling-Hammond as the deputy secretary.
In some sense, the final option would be the biggest setback for reform. Education is one of those areas where implementation and the details are more important than grand pronouncements. If the deputies and assistants in the secretary’s office are not true reformers, nothing will get done.
The stakes are huge. For the first time in decades, there is real momentum for reform. It’s not only Rhee and Klein — the celebrities — but also superintendents in cities across America who are getting better teachers into the classrooms and producing measurable results. There is an unprecedented political coalition building, among liberals as well as conservatives, for radical reform.
No Child Left Behind is about to be reauthorized. Everyone has reservations about that law, but it is the glaring spotlight that reveals and pierces the complacency at mediocre schools. If accountability standards are watered down, as the establishment wants, then real reform will fade.
This will be a tough call for Obama, because it will mean offending people, but he can either galvanize the cause of reform or demoralize it. It’ll be one of the biggest choices of his presidency.
Many of the reformist hopes now hang on Obama’s friend, Arne Duncan. In Chicago, he’s a successful reformer who has produced impressive results in a huge and historically troubled system. He has the political skills necessary to build a coalition on behalf of No Child Left Behind reauthorization. Because he is close to both Obamas, he will ensure that education doesn’t fall, as it usually does, into the ranks of the second-tier issues.
If Obama picks a reformer like Duncan, Klein or one of the others, he will be picking a fight with the status quo. But there’s never been a better time to have that fight than right now.
Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company
Sunday, January 06, 2008
US Presidential Candidates On Education: Fred Thompson
In addition to being an actor who has played presidents in two films, Fred Thompson is trying to act his way into the White House. Thompson held out to the very last minute before announcing his candidacy to see if he can gain some momentum and save a little dough for the role errr... road ahead. Thompson voted for No Child Left Behind in 2001 but feels that charter schools are the answer. They aren't. According to USA Today, here's where Thompson stands on NCLB and other educational issues:
Fred Thompson on education
On No Child Left Behind law
When he was a U.S. senator representing Tennessee, Fred Thompson voted in 2001 for the No Child Left Behind education law. The law, signed by President Bush in 2002, requires states to test students annually. Schools failing to make academic progress over several years could be closed or have their faculty replaced.
Thompson has said he believes it is appropriate for the federal government to provide money if states meet certain goals but thinks implementation of the law has gone too far. “The most encouraging reforms in education are occurring at the local level, with options like charter schools,” he said on his campaign website. “And often the best thing Washington can do is let the states, school districts, teachers and parents set their own policies and run their own schools.”
On making college affordable
Thompson has yet to unveil a higher-education platform. In the past, he has supported education savings accounts that allow parents to sock money away for college tuition and let it grow tax-free.
Other education priorities
Thompson said on his campaign website that he supports giving parents more choices in where they send their children to school, including vouchers that would allow them to pay for private-school tuition. He wants to reduce federal education mandates and emphasize science and math instruction.
Fred Thompson on education
On No Child Left Behind law
When he was a U.S. senator representing Tennessee, Fred Thompson voted in 2001 for the No Child Left Behind education law. The law, signed by President Bush in 2002, requires states to test students annually. Schools failing to make academic progress over several years could be closed or have their faculty replaced.
Thompson has said he believes it is appropriate for the federal government to provide money if states meet certain goals but thinks implementation of the law has gone too far. “The most encouraging reforms in education are occurring at the local level, with options like charter schools,” he said on his campaign website. “And often the best thing Washington can do is let the states, school districts, teachers and parents set their own policies and run their own schools.”
On making college affordable
Thompson has yet to unveil a higher-education platform. In the past, he has supported education savings accounts that allow parents to sock money away for college tuition and let it grow tax-free.
Other education priorities
Thompson said on his campaign website that he supports giving parents more choices in where they send their children to school, including vouchers that would allow them to pay for private-school tuition. He wants to reduce federal education mandates and emphasize science and math instruction.
US Presidential Candidates On Education: Bill Richardson
Bill Richardson is another marginalized presidential candidate who has the right ida about No Child Left Behind. Catch his other stands on the issues, according to USA Today, before he's out of the race:
Bill Richardson on education
On No Child Left Behind law
New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, a Democrat, says he wants to scrap the education law known as No Child Left Behind, which requires states to test students annually. It was signed by President Bush in 2002. “Our students are suffering under this failed policy,” Richardson said on his campaign website. He wants to beef up education funding and replace the current system of sanctions for chronically low-performing schools with one that provides more assistance.
On making college affordable
Richardson wants to make college available to “every high school graduate who wants to attend.” He supports expanding college grants and loan options but has not provided many specifics.
Other education priorities
Richardson wants to raise pay for new teachers (to $40,000 nationally) and establish a pre-kindergarten program for all 4-year-olds. He is opposed to vouchers that would allow families to pay for tuition at private schools. Richardson also says he wants to give schools money to expand outreach to parents.
Bill Richardson on education
On No Child Left Behind law
New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, a Democrat, says he wants to scrap the education law known as No Child Left Behind, which requires states to test students annually. It was signed by President Bush in 2002. “Our students are suffering under this failed policy,” Richardson said on his campaign website. He wants to beef up education funding and replace the current system of sanctions for chronically low-performing schools with one that provides more assistance.
On making college affordable
Richardson wants to make college available to “every high school graduate who wants to attend.” He supports expanding college grants and loan options but has not provided many specifics.
Other education priorities
Richardson wants to raise pay for new teachers (to $40,000 nationally) and establish a pre-kindergarten program for all 4-year-olds. He is opposed to vouchers that would allow families to pay for tuition at private schools. Richardson also says he wants to give schools money to expand outreach to parents.
US Presidential Candidates On Education: Mitt Romney
Mitt Romney is the only presidential candidate willing to admit, however implicitly, that the No Child Left Behind and the current US Department of education is a way to neutralize the powerful teachers' unions. So, the smoking gun is in the hands of a presidential candidate who has flip-flopped (that is a pretty cool word) on educational issues.
Here is where Romney sits on the other issues, inluding NCLB:
Mitt Romney on education
On No Child Left Behind law
Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney has talked about how his views on federal involvement in education have evolved. Romney said during a May 2007 debate in South Carolina that he supported abolishing the Department of Education during his 1994 U.S. Senate bid because "it was very popular with the (GOP) base.”
As governor from January 2003 to January 2007, he said he saw the impact the agency had in “holding down the interests of the teachers union.” He said that is why he embraced the No Child Left Behind education law, which requires states to test students annually. “I find the testing of our kids to be a good thing, to find out which schools are succeeding and which ones are failing,” he said at a New Hampshire town meeting in August 2007.
On making college affordable
As governor, Romney established a scholarship program to reward the top 25% of Massachusetts high school students with a four-year, tuition-free scholarship to any state public university or college.
Other education priorities
Romney supports vouchers that would allow students from low-income areas pay for private-school tuition. As governor, he advocated merit pay for teachers, English immersion classes for foreign-speaking students, and increased math and science requirements. He told a New Hampshire crowd in August 2007 that the failure of inner-city schools is “the great civil rights issue of our time.”
Here is where Romney sits on the other issues, inluding NCLB:
Mitt Romney on education
On No Child Left Behind law
Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney has talked about how his views on federal involvement in education have evolved. Romney said during a May 2007 debate in South Carolina that he supported abolishing the Department of Education during his 1994 U.S. Senate bid because "it was very popular with the (GOP) base.”
As governor from January 2003 to January 2007, he said he saw the impact the agency had in “holding down the interests of the teachers union.” He said that is why he embraced the No Child Left Behind education law, which requires states to test students annually. “I find the testing of our kids to be a good thing, to find out which schools are succeeding and which ones are failing,” he said at a New Hampshire town meeting in August 2007.
On making college affordable
As governor, Romney established a scholarship program to reward the top 25% of Massachusetts high school students with a four-year, tuition-free scholarship to any state public university or college.
Other education priorities
Romney supports vouchers that would allow students from low-income areas pay for private-school tuition. As governor, he advocated merit pay for teachers, English immersion classes for foreign-speaking students, and increased math and science requirements. He told a New Hampshire crowd in August 2007 that the failure of inner-city schools is “the great civil rights issue of our time.”
Saturday, January 05, 2008
US Presidential Candidates On Education: Barack Obama
Other than the fact that my mother attends church with Senator Obama, I didn't know much about him until his candidacy for the US Senate seat in Illinois a few years back. He certainly is Kennedy-esque in coming out of nowhere to upset the apple cart of the status quo.
While attending an educator's of color conference in Independent Schools in Boston at the tail end of November 2007, we (mostly African American) educators debated Barack's chances for getting the Democratic Party's nomination and later winning the election. Out of the seven or eight of us who debated his chances, I was the lone voice who said that Obama had a chance of getting the Party's nod to head the ticket. Not that I was or am endorsing Obama at this point, but I did see that Obama's luck and skill as a candidate is more savvy than we have seen in many generations--perhaps not since the initial candidacies of Ronald Reagan, Jimmy Carter, John Kennedy, or Franklin Roosevelt.
At the moment, Barack's populist candidacy is in the Carter mode, which doesn't portend a great presidency. Yet, I'll argue now what I argued in Boston: Barack creates his own luck and inspires people's imagination in a way that is rare in US politics. Whether it's education or foreign policy, the American people would like to see some forward progress in most areas in the overall effectiveness of the next presidency.
According to USA Today, Obama's views on education policy is as follows...
Barack Obama on education
On No Child Left Behind law
Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., was not in office when Congress passed an education bill in 2001 that requires states to annually test students, known as the No Child Left Behind law. He has said it is a well-intentioned attempt to erase long-standing achievement gaps between white and minority students, but he believes the Bush administration ruined it through inflexible application. Obama wants more money for schools and to move away from traditional testing to judge schools.
On making college affordable
Obama has been pushing for an increase in the federal Pell grant awards that students can get to pay for college. That increase was part of a wide-ranging college funding bill that the Senate passed in September 2007. Obama was a co-sponsor of legislation that President Bush signed in September 2007 lowering fees and cutting interest rates for student loans by half, to 3.4%, and increasing Pell grant awards from $4,310 in 2007 to $5,400 by 2012. But Obama missed the vote on final passage.
Other education priorities
Obama says he wants to improve teacher quality and increase pay, especially for those teachers who also mentor students or boost achievement. Obama has said, however, that improvements in achievement shouldn’t be based “on some arbitrary test score.”
While attending an educator's of color conference in Independent Schools in Boston at the tail end of November 2007, we (mostly African American) educators debated Barack's chances for getting the Democratic Party's nomination and later winning the election. Out of the seven or eight of us who debated his chances, I was the lone voice who said that Obama had a chance of getting the Party's nod to head the ticket. Not that I was or am endorsing Obama at this point, but I did see that Obama's luck and skill as a candidate is more savvy than we have seen in many generations--perhaps not since the initial candidacies of Ronald Reagan, Jimmy Carter, John Kennedy, or Franklin Roosevelt.
At the moment, Barack's populist candidacy is in the Carter mode, which doesn't portend a great presidency. Yet, I'll argue now what I argued in Boston: Barack creates his own luck and inspires people's imagination in a way that is rare in US politics. Whether it's education or foreign policy, the American people would like to see some forward progress in most areas in the overall effectiveness of the next presidency.
According to USA Today, Obama's views on education policy is as follows...
Barack Obama on education
On No Child Left Behind law
Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., was not in office when Congress passed an education bill in 2001 that requires states to annually test students, known as the No Child Left Behind law. He has said it is a well-intentioned attempt to erase long-standing achievement gaps between white and minority students, but he believes the Bush administration ruined it through inflexible application. Obama wants more money for schools and to move away from traditional testing to judge schools.
On making college affordable
Obama has been pushing for an increase in the federal Pell grant awards that students can get to pay for college. That increase was part of a wide-ranging college funding bill that the Senate passed in September 2007. Obama was a co-sponsor of legislation that President Bush signed in September 2007 lowering fees and cutting interest rates for student loans by half, to 3.4%, and increasing Pell grant awards from $4,310 in 2007 to $5,400 by 2012. But Obama missed the vote on final passage.
Other education priorities
Obama says he wants to improve teacher quality and increase pay, especially for those teachers who also mentor students or boost achievement. Obama has said, however, that improvements in achievement shouldn’t be based “on some arbitrary test score.”
US Presidential Candidates On Education: Ron Paul
Like Sen. Barack Obama, the constituent base for Rep. Ron Paul (R.-Texas) are rabid and different. Both men garner support that echoes Beatlemania or Ross Perot-like enthusiasm. Rep. Paul is also in the populist camp, which seems to be striking a chord with the fringe as well as mainstream folks alike. His take on families who homeschool their children separates him from his other presidential competitors.
Below is where Ron Paul stands on education, as compiled by USA Today...
Ron Paul on education
On No Child Left Behind law
Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, voted against the education law known as No Child Left Behind, which requires states to test students annually, and remains wary of federal intervention in education. He is co-sponsoring a bill that would allow states to opt out of the No Child Left Behind mandates but still receive federal education aid. Under the proposal, residents of those states would receive a tax credit equal to the amount that they otherwise would have received in federal funding.
On making college affordable
Paul says he is concerned about the increasing debt load college students are bearing. He would lower taxes so families have more money to pay for college. Paul missed the vote on a bill that cut the interest rate on federally backed student loans by half, to 3.4%, and increased Pell grants from $4,310 in 2007 to $5,400 by 2012. President Bush signed the bill into law Sept. 27, 2007.
Other education priorities
Paul champions home schooling. He would push for tax credits to help parents instruct kids at home, promote home-school diplomas as equivalent to regular high school certificates and block federal mandates on home-school curricula. Paul also supports abolishing the Department of Education and believes education decision-making should be made at the state or local level.
Below is where Ron Paul stands on education, as compiled by USA Today...
Ron Paul on education
On No Child Left Behind law
Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, voted against the education law known as No Child Left Behind, which requires states to test students annually, and remains wary of federal intervention in education. He is co-sponsoring a bill that would allow states to opt out of the No Child Left Behind mandates but still receive federal education aid. Under the proposal, residents of those states would receive a tax credit equal to the amount that they otherwise would have received in federal funding.
On making college affordable
Paul says he is concerned about the increasing debt load college students are bearing. He would lower taxes so families have more money to pay for college. Paul missed the vote on a bill that cut the interest rate on federally backed student loans by half, to 3.4%, and increased Pell grants from $4,310 in 2007 to $5,400 by 2012. President Bush signed the bill into law Sept. 27, 2007.
Other education priorities
Paul champions home schooling. He would push for tax credits to help parents instruct kids at home, promote home-school diplomas as equivalent to regular high school certificates and block federal mandates on home-school curricula. Paul also supports abolishing the Department of Education and believes education decision-making should be made at the state or local level.
Friday, January 04, 2008
US Presidential Candidates On Education: Dennis Kucinich
Dennis Kucinich is the progressive's progressive. He's sort of a throwback to the populist presidential candidate William Jennings Bryan with more than a little bit of a whiff of the accused anarchists Sacco and Vanzetti . Kucinich is like your crazy uncle who everyone is embarrassed by because of his odiferous gas, but you can't help but be enamored by his willingness to call a spade a spade.
This is where USA Today says that Kucinich stands on education...
Dennis Kucinich on education
On No Child Left Behind law
Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, doesn’t hide his contempt for the education law known as No Child Left Behind and its reliance on test scores to judge performance. He voted for the bill in 2001. Kucinich told the National Education Association in July 2007 that he wants to reduce the amount of testing and give schools greater flexibility to use other ways of measuring student achievement. “We need to make sure children can read, but we do not want to defeat the learning experience and make it all about testing, because then all you have is a generation of test takers,” he said.
On making college affordable
Kucinich says he wants to make public college tuition-free and would pay for it by cutting the defense budget by 15%, or $75 billion. He voted for a bill that would cut the interest rate on student loans by half, to 3.4%, and increase Pell grantsfrom $4,310 in 2007 to $5,400 by 2012. President Bush signed the bill into law Sept. 27, 2007.
Other education priorities
Kucinich wants to establish pre-kindergarten programs for all 4-year-olds. He said this and other education initiatives can be paid for by cutting defense spending.
This is where USA Today says that Kucinich stands on education...
Dennis Kucinich on education
On No Child Left Behind law
Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, doesn’t hide his contempt for the education law known as No Child Left Behind and its reliance on test scores to judge performance. He voted for the bill in 2001. Kucinich told the National Education Association in July 2007 that he wants to reduce the amount of testing and give schools greater flexibility to use other ways of measuring student achievement. “We need to make sure children can read, but we do not want to defeat the learning experience and make it all about testing, because then all you have is a generation of test takers,” he said.
On making college affordable
Kucinich says he wants to make public college tuition-free and would pay for it by cutting the defense budget by 15%, or $75 billion. He voted for a bill that would cut the interest rate on student loans by half, to 3.4%, and increase Pell grantsfrom $4,310 in 2007 to $5,400 by 2012. President Bush signed the bill into law Sept. 27, 2007.
Other education priorities
Kucinich wants to establish pre-kindergarten programs for all 4-year-olds. He said this and other education initiatives can be paid for by cutting defense spending.
US Presidential Candidates On Education: Mike Gravel
The 2008 Iowa Caucuses have come and gone, while the New Hampshire primary is coming up hard on our right. The next candidate that we examine is Mike Gravel of Alaska, who is still in the race. Gravel, although the longest of long-shots, is still in the race, contrary to what MSNBC's Keith Olbermann has indicated. This is where Gravel stands on educational issues, according to USA Today:
Mike Gravel on education
On No Child Left Behind law
Former Alaska senator Mike Gravel says he doesn’t like the No Child Left Behind education law, saying its emphasis on testing has robbed students of a well-rounded education. The law requires every state to test students annually. Schools failing to make academic progress over several years could be closed or have their faculty replaced.
“Principals constantly prep students for the tests by cutting not only art, gym and music but also history and science,” he wrote in The New York Sun on Aug. 30, 2007. “No wonder children are bored with school.” Gravel was not in office when President Bush signed the law in January 2002.
On making college affordable
Gravel says low-income students who want to attend college should be given tuition assistance. He wants to provide technical training to those who don’t want to attend college. He would give tax breaks to companies that hire and train teenagers to perform technology-based jobs.
Other education priorities
Gravel supports government vouchers for low-income students, a longer school calendar and merit pay for teachers. “Why should teachers with energy, excitement and talent be paid the same as the ones who don’t make an effort?” he asks.
Gravel also points out that American students spend far less time in school than their Japanese and European counterparts. He advocates an education system that would require students to begin school at a younger age and to spend more hours a day and more days a year in school than they do now.
Mike Gravel on education
On No Child Left Behind law
Former Alaska senator Mike Gravel says he doesn’t like the No Child Left Behind education law, saying its emphasis on testing has robbed students of a well-rounded education. The law requires every state to test students annually. Schools failing to make academic progress over several years could be closed or have their faculty replaced.
“Principals constantly prep students for the tests by cutting not only art, gym and music but also history and science,” he wrote in The New York Sun on Aug. 30, 2007. “No wonder children are bored with school.” Gravel was not in office when President Bush signed the law in January 2002.
On making college affordable
Gravel says low-income students who want to attend college should be given tuition assistance. He wants to provide technical training to those who don’t want to attend college. He would give tax breaks to companies that hire and train teenagers to perform technology-based jobs.
Other education priorities
Gravel supports government vouchers for low-income students, a longer school calendar and merit pay for teachers. “Why should teachers with energy, excitement and talent be paid the same as the ones who don’t make an effort?” he asks.
Gravel also points out that American students spend far less time in school than their Japanese and European counterparts. He advocates an education system that would require students to begin school at a younger age and to spend more hours a day and more days a year in school than they do now.
Education As We Know It Is Dead: Radical Ideas About Education
Two days ago, one of our readers wrote:
>NCLB, Great concept but DUMB implementation
I'm not all that in love with the concept of NCLB because of what it does. I hate to be a platonic elitist but, like you, I believe that all children should be seeking what they are good at and what their strengths are. We should figure out the bare-bones of what kids absolutely need to know and then get them into societally appropriate endeavors where they will be productive. Do all kids need to have Geometry and Algebra II? Do they all need to have Ancient History, World History, and US History? Can we feed them early on in their educational careers by having them fed by things like culinary schools or a sales academy, perhaps, rather than dragging their carcasses through a regiment of "what we think you need to know" think? What about giving kids who aren't real school-type kids the Cliff Notes' version of education, with the appropriate credit, of course, and get them doing more stuff that might make a difference in their lives, and more importantly in the lives of their community.
Education as we know it is dead, or at least close to it. When in many urban and rural communities, over half of the children are dropping out between 7th and 12th grade (see they never give us the drop out rates of the kids who have never made it into high school), then you know that the*system*isn't*working. It's not about teachers, administrators, or parents, per se, it just means that what we are selling (in teaching) isn't being bought by America's youth.
In any event, I like NAF's Academy model or even CART in Fresno. Do you know that school. If you don't, you should visit it some time. CART is what I was basing some of my Agassi School ideas on.
About the environment. It's like ulcers. Remember everybody got ulcers back in the day. What happened to ulcers? We as a society work ourselves into conditions, illnesses, and diseases. We need to stop doing that. Global warming is one thing that we have created, like the Cold War, that truly exists and yet it doesn't. "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down that wall."
>NCLB, Great concept but DUMB implementation
I'm not all that in love with the concept of NCLB because of what it does. I hate to be a platonic elitist but, like you, I believe that all children should be seeking what they are good at and what their strengths are. We should figure out the bare-bones of what kids absolutely need to know and then get them into societally appropriate endeavors where they will be productive. Do all kids need to have Geometry and Algebra II? Do they all need to have Ancient History, World History, and US History? Can we feed them early on in their educational careers by having them fed by things like culinary schools or a sales academy, perhaps, rather than dragging their carcasses through a regiment of "what we think you need to know" think? What about giving kids who aren't real school-type kids the Cliff Notes' version of education, with the appropriate credit, of course, and get them doing more stuff that might make a difference in their lives, and more importantly in the lives of their community.
Education as we know it is dead, or at least close to it. When in many urban and rural communities, over half of the children are dropping out between 7th and 12th grade (see they never give us the drop out rates of the kids who have never made it into high school), then you know that the*system*isn't*working. It's not about teachers, administrators, or parents, per se, it just means that what we are selling (in teaching) isn't being bought by America's youth.
In any event, I like NAF's Academy model or even CART in Fresno. Do you know that school. If you don't, you should visit it some time. CART is what I was basing some of my Agassi School ideas on.
About the environment. It's like ulcers. Remember everybody got ulcers back in the day. What happened to ulcers? We as a society work ourselves into conditions, illnesses, and diseases. We need to stop doing that. Global warming is one thing that we have created, like the Cold War, that truly exists and yet it doesn't. "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down that wall."
Tuesday, January 01, 2008
Happy New Year! What's Old is What's New
So, it's the New Year! What does it hold in store for us as a people, as a nation of innovators and learners. Most of our early attention this year will be centered on what's happening in Iowa, Pakistan, Iran, and Iraq. Taking our collective eyes off of the ball.
Perhaps we'll even pay some attention to what the Israelis and Palestinian's are up to (vis-a-vis the Bush administration wanting to salvage it's reputation in the world. Can you say, "Condi-NOT!")
The real attention should be on the future of education and what the early Presidential primaries may have in store for the school children in this country for the next three generations. Although we can no longer ignore world events (global warning, enter stage right), we must also keep our eye on the ball as it relates to the dumbing of the American child.
One woman that I spoke to said that No Child Left Behind poses a grave and present danger to the autonomy of our nation as a civilization. Does this sound like a hysterical ranting of yet another John Dewey Progressive who doesn't quite get that the Me Generation ended along with the Seventies and hippies?
Yet, witness the resurrection of Jimmy Carter, a man with plenty of vision and great ideas and very little follow through, at least some folks would say so. Did Jimmy Carter's presidency derail Al Gore's hope at the White House--or Barack Obama's? Can effete men and women of principle win the highest office in the land? Or must all politician's these days be shrewd political operatives who pander to all sorts of special interests in this country to get anywhere at all? The George W. Bushes, the Mike Huckabees, and the Hillary Clintons. With special interests groups firmly in hand, Presidents and candidates like these offer little new or innovative in the way of foreign or domestic policies. Who cares if Hillary will be the first woman President in this country if the results are the very same as they are today. Perhaps she has a little more vigor than our current feckless leaders in power, who lie and steal and cheat and lie, to great effect, shamelessly telling people just what they want (and perhaps need) to hear.
"I won the election fair and square." "There is no global warning." "It's okay to reveal the identity of a CIA agent and have it not matter all that much." "Let's send many thousands of young men and women to the Middle East and fight a war that has always been and will always be about oil." "It's okay to serve up one of the worst educational public policies in our nation's history as long as we divert the attention of the American people on what really matters."
In short, I am angry this New Years Day. I don't feel that we as a people and as a nation are any closer to solving what ails us. In writing this blog (and dedicating my career to education), I have put all of my eggs into one basket--that of America's school children--while they and their teachers are being scrambled to death with meaningless tests, jumping through hoops that will always tell them that they are less than. Also, if the tests that come with the scourge of a law are designed to make the school children in this country be great followers who don't question authority in any way--or the opposite of the root word of education, which is "educere," meaning to "lead out"--then we are in for generations of heartache. We must do more to fight for what matters most and has always mattered most.
Last Century, we spent a lot of time working on infrastructure--dams, roads and highways, schools, skyscrapers, fiber optics. This year and into this next epoch, we must use micro-technologies as our metaphor and rallying cry for what to concentrate on next. People, each and every one of us, especially children, should be moved to the center. No Child Left Behind serves as one of those 1984 lessons of marketing the opposite. While drop out rates soar in middle and high schools, and boys of all stripes and hues lose out in higher ed, then we must re-focus our attention on what matters most and what has always mattered most in this country...
Education.
Perhaps we'll even pay some attention to what the Israelis and Palestinian's are up to (vis-a-vis the Bush administration wanting to salvage it's reputation in the world. Can you say, "Condi-NOT!")
The real attention should be on the future of education and what the early Presidential primaries may have in store for the school children in this country for the next three generations. Although we can no longer ignore world events (global warning, enter stage right), we must also keep our eye on the ball as it relates to the dumbing of the American child.
One woman that I spoke to said that No Child Left Behind poses a grave and present danger to the autonomy of our nation as a civilization. Does this sound like a hysterical ranting of yet another John Dewey Progressive who doesn't quite get that the Me Generation ended along with the Seventies and hippies?
Yet, witness the resurrection of Jimmy Carter, a man with plenty of vision and great ideas and very little follow through, at least some folks would say so. Did Jimmy Carter's presidency derail Al Gore's hope at the White House--or Barack Obama's? Can effete men and women of principle win the highest office in the land? Or must all politician's these days be shrewd political operatives who pander to all sorts of special interests in this country to get anywhere at all? The George W. Bushes, the Mike Huckabees, and the Hillary Clintons. With special interests groups firmly in hand, Presidents and candidates like these offer little new or innovative in the way of foreign or domestic policies. Who cares if Hillary will be the first woman President in this country if the results are the very same as they are today. Perhaps she has a little more vigor than our current feckless leaders in power, who lie and steal and cheat and lie, to great effect, shamelessly telling people just what they want (and perhaps need) to hear.
"I won the election fair and square." "There is no global warning." "It's okay to reveal the identity of a CIA agent and have it not matter all that much." "Let's send many thousands of young men and women to the Middle East and fight a war that has always been and will always be about oil." "It's okay to serve up one of the worst educational public policies in our nation's history as long as we divert the attention of the American people on what really matters."
In short, I am angry this New Years Day. I don't feel that we as a people and as a nation are any closer to solving what ails us. In writing this blog (and dedicating my career to education), I have put all of my eggs into one basket--that of America's school children--while they and their teachers are being scrambled to death with meaningless tests, jumping through hoops that will always tell them that they are less than. Also, if the tests that come with the scourge of a law are designed to make the school children in this country be great followers who don't question authority in any way--or the opposite of the root word of education, which is "educere," meaning to "lead out"--then we are in for generations of heartache. We must do more to fight for what matters most and has always mattered most.
Last Century, we spent a lot of time working on infrastructure--dams, roads and highways, schools, skyscrapers, fiber optics. This year and into this next epoch, we must use micro-technologies as our metaphor and rallying cry for what to concentrate on next. People, each and every one of us, especially children, should be moved to the center. No Child Left Behind serves as one of those 1984 lessons of marketing the opposite. While drop out rates soar in middle and high schools, and boys of all stripes and hues lose out in higher ed, then we must re-focus our attention on what matters most and what has always mattered most in this country...
Education.
Monday, December 31, 2007
US Presidential Candidates On Education: John Edwards
In 2001 John Edwards voted for the awful No Child Left Behind bill that has become the scourge of most public schools and school districts in this country. Make no mistake, NCLB is a mistake. There is no way to sugar-coat how bad the law and its intended or unintended impact on teaching and learning has meant for American education.
However, we do like some of the other more creative solutions that Edwards is authoring about reducing the drop-out rate and providing more access for students to go to college. Yet, does Edwards go far enough? Not nearly. According to USA Today, here are some of the other issues that Edwards has grappled with educationally...
John Edwards on education
On No Child Left Behind law
As a senator representing North Carolina, Democrat John Edwards voted in 2001 for the education bill known as No Child Left Behind. Now, he says, the law should be “radically overhauled.” The law requires every state to test students annually. Schools failing to make academic progress over several years could be closed or have their faculty replaced.
Edwards wants better tests that measure true skills (essay questions instead of multiple choice, for example) and an assessment system that takes actual student progress into account. “We need to find out if schools are working, but I think we need a more precise way to measure what’s happening. And the parameters of what we’re measuring need to be more diverse, not just whether you can fill in a bubble in response to a math or science question,” he said at a community meeting in Dubuque, Iowa, in August 2007.
On making college affordable
Edwards would create a national program to pay for one year of public-college tuition, fees and books. He has predicted the program would allow more than 2 million students to go to college who might not be able to afford it otherwise. In return, Edwards says, students would be required to work part-time in college, take a college-prep curriculum in high school and “stay out of trouble.” He would pay for the $9 billion cost of his initiative through changes to the federal student loan program.
Other education priorities
Edwards wants to tackle the nation’s dropout problem (three out of 10 ninth-graders don’t finish high school) by creating "second-chance schools" that he says would help dropouts by offering them one-on-one attention and a chance to earn a diploma. He’s also proposing to help states provide universal pre-kindergarten for 4-year-olds; parents would pay on a sliding scale based on their income.
However, we do like some of the other more creative solutions that Edwards is authoring about reducing the drop-out rate and providing more access for students to go to college. Yet, does Edwards go far enough? Not nearly. According to USA Today, here are some of the other issues that Edwards has grappled with educationally...
John Edwards on education
On No Child Left Behind law
As a senator representing North Carolina, Democrat John Edwards voted in 2001 for the education bill known as No Child Left Behind. Now, he says, the law should be “radically overhauled.” The law requires every state to test students annually. Schools failing to make academic progress over several years could be closed or have their faculty replaced.
Edwards wants better tests that measure true skills (essay questions instead of multiple choice, for example) and an assessment system that takes actual student progress into account. “We need to find out if schools are working, but I think we need a more precise way to measure what’s happening. And the parameters of what we’re measuring need to be more diverse, not just whether you can fill in a bubble in response to a math or science question,” he said at a community meeting in Dubuque, Iowa, in August 2007.
On making college affordable
Edwards would create a national program to pay for one year of public-college tuition, fees and books. He has predicted the program would allow more than 2 million students to go to college who might not be able to afford it otherwise. In return, Edwards says, students would be required to work part-time in college, take a college-prep curriculum in high school and “stay out of trouble.” He would pay for the $9 billion cost of his initiative through changes to the federal student loan program.
Other education priorities
Edwards wants to tackle the nation’s dropout problem (three out of 10 ninth-graders don’t finish high school) by creating "second-chance schools" that he says would help dropouts by offering them one-on-one attention and a chance to earn a diploma. He’s also proposing to help states provide universal pre-kindergarten for 4-year-olds; parents would pay on a sliding scale based on their income.
US Presidential Candidates On Education: Duncan Hunter
Duncan Hunter?!! Your guess is as good as mine. I hadn't heard of him either. Wouldn't you know it that he has a very Libertarian streak when it comes to education--with the exception of school vouchers. People like Hunter cloak their disdain for public education but is willing to have taxpayers bankroll private schools in the form of vouchers. Here's where Hunter stands on the other educational issues...
Duncan Hunter on education
On No Child Left Behind law
Although Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., voted in 2001 for the education law known as No Child Left Behind, he is no fan of federal intervention in education. Signed by President Bush in 2002, the law requires every state to test students annually. Schools failing to make academic progress over several years could be closed or have their faculty replaced.
Hunter says he would move to dismantle the top-down “expensive and inefficient” mandates of the law and has co-sponsored legislation to change it. That bill would give states the right to opt out of the law and allows them to “assume full responsibility for the educational needs of its students,” according to Hunter’s congressional website. States not willing to take this step would be required to follow current mandates under the law. “I believe we can educate students more effectively by returning school curriculum prerogatives to the states, local communities and, most importantly, to the family,” he said.
On making college affordable
Hunter has said he doesn’t think the federal government should play a large role in college affordability. He voted against legislation that Congress passed and the president signed in September 2007 that increased Pell grants from $4,310 in 2007 to $5,400 in 2012 and cut the interest rate by half, to 3.4%, on federally backed student loans.
Other education priorities
Hunter supports vouchers and government aid to pay for private school tuition, from kindergarten through 12th grade. He also wants to make sure home-schooled children have the same access to federal benefits, such as financial aid, as those attending public school.
Duncan Hunter on education
On No Child Left Behind law
Although Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., voted in 2001 for the education law known as No Child Left Behind, he is no fan of federal intervention in education. Signed by President Bush in 2002, the law requires every state to test students annually. Schools failing to make academic progress over several years could be closed or have their faculty replaced.
Hunter says he would move to dismantle the top-down “expensive and inefficient” mandates of the law and has co-sponsored legislation to change it. That bill would give states the right to opt out of the law and allows them to “assume full responsibility for the educational needs of its students,” according to Hunter’s congressional website. States not willing to take this step would be required to follow current mandates under the law. “I believe we can educate students more effectively by returning school curriculum prerogatives to the states, local communities and, most importantly, to the family,” he said.
On making college affordable
Hunter has said he doesn’t think the federal government should play a large role in college affordability. He voted against legislation that Congress passed and the president signed in September 2007 that increased Pell grants from $4,310 in 2007 to $5,400 in 2012 and cut the interest rate by half, to 3.4%, on federally backed student loans.
Other education priorities
Hunter supports vouchers and government aid to pay for private school tuition, from kindergarten through 12th grade. He also wants to make sure home-schooled children have the same access to federal benefits, such as financial aid, as those attending public school.
US Presidential Candidates On Education: Chris Dodd
Chris Dodd, like most of the other candidates, would like to spend more money on fully funding No Child Left Behind, particularly in funding failing schools. He voted for the original legislation in 2001. Not much innovation in his arsenal. Just the same old thing. Here is where Dodd stands on NCLB and some of the other issues...
Chris Dodd on education
On No Child Left Behind law
Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., would keep intact the basic accountability-driven framework of the education law, known as No Child Left Behind, that President Bush signed in January 2002. The law requires every state to test students annually. Schools failing to make academic progress over several years could be closed or have their faculty replaced.
Dodd wants to spend more money on failing schools, a departure from the law’s emphasis on punishing schools that perennially score poorly on tests. Dodd voted for the legislation in 2001.
On making college affordable
Dodd says no one who wants a college education should be denied one. As president, he would make community college free for anyone who can’t afford a traditional four-year university by partnering with states to subsidize tuition at community colleges. Dodd says he can pay for the program through cuts in federal government subsidies to student lenders.
Dodd missed the vote on a bill that would cut the interest rate on student loans by half, to 3.4%, and increase Pell grants from $4,310 in 2007 to $5,400 by 2012. President Bush signed the bill into law Sept. 27, 2007.
Other education priorities
Dodd proposes a number of programs that require local buy-in and lots of money: universal pre-kindergarten for low-income families, a school modernization fund, smaller class sizes and a longer school day. Dodd also wants to develop national academic standards that states would voluntarily adopt instead of having a mishmash of different programs.
Chris Dodd on education
On No Child Left Behind law
Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., would keep intact the basic accountability-driven framework of the education law, known as No Child Left Behind, that President Bush signed in January 2002. The law requires every state to test students annually. Schools failing to make academic progress over several years could be closed or have their faculty replaced.
Dodd wants to spend more money on failing schools, a departure from the law’s emphasis on punishing schools that perennially score poorly on tests. Dodd voted for the legislation in 2001.
On making college affordable
Dodd says no one who wants a college education should be denied one. As president, he would make community college free for anyone who can’t afford a traditional four-year university by partnering with states to subsidize tuition at community colleges. Dodd says he can pay for the program through cuts in federal government subsidies to student lenders.
Dodd missed the vote on a bill that would cut the interest rate on student loans by half, to 3.4%, and increase Pell grants from $4,310 in 2007 to $5,400 by 2012. President Bush signed the bill into law Sept. 27, 2007.
Other education priorities
Dodd proposes a number of programs that require local buy-in and lots of money: universal pre-kindergarten for low-income families, a school modernization fund, smaller class sizes and a longer school day. Dodd also wants to develop national academic standards that states would voluntarily adopt instead of having a mishmash of different programs.
Sunday, December 30, 2007
US Presidential Candidates On Education: Mike Huckabee
Mike Huckabee is a rising star in the Republican Party. Republicans have been looking for a telegenic candidate like Huckabee ("What would you give me for Mike Huckabee and Kevin Spacey") who believes what the right wing element of the party believes. Huckabee is a died in the wool neo-con and the Right loves him. This is what USA Today says about his stand on education...
Mike Huckabee on education
On No Child Left Behind law
Former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, a Republican, supports the education law known as No Child Left Behind. Signed by President Bush in 2002, the law requires every state to test students annually. Failure to meet certain requirements results in reduced federal funding to schools.
Though he has said opponents of the law have maligned it as unwarranted federal intrusion, Huckabee agrees states should oversee implementation of the law. “While there is value in the No Child Left Behind law's effort to set high national standards, states must be allowed to develop their own benchmarks,” he wrote on his campaign website.
On making college affordable
If elected president, Huckabee says he would be willing to provide federally funded, state-administered scholarships for students who go into national service, such as teaching in high-poverty schools. He also supports scholarships for low-income students who do well in high school.
Other education priorities
When he was governor of Arkansas, Huckabee emphasized arts and music education for young students. He’d like to continue that as president, saying it’s “crucial that children flex both the left and right sides of the brain. … Our future economy depends on a creative generation.”
Mike Huckabee on education
On No Child Left Behind law
Former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, a Republican, supports the education law known as No Child Left Behind. Signed by President Bush in 2002, the law requires every state to test students annually. Failure to meet certain requirements results in reduced federal funding to schools.
Though he has said opponents of the law have maligned it as unwarranted federal intrusion, Huckabee agrees states should oversee implementation of the law. “While there is value in the No Child Left Behind law's effort to set high national standards, states must be allowed to develop their own benchmarks,” he wrote on his campaign website.
On making college affordable
If elected president, Huckabee says he would be willing to provide federally funded, state-administered scholarships for students who go into national service, such as teaching in high-poverty schools. He also supports scholarships for low-income students who do well in high school.
Other education priorities
When he was governor of Arkansas, Huckabee emphasized arts and music education for young students. He’d like to continue that as president, saying it’s “crucial that children flex both the left and right sides of the brain. … Our future economy depends on a creative generation.”
US Presidential Candidates On Education: Hillary Clinton
Many of the pundits have said that Hillary Clinton is the candidate to beat in next year's election? Yet, is her position on education that of a frontrunner or that of an also ran. You decide...
Hillary Rodham Clinton on education
On No Child Left Behind law
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., voted in 2001 for the education bill known as No Child Left Behind. Signed into law by President Bush in 2002, the law requires every state to test students annually. Schools failing to make academic progress over several years could be closed or have their faculty replaced.
Now Clinton is calling for a “total change” in the law partly because she says the federal government isn’t giving states enough flexibility to measure student progress. “We need to make sure that when we look at our children, we don’t just see a little walking test,” she said at an August 2007 debate. Like other Democratic candidates, Clinton has accused the Bush administration of not funding the law adequately.
On making college affordable
Clinton has sponsored legislation that would gradually increase the maximum Pell Grant for low-income college students to $11,600 a year. She missed the vote on a bill that would cut the interest rate on student loans by half, to 3.4%, and increase Pell grants from $4,310 in 2007 to $5,400 by 2012. President Bush signed the bill into law on Sept. 27, 2007.
Clinton also wants to increase the Hope Tax Credit to $3,500 from $1,650 and make it available for four years of college instead of the current two. With this tax credit, families would subtract the credit amount directly from the taxes they owe. Clinton wants to increase money for programs that help minorities and first-generation students (those who are the first in their family to attend college). She also wants to adjust federal loan programs so students can borrow at lower rates.
Other education priorities
Clinton wants to provide federal funding to states that agree to establish voluntary pre-kindergarten for all 4-year-olds. Low-income families and those with limited English proficiency would be allowed to enroll their children for free. States would be required to work with existing community-based preschools to ensure parents have a choice on where to enroll their children. States also would have the option to expand Head Start programs as part of a strategy to offer universal pre-K programs.
Hillary Rodham Clinton on education
On No Child Left Behind law
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., voted in 2001 for the education bill known as No Child Left Behind. Signed into law by President Bush in 2002, the law requires every state to test students annually. Schools failing to make academic progress over several years could be closed or have their faculty replaced.
Now Clinton is calling for a “total change” in the law partly because she says the federal government isn’t giving states enough flexibility to measure student progress. “We need to make sure that when we look at our children, we don’t just see a little walking test,” she said at an August 2007 debate. Like other Democratic candidates, Clinton has accused the Bush administration of not funding the law adequately.
On making college affordable
Clinton has sponsored legislation that would gradually increase the maximum Pell Grant for low-income college students to $11,600 a year. She missed the vote on a bill that would cut the interest rate on student loans by half, to 3.4%, and increase Pell grants from $4,310 in 2007 to $5,400 by 2012. President Bush signed the bill into law on Sept. 27, 2007.
Clinton also wants to increase the Hope Tax Credit to $3,500 from $1,650 and make it available for four years of college instead of the current two. With this tax credit, families would subtract the credit amount directly from the taxes they owe. Clinton wants to increase money for programs that help minorities and first-generation students (those who are the first in their family to attend college). She also wants to adjust federal loan programs so students can borrow at lower rates.
Other education priorities
Clinton wants to provide federal funding to states that agree to establish voluntary pre-kindergarten for all 4-year-olds. Low-income families and those with limited English proficiency would be allowed to enroll their children for free. States would be required to work with existing community-based preschools to ensure parents have a choice on where to enroll their children. States also would have the option to expand Head Start programs as part of a strategy to offer universal pre-K programs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)