Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Ted Kennedy on No Child Left Behind
Here are some unintentionally funny--if you like to cry on the inside, that is--snippets from Ted Kennedy's Wash Post op-ed on why taxpayers should fork over even more federal money for public schools under The No Child Left Behind Act. At least, that is, as long as that controversial law doesn't allow students anything remotely resembling the educational choice that Ted Kennedy and every member of Congress exercises without thinking twice about it:
Most of us in Congress know that a retreat to mediocrity is wrong. To meet the demands of the 21st century, we have to expand opportunity for all and keep our commitment to leaving no child behind.
We know the law has flaws, but we also know that with common-sense changes and adequate resources, we can improve it by building on what we've learned. We owe it to America's children, parents and teachers to reinforce our commitment, not abandon it....
We must expand and fortify the teacher workforce. Researchers agree that teacher quality is the most important factor affecting student achievement. Good teachers can make all the difference in closing achievement gaps for low-income and minority students. The same research also shows, however, that our most at-risk students are often taught by the least prepared, least experienced and least qualified teachers. The No Child Left Behind Act made a commitment that every child would be taught by a highly qualified teacher. To reach that goal, a greater federal investment is needed.
The whole chunk of corned beef is right here.
Now I realize with Good Friday--one of Teddy's favorite days to go boozing--coming around, Teddy's mind is probably somewhere other than educational policy. But let's note a couple of things which suggest that neither "a greater federal investment" nor a greater state investment is going to really help kids trapped in the crappiest of public schools:
1. According to the National Assessment of Educational Progress, which is the generally regarded as the most comprehensive measure of student performance over the past 40 or so years, "At age 17 [i.e., among high school seniors], no measurable differences in performance were found between 1971 and 2004 for any reporting metric."
2. In 1970-71, Americans spent $4,000 per student. In 2002-03, we spent $8,468 dollars per student in public K-12 schools. That's adjusted for inflation, and using 2004-05 dollars. So we're spending more than twice as much, with no change in average outcome. More here.
That strikes me as a pretty strong indicator that there's something systemically wrong with public schools. Where else are you paying twice as much for same product you got in 1971?
As for "fortifying" the teacher workforce: In 1970-71, the average teacher pulled down $44,723 in 2004-05 dollars. In 2004-05, they made $47,750. And that's not including other compensation (retirement, health care, summer school teaching pay), which is almost certainly better than it was back then. And as for "expanding" it, the pupil-to-teacher ratio in 1970 was 22.3 students to one teacher; in 2002, it was 16 to one.
This isn't to say the school debate isn't a weird one. According to Gallup, about 77 percent of parents are either completely or somewhat satisified with the schools their kids attend, which surely explains why so little radical change happens. Yet only 45 percent of parents are either completely or somewhat satisfied with the quality of K-12 education overall in the U.S. Go figure.
And fwiw, a majority of Americans, says Gallup, haven't even heard of No Child Left Behind. Of those who have, it's a split decision as to whether it's worth anything. Which sadly probably makes it more likely to get more spending.
|3.26.07 @ 3:08PM|#
I put it at 50/50 the next POTUS will be a Democrat. (I know, I
live out on the edge) If it is, and the Dems retain control of
congress, we'll see the biggest big-government government ever. Of
course the Reps will go absolutely ape. And of course, it will be
all their fault. They had their chance to cut back Big Brother's
reach, but they saw only how they could extend it even farther.
Perhaps this will at long last put an end to the myth of small
government conservatives, and usher in the libertarian era.
Well, a man can dream can't he. Besides I don't think it's that
unreasonable. Brian says we're in ascendancy, and our righteousness
can not help but win the day. At least that's the way I heard
it.
|3.26.07 @ 3:11PM|#
"This isn't to say the school debate isn't a weird one.
According to Gallup, about 77 percent of parents are either
completely or somewhat satisified with the schools their kids
attend, which surely explains why so little radical change happens.
Yet only 45 percent of parents are either completely or somewhat
satisfied with the quality of K-12 education overall in the U.S. Go
figure."
Kinda like how most people are dissatisfied w/ Congress in general,
but approve of their Congressperson.
Sam B|3.26.07 @ 3:17PM|#
"We need to strengthen our academic standards and assessment
methods to ensure that students have the knowledge and skills
necessary for today's knowledge-based global economy."
This seems to me to say "We need to make the tests harder to help
our students", which clearly makes no sense.
Also; want to know how to ensure that teachers are motivated and of
excellent quality? How about performance based as opposed to tenure
based pay and the ability to fire substandard teachers?
Fluffy|3.26.07 @ 3:18PM|#
If verbal skill is 50% of what we're measuring here, there's a reason we aren't seeing greater student success with greater spending. It's because most students don't actually acquire any verbal skills in the schools; they simply earn a credential certifying the verbal skill they already had when they arrived at the school.
|3.26.07 @ 3:24PM|#
Great post, Nick. A lot of good info in there.
Although we've more than doubled real spending since the early
'70s, we've gotten nothing extra for our money.
So why is no one pissed?
Maybe because we're lying to them.
Even though achievement is flat or lower, grades are up!
No wonder we suck.
|3.26.07 @ 3:24PM|#
adjusted for inflation but at current dollars?
Inflate old dollers into current dollars . .
The result is adjusted for inflation and in current dollars; got it
now?
Paul|3.26.07 @ 3:26PM|#
Liberals love 'no child left behind'. They just don't like the
president who gave it to us. No Child Left Behind creates all kinds
of new levers to power at the federal level. Any opportunity for
Congress to fiddle with you kids education will not be missed, no
sireebob.
NCLB is great, it just needs more federal control, money,
and regulations to make it work. More is better, right?
LarryA|3.26.07 @ 3:35PM|#
Most of us in Congress know that a retreat to mediocrity is
wrong.
Retreat is the wrong direction. A system that fails to teach so
many students to read needs to advance to reach
"mediocrity."
To meet the demands of the 21st century, we have to expand
opportunity for all and keep our commitment to leaving no child
behind.
What we actually need for the 21st century is to challenge the best
and brightest. They'll make the most difference.
We know the law has flaws, but we also know that with
common-sense changes and adequate resources, we can improve it by
building on what we've learned.
Translation: Bigger budgets.
We owe it to America's children, parents and teachers to
reinforce our commitment, not abandon it....
If a government program isn't working, try, try again with more
funding.
We must expand and fortify the teacher workforce. Researchers
agree that teacher quality is the most important factor affecting
student achievement. Good teachers can make all the difference in
closing achievement gaps for low-income and minority
students.
This translates into "every teacher must obtain a real education
school certified degree and become a member of the union."
To reach that goal, a greater federal investment is
needed.
Where "investment" = "funding and control."
No Child Left Behind = No Child Gets Ahead
|3.26.07 @ 3:38PM|#
Liberals love 'no child left behind'. They just don't like
the president who gave it to us. No Child Left Behind creates all
kinds of new levers to power at the federal level. Any opportunity
for Congress to fiddle with you kids education will not be missed,
no sireebob
Uhmm, I'm a liberal and I hate it.
I don't like the emphasis on standardized testing and the perverse
incentives it creates and I don't like taking control away from the
local level. But please feel free to tell us all more about what
"liberals" like and dislike
The Wine Commonsewer|3.26.07 @ 3:38PM|#
Kennedy didn't mind leaving Mary Jo behind. Of course, she wasn't a child.
The Wine Commonsewer|3.26.07 @ 3:40PM|#
Uhmm, I'm a liberal and I hate it.
There's two of you?
Sorry, the comment wrote itself.
The Wine Commonsewer|3.26.07 @ 3:46PM|#
Under NCLB, a failing school can totter along spewing uneducated students into the world for twenty years so long as it makes a teensy little bit of progress each year. If the education establishment was serious about education it would be intolerable to allow two full generations of students to be sacrificed along the way while the educrats try to figure out how to educate.
Sam B|3.26.07 @ 3:52PM|#
"Retreat is the wrong direction. A system that fails to teach so
many students to read needs to advance to reach
"mediocrity.""
Well said LarryA.
Sam B|3.26.07 @ 3:54PM|#
After multiple paragraphs of rhetoric and empty bromides:
"In the weeks ahead, those opposed to doing what it takes to leave
no child behind will do everything in their power to impede our
progress. Don't let their rhetoric fool you."
|3.26.07 @ 3:55PM|#
Also; want to know how to ensure that teachers are motivated
and of excellent quality? How about performance based as opposed to
tenure based pay and the ability to fire substandard
teachers?
i don't know any teachers worth their salt who are against this
idea - even unionized (horror!) ones. the opposition is that
student testing is a piss-poor method of evaluating teacher
performance.
|3.26.07 @ 3:59PM|#
i don't know any teachers worth their salt who are against
this idea - even unionized (horror!) ones.
You don't know any teachers "worth their salt" who are opposed to
eliminating tenure? You and I know completely different
teachers.
|3.26.07 @ 4:00PM|#
So Nick "Sober as a judge" Gillespie has to make fun of Teddy Kennedy's fondness for the bottle. Hey, he's Irish, dude! Cut him some slack! Yeah, that "old-fashioned family Easter" that ended up at the "Au Bar" didn't work out so well. So what! That was years ago, man! And, as Jack Germond so sagely observed at the time, "You want him to drink alone?"
Sam B|3.26.07 @ 4:02PM|#
downstater,
1) That may be true, but many teachers are not at all "worth their
salt."
2) Individual teachers may be against these things, but the unions
that represent certainly push for them hard with seemingly little
internal opposition.
I think one of the big problems here is that in the mind of the
average Joe what is good for the union is good for the teacher and
what is good for the teacher is good for the student, therefore
these unions ultimately have the students best interest in mind.
Any brisk reading of the history of teachers unions will show that
is FAR from the case.
D.A. Ridgely|3.26.07 @ 4:13PM|#
I hear if this goes well, Kennedy's next venture will be to provide equivalent funding for parochial schools, such legislation tentatively entitled No Child's Behind Left.
Xmas|3.26.07 @ 4:23PM|#
Good teachers can make all the difference in closing
achievement gaps for low-income and minority students. The same
research also shows, however, that our most at-risk students are
often taught by the least prepared, least experienced and least
qualified teachers.
Well, that's sure going to win him votes with the teachers, won't
it. Who am I kidding? TK will be my senator forever. He'll kept up
and running by The Honorable Edward Moore Kennedy Cyborg Wing and
Brigham and Women's Hospital.
|3.26.07 @ 4:27PM|#
No one really wants to put the blame where it really belongs.
The kids first, parents second. The kids take little or no
responsibility for their own education. They don't want to do the
reading and homework assignments. They don't really care about
learning. They don't understand the importance of their own
participation, and the parents either don't understand that
importance or/and can't get it across to the kids. Many parents are
not smart enough to help with the homework.
The kids are not that concerned, and the parents are clueless or
frustrated about how to motivate them. It sounds so much better to
blame the schools and government than the kids and their
parents.
I graduated from college last year, I did college later in life.
That worked in my favor because I was ready to learn. I placed sole
responsibility on myself to learn.
My experience opened my eyes to how bad the average student really
is. I was one of a few people that actually read the assignments
and turned in all of the homework. I took a vested interest in my
own education. If I didn't understand something, I used whatever
resources at my disposal, school library, city library, the
Internet, whatever. I didn't wait for knowledge to come to me, if I
didn't know something I needed to, I was proactive. I made sure I
found out.
I guess I could have done like most, not do the work, take no
responsibility for my education, then blame the teacher, school and
government.
|3.26.07 @ 4:29PM|#
MP,
You don't know any teachers "worth their salt" who are opposed
to eliminating tenure? You and I know completely different
teachers.
my post was in response to the notion of tenure-based
pay/motivation as opposed to tenure as an academic
protection.
so if you're referring to teachers opposed to tenure-based pay,
then yes, apparently we know completely different teachers.
why would someone employed as a teacher have a different allergen
to watching a do-nothing coworker getting paid more than a person
in any other profession?
Sam B,
of course not all teachers are worth their salt. the union support
for tenure-based pay and against performance-based pay doesn't
change the fact that student test scores are poor measures of
teacher performance.
Nick Gillespie|3.26.07 @ 4:33PM|#
Alan,
Who says I was making fun (hiccup)? I was merely suggesting a
reason for the general lack of attention to facts in Teddy's
op-ed.
|3.26.07 @ 4:46PM|#
No one really wants to put the blame where it really
belongs. The kids first, parents second. The kids take little or no
responsibility for their own education. They don't want to do the
reading and homework assignments. They don't really care about
learning. They don't understand the importance of their own
participation, and the parents either don't understand that
importance or/and can't get it across to the kids. Many parents are
not smart enough to help with the homework.
The problem I have with this is that I remember when I was a kid. I
didn't enjoy learning and homework, nor did I understand what an
education meant for me and my future.
I don't think it is fair to fault kids for being kids. Kids aren't
supposed to want to learn or go to school, and are supposed to want
to do fun things.
I did well enough in school, not because of some profound love of
learning but because I was afraid of the consequences of doing
poorly. (Grounding, loss of privileges/freedoms, having my mom
check up on me all the time etc) I also didn't like the idea being
thought of as not smart and feeling like I let my mom down when I
didn't live up to the potential she and others adults believed I
had.
As for reading and homework...I HATED reading. It wasn't until I
became an adult that I grew to love reading. As a youth I used to
say "why read when you can watch the movie?" It is the nature of
childhood and immaturity.
I agree that lots of parents shoulder the blame though. Many of
them can't/won't be bothered to follow up and make sure the kids
are doing well, and none of them are making sure that there are
consequences to doing poorly. It seems that a lot of parents (not
all, but more than I rememebr when I was growing up) want to be
"buddies" or "friends" with their kids rather than wanting to be
the responsible adult and teach their kids right from wrong.
|3.26.07 @ 4:46PM|#
What is a good measure of teacher performance?
well, you've asked the million dollar question! i don't pretend to
have definitive answers. however, i do generally think they should
be measures within control of the teacher. not dependent on whether
the teacher gets stuck with a class of students who don't show up,
don't do their work, are excused by their parents and then
subsequently fail despite the teacher's full and conscientious
preparation.
i'd point you here for one excellent (though not perfect) way of
measuring teacher performance without using student test
scores.
http://www.nbpts.org/
|3.26.07 @ 4:52PM|#
my post was in response to the notion of tenure-based
pay/motivation as opposed to tenure as an academic
protection.
Thank you for the clarification.
|3.26.07 @ 4:58PM|#
Kennedy didn't mind leaving Mary Jo behind.
Thanks, TWC. I feel that karmic justice requires that every
utterance by the Tedster should be met with a reference
Chappaquiddick, but I couldn't come up with one. Yours is a
masterpiece.
|3.26.07 @ 4:59PM|#
Thank you for the clarification.
hey, no problem! i often find myself not being very clear when
posting.
I'd agree if you stopped here.
yes, of course it's all moot for the ruggedly self-educated. abe
lincoln, candlelight and all that, right? ;)
|3.26.07 @ 5:17PM|#
Like, Ted Kennedy had a car accident back before I was born, and
used to drink.
Can be one of the cool kids now?
Grow up.
|3.26.07 @ 5:23PM|#
"""I don't think it is fair to fault kids for being kids. Kids
aren't supposed to want to learn or go to school, and are supposed
to want to do fun things. """"
To me, this is the heart of the problem. We want to excuse the kids
for not taking education seriously.
If we start from kids shouldn't want to learn or participate in
class, and that they should do "fun" things. It's a losing battle.
Money becomes irrelevant, and we shouldn't consider teachers as
failures because the class wasn't "fun" enough.
Don't get me wrong, I understand what your saying. I did very lousy
in jr high and high school. I didn't want to learn either. My mom
blamed the school and teachers. Only when I was dedicated to the
cause during college, and made myself responsible, did I do
well.
My commitment to education is what took me from a C,D, and F
student in high school to straight A student in college. Hell, I
dropped out of high school!! It was not the quality of teacher, and
school, nor the amount of taxpayer money the school received that
made the difference. It was this student's attitude towards
learning.
My point is we can not expect any real gains in education by
ignoring the root cause. Paying teacher more, extending school
hours, dumbing down tests, will not solve the problem.
Of course how to get an 10 year old interested in a given subject
is a tough question. I doubt any federal law will solve that.
|3.26.07 @ 5:30PM|#
...must resist temptation to make fun of Teddy K...
Seriously, the USA spends about a zillion times more on its schools
than most of those countries whose children handily outperform ours
academically. Which suggests that the problem is not one of
funding.
|3.26.07 @ 5:42PM|#
"Like, Ted Kennedy had a car accident [and left his female
friend dead at the bottom of a river] back before I was born, and
used to drink. Can be one of the cool kids now?" - joe
Sure, as soon as TK serves out a prison term for
manslaughter.
"Grow up." - joe
You first. Of course, it's no big deal when a member of Team Blue
does something wrong. It's only the Team Red guys who deserve
castigation, right joe?
Admit it, Team Blue & Team Red are in a dead heat for "numbers
of scoundrels." The only difference is that the manslaughter and
Klan-affiliated guys are on Team Blue, while the man-boy love
association text messengers and insider trading. Both have their
share of influence peddlers and voter fraud.
|3.26.07 @ 5:43PM|#
Should have read:
Admit it, Team Blue & Team Red are in a dead heat for "numbers
of scoundrels." The only difference is that the manslaughter and
Klan-affiliated guys are on Team Blue, while the man-boy love
association text messengers and insider trading are on Team Red.
Both have their share of influence peddlers and voter fraud.
|3.26.07 @ 5:45PM|#
Tom- I suspect most kids hate learning and reading because they
have been taught to associate those things with being stuck in a
desk and droned at all day.
Personally I loved reading and learning, and still do. But I never
made the mistake of assuming that school and learning were
equivalent.
|3.26.07 @ 6:11PM|#
I suspect most kids hate learning and reading because they
have been taught to associate those things with being stuck in a
desk and droned at all day.
Number 6 -- I'll agree with that.
But I think a big part of learning (and part of life) is learning
to have the discipline to do even mundane and boring things. This
hasn't changed even as I became an adult. I still have to do
drone-like things, like paperwork or status reports etc. That's
part of life.
I don't expect kids to want to do homework, I expect them to
understand that it is an obligation that must be done, even if it
is boring or mundane. Life is full of mundane/tedious things that
must be done and it takes discipline and practice to continue to do
those things that no one likes to do but nonetheless has to be
done.
I hated reading, but I did like learning certain subjects -- in Jr
High I loved math and civics classes and even econ. Where was I
gonna learn these things if not at school?? When would I learn
about history or learn proper grammar if I wasn't forced to do it
in school?
I don't think it would be appropriate to excuse a kid for not
learning subjects because they are taught in a boring way or in a
drone like environment. Life is full of times when you have to do
shit in less than ideal settings.
C. Castle|3.26.07 @ 6:27PM|#
"Where else are you paying twice as much for same product you
got in 1971?"
Healthcare maybe?
Old guy|3.26.07 @ 6:50PM|#
"Where else are you paying twice as much for same product you
got in 1971?"
Sex. And a bargian at that.
|3.26.07 @ 7:13PM|#
ChicagoTom - I always thought the reason human beings failed to
learn things (assuming they were of sound mind) was more to do with
the techniques employed. Schoolroom learning approaches are often
self-defeating, in my experience. And droning at someone is the
least effective way to teach.
I'd think it would be more useful to train people in critical
thinking skills and creative problem-solving in as entertaining a
manner as possible.
Unless, of course, your real goal is to sufficiently
institutionalize someone to the point that they can stand/sit still
all day long, like a prisoner or a soldier standing watch. Heck,
even now, when I'm at work, I can go to lunch, grab a drink or a
snack, or take a bathroom break when I need to, without permission.
When was the last time you were in a grade school that allowed
that?
The Wine Commonsewer|3.26.07 @ 7:32PM|#
RC, you're welcome. I agree with your assessment of karmic
justice.
GWB's sole redeeming quality is to refer to Kennedy as
Chappy. Source? Why, the Man In Black, of course.
Paul|3.26.07 @ 7:45PM|#
But please feel free to tell us all more about what
"liberals" like and dislike
Props to you, then. I'm glad to have met a liberal who disagrees
with Ted Kennedy (and other Democrats) on this. I can only hope
there are more of you. Alas, I'm afraid that liberals are learning
to like NCLB. Which is why they ask for "changes" to the law, not
repeal. To wit:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/EDUCATION/03/15/congress.no.child.ap/index.html?eref=rss_education
The Wine Commonsewer|3.26.07 @ 7:47PM|#
Joe, if Kennedy had JUST had a car accident and had actually
given up drinking he might be forgivable. It's not about growing
up, it's about a man who killed someone, either on purpose or by
accident, who because of his connections, stature, money, what have
you, faced absolutely no consequences.
Killing someone while drunk driving is typically about a four year
stint in prison, which leaves you with a felony conviction and, if
I'm not mistaken, that means Teddy wouldn't be eligible to sit in
the US Senate.
Meantime, Teddy has about as much moral high ground to lecture
America on virtue as Jimmy Lee Swaggart. I'm thinking that if I was
kicking Swaggart around that nobody would think to tell me to
grow up, that was before they were born. And all he did
was a hooker.
z|3.26.07 @ 8:06PM|#
School is in session 9.5 months a year. During that time there are 4 whole weeks of break, 2 weeks of holidays, and an assorted week of snowdays. But since 7 weeks off in 9.5 months isn't enough, teachers get 2 more weeks of vacation time, plus enough sick leave to take another day every other week. I'm sorry, this is not a full time job.
|3.26.07 @ 8:33PM|#
The average pay for all teachers is $47,750, or is that just
starting teachers? That's about what allegedly underpaid teachers
in the Chicago Public Schools are making to start.
I checked up all of my teachers from high school (who haven't been
given cushy retirement buyouts) and the vast majority are making
six figures. Peanuts compared to what a CEO at a large,
multinational corporation makes after 15 years in the job.
Sam B|3.26.07 @ 8:55PM|#
downstater,
I think we misunderstand each other, I don't mean firing teachers
based on student test scores, that of course falls short. I meant
more along the lines of a teacher whom a principle knows to be
terrible but can't fire because of the insanely arduous process
(brought about through teacher's unions) involved in doing so).
It's anecdotal but there have been cases where teachers who were
accused of sexual abuse remained in classrooms because union rules
forbade their being removed.
"Of course how to get an 10 year old interested in a given subject
is a tough question. I doubt any federal law will solve
that."
I think a LACK of federal laws would show us a solution very
quickly.
Sam B|3.26.07 @ 8:57PM|#
"Peanuts compared to what a CEO at a large, multinational
corporation makes after 15 years in the job."
Well if the CEO of a multinational corporation is your standard I
think you'll find quite a few paupers in this world.
|3.26.07 @ 11:08PM|#
"Most of us in Congress know that a retreat to mediocrity is
wrong."
Well hell, most of Congress has yet to advance to mediocrity, let
alone retreat to it.
|3.26.07 @ 11:29PM|#
Using the average in this sense is something of an abuse of
statistics. The distribution is more important than the strict
average.
For example, what percentage of teachers are making what after 10
years in the field vs. others with equivalent levels of education?
What are their starting salaries compared to the rest of
society?
There are two reasons for looking at it this way:
1) The average doesn't account for long-term trends in an
individual's salary. Example: If I pay everyone, regardless of how
many years they work for me, $50k/year indexing against inflation.
The average is higher than what teachers are making, but I will
quickly lose qualified people because they will be sucked away by
other industries.
2) Related to point #1: The economy outside of teaching has
changed. The question is what could they have made in the 1970s if
they did not go into teaching vs. what they can make today without
going into teaching.
I've made the point before. A level one software engineer has a
median salary, according to salary.com, of over $50k/year. If
someone has the skills and background to do this what is the
financial incentive to go into teaching? In ten years, that gap
looks even larger.
Now, for a programming class or a math class, would you want
someone who wasn't qualified for this position?
This is ignoring the factors such as how much teachers need to do
today in terms of paperwork, stresses of the job, relative
education levels, or other such related issues.
|3.27.07 @ 7:16AM|#
1. If the kids don't want to learn, there's very little that a
teacher can do. Sometimes I think we should bring back something
tedious and laborious as an alternative--if you don't want to go to
school and do well, it's back out to the farm with you and 12 hours
a day of lifting bales of hay.
2. The teaching profession used to be able to get away with low
salaries because it was one of the few careers available for women.
As soon as the doors opened up, the teaching profession would have
had to increase salaries dramatically if it had wanted to remain
competitive. It didn't.
3. The silliness of "educational" credentials. Strange how I, as a
grad student acting as TA, was considered perfectly fine to teach a
bunch of undergrads, but someone teaching math in high school has
to get a whole bunch of extra credentials in order to be
"qualified."
4. Anti-intellectualism in the US. 'Nuff said.
|3.27.07 @ 9:34AM|#
yes, of course it's all moot for the ruggedly
self-educated.
Believe me, I have no fantasies of being "ruggedly self-educated"
... more "poorly self-educated in bits and pieces"
I would like to be able to sit back, Garrison Keillor-style, and
talk about the great simple things that public education has given
me.
But it would be a lie.
It doesn't matter if you're teaching to a test or to a curriculum
or to a cereal box when you have teachers who think that Cleopatra
was an African-American.
I didn't care whether I get art or music or social studies when I
lived in fear of being interrogated and jailed for saying the wrong
thing.
When my history teacher said "I don't know why kids have to learn
this stuff" and my English teachers looked at the literary books I
was reading and said "Why would you read THAT?" I really don't
think we're looking at some sort of profound inspiration that's
going to be stifled by regulations.
Ted Kennedy|3.28.07 @ 2:45PM|#
Most of us in Congress know that a retreat to mediocrity is
wrong.
But the voters keep re-electing us anyway.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245