Sec of Ed: Beyond my mistake, my real frustration (union heads oppose all educational reform)

Houston Chronicle ^ | February 29, 2004 | Rod Paige, U.S. Secretary of Education

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Education should be about children, not partisan politics. Yet, sadly, there has been a lot of political posturing on this issue lately. It may be inevitable during an election year.

I admit that last week I, too, ratcheted up the debate with a very poor word choice to describe the leadership of the nation's largest teachers union. I chose my words carelessly, and I am truly sorry for the hurt and confusion they caused.

I especially want to be clear on one point. As ill-considered as my words were, my disappointment was directed only -- and I mean only -- at the union heads in Washington who have been opposing any and all educational reforms, no matter what the consequences to our children. I have the utmost respect for our nation's teachers: They work hard and have dedicated their lives to children.

My comment was born out of frustration at the depth of the problem in our schools. Let's look at the facts: The Nation's Report Card (the National Assessment of Educational Progress, or NAEP) shows that only one in six African-Americans and one in five Hispanics are proficient in reading by the time they are seniors. NAEP math scores are even worse: Only 3 percent of blacks and 4 percent of Hispanics are testing at the "proficient" level. No wonder a recent study claimed a high school diploma has become nothing more than a "certificate of attendance."

Is our system as a whole preparing the next generation of workers for the global economy? As Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan noted recently, "We need to be forward-looking in order to adapt our educational system to the evolving needs of the economy and the realities of our changing society ... It is an effort that should not be postponed." That's why I am so passionate about making these historic reforms and drawing attention to the issue.

The old system -- the status quo -- is one we must fight to change. President Bush and Congress understood the urgency of the situation and set in motion a process to fix the problem: the No Child Left Behind Act. The law requires schools to give all students a quality education, provides accountability and choice for parents and insists that teachers be highly qualified to teach -- in other words, that they be knowledgeable in the subjects they are teaching -- which is just plain common sense.

Why the focus on teaching? Because research tells us that teachers are the single most important factor in student achievement.

Some have claimed that No Child Left Behind is intrusive and a violation of states' rights. Of course elementary and secondary education is the traditional province of state and local governments. The specific standards, tests and most of the other major tenets of the law are designed and implemented by the states.

But there is a compelling national interest in education, which is why the federal government is involved and has been for some time. The federal government has stepped in to correct overt unfairness or inequality, starting with measures to enforce civil rights and dismantle segregation in the wake of the Brown v. Board of Education decision a half-century ago.

The federal government's first major legislative involvement in education dates to 1965 and the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which marked the first federal aid given to school districts with large percentages of children living in poverty. The law has been renewed many times since, with the last incarnation before the No Child Left Behind Act coming in 1994. It was called the Improving America's Schools Act. Like No Child Left Behind, it required standards, assessment and the identifying of schools for improvement.

There are two main differences between that 1994 legislation and No Child Left Behind. First, the 1994 act was a tepid attempt at accountability, whereas the more recent legislation builds on that first step and sets concrete expectations. Second, this administration is serious about enforcing the law. When President Bush took office, only 11 states were in compliance with the 1994 law. Three-quarters of them were ignoring the law and simply taking the largess.

The days of free money are over. The No Child Left Behind Act says that if you take federal education dollars, we will ask you to be accountable in terms of raising student achievement -- for all students, not just some.

But this law is not a one-size-fits-all federal approach. The administration has worked hard to create a climate of cooperation and trust with states, and we have listened. New flexibility is being provided. For example, the progress of special education students and English-language learners can now be measured more accurately.

It's time to make the law successful. We need to create a public educational system that matches the vision of this law, where we strive for excellence without exclusion, where our children achieve greatness rather than greatly underachieving, and where 10 or 20 years from now a new generation of adults realizes that we gave them a better life because we had courage and conviction.

Paige is U.S. secretary of education.

[Vigilanteman]

Rod Paige is a good man who truly cares about kids. My sister (two school age children) moved from the Houston suburbs into the city because he had done such a good job of turning Houston's failing public schools around. Unfortunately, she is now regretting her decision because with Paige gone to Washington and the RATS back in charge of city government, the schools there are regressing again.

[Doohickey]

Gee, it looks like liberals have finally discovered State's rights. First on homosexual marriage and now on this. And by golly, I think they're right. Defund every single money pit that is not a specific power delegated to the federal bureaucracy by the United States Constitution.

Could it be that liberal social engineers have finally given up on flyover country and the south?

[Stretch]

Maybe the "root cause" is that the faculty and students are still struggling with what the "meaning of 'is' "is".

[DaGman]

If Congress and the President are going to pass an education bill like No Child Left Behind then fund the thing completely. My school property taxes are absolutely obscene and will go even higher because the school district has to fund these unplanned in the local tax base programs. My tax cut has been more than offset by local taxes being raised to offset the lack of federal dollars to local government. At least I can deduct the local property taxes on my federal tax return, then the vicious cycle begins again.

What are my choices? Refuse to pay my property taxes then barricade my house and hole up when they come to sieze it? We all know what happens then.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

They keep changing the "is" in is. No one would recognize it, even if it was sitting on their nose.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Gee, it looks like liberals have finally discovered State's rights.

Any port in the storm for these liars. They recognize nothing but their own entitlement to lie to achieve power.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

All politics are local. If the shit hits the fan down the street from you, you're more likely to act and succeed in replacing the culprits.

[Stretch]

Maybe the "root cause" is that the faculty and students are still struggling with what the "meaning of 'is' "is".

[lonerepubinma]

Your choice is to start demanding accountabilty from your schools on the local level. When the NEA sees that the average taxpayer is fed up it will be forced to make positive changes.
I am sick and tired about teachers complaining about not receiving a raise for the past few years, neither have I.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Bump!

[Principled]

"Highly qualified" would likely mean something quite different to you than what NCLB says.

Don't the local pricipal and parents know better than DC who is "higly qualified"??? All DC can do is issue edicts based on generalities. A local principal can interview, observe, check references, etc. What in the hell makes anyone in DC think they can decide better than a local person just who is "highly qualified"?

It's ALL politics. 100%.

It is nonsensical and impractical to make personal judgements from DC on millions of individuals across our nation.

Who really thinks that FED control could somehow be better???

[NewRomeTacitus]

From “Public Schools: Issues & Reality; Education & Politics” found at
http://pages.prodigy.net/krtq73aa/educate.htm

“Because of the inherent limitations on central planning, it must be obvious that the most effective education--hence the least wasteful education--is that closest to home; that which may be most easily molded to the specific needs and interests of the individual child. This does not mean that we should scrap comparative testing of school achievement. On the contrary, establishing minimum standards for what constitutes a certain level of education is absolutely necessary, if that particular level is to have any significance. But on the question of how a child gets to that level--or how best to try to bring a child to that level--all human experience suggests that the less centralized planning and direction, the better. We need to free local education from the theorists' procedural check lists. Ultimately, we must return to the reality, that child rearing is primarily the responsibility of a child's parents. This is not only the most practical course. It is the basis of traditional social morality; a major part of the dynamic, ongoing ethic, which gives continuity to the heritage of any people.”

The “Return of the Gods” website is rapidly becoming the ruler of common sense I measure political agendas against. I can’t recommend it enough.

http://pages.prodigy.net/krtq73aa/home.htm

[Swing_Thought]

Don't the local pricipal and parents know better than DC who is "higly qualified"???

Don't get me wrong, I'm no fan of USDOE, or of NCLB - which may end up doing more harm than good.

But, in my school district, more than 25% of the teachers are not highly qualified. (i.e. they are not certfified to teach what they are teaching!) This is nearly downright criminal, IMO, and no one knew about it prior to NCLB.

So no, evidently the local school officials DON'T know better than the feds who is highly qualified. Not in my district, anyway.

[Principled]

But, in my school district, more than 25% of the teachers are not highly qualified. (i.e. they are not certfified to teach what they are teaching!)

No. What happened is that the feds changed their definition of what it means to be certified.

So it isn't the case that "not highly qualified" teachers have been teaching all along. They just changed to definition to make it seem like they're trying to up standards.
They're not.

[Swing_Thought]

In VA, highly qualified simply means that the teacher is certified to teach the subject. Neither classroom experience, advanced degrees, or any other measure of a teacher's expertise is part of the equation.

Nobody changed the definition or made it more stringent. In fact, just the opposite is the case. The usage of the term highly qualified leads the layman to think it means more than it does.

[Tribune7]

Bush really did do a good job of picking his cabinet.

Kudos for Rod.

[SoftballMominVA]

I'd love to know what county you are talking about. Can you supply any support for your statement? Would you be willing to freepmail me the name of the county? I will call there and will report back.

I've been teaching in VA for a while and have never, ever heard of a substitution, EXCEPT, this one. If a student fails the SOL and PASSES the AP exam, the AP exam can substitute for the SOL. But if you fail the SOL, you ain't passing the AP.

And as far as massive amounts of kids failing? Not going to happen in most counties. Just look at the most recent SOL scores from last year. If your county had a good pass rate in 11th grade, those kids who failed get to retake the test and many, many will pass it. Now if you are talking about inner city Richmond? Well, I'll grant you those kids are in a world of hurt. If you start kindergarten 5 years behind, it's hard to ever catch up.

[Swing_Thought]

Certifications can be used in place of four of the six verified credits required for graduation - for this year and the next two "transition" years. (We'll see if this is discontinued after the transition years.)

This isn't a local thing, it's VADOE defined.

The vocational certification substitutes are defined in this document (towards the back) from the VADOE website. There are some rigorous certifications, to be sure (i.e. A+...), but "cosmetology", "nail technicion"? As substitutes for Algebra, or Biology? Oh yea, that's holding these graduates to high standards.

[Principled]

Nobody changed the definition

Yeah they did... In Georgia it used be OK to have a BS in Biology teach physical science for example. It is obvious to anyone in the field of Biology that pysical science (a 9th grade requirement in our system) is fundamental to Biology. A BS in Bio probably had to take several college course and pass more than one "certification" test indicating subject competency.

Now, it has changed so that individuals with a degree in biology who teach physical science have suddenly, overnight, become "not higly qualified". This is the case even for a teacher with 27 yrs experience with Exxon. Similar is true of a mth teacher with 12 yrs experience in banking.

Do you think a principal would've hired these folks had they not a)had the requisite certifications and b)shown competence ?

Yes, they did change certification definitions.

Beyond that, we still have the problem of having DC making decisions in North Hall County, Georgia that folks from Hall County should be making. We know more about our canidates than some politician. We don't hire idiots here. Our community is vehemently opposed to the federal control. It's been nothing but bad for students... and it's not teachers' fault....it's DC's fault.