On the first day of February 1966, President Lyndon B. Johnson had a phone conversation with Senator Eugene McCarthy in which he hoped to tone down McCarthy’s criticism of America’s escalating military involvement in Vietnam. Johnson, clearly frustrated by the deepening political quicksand of Southeast Asia, said with exasperation, “I know we oughtn’t to be there, but I can’t get out. I just can’t be the architect of surrender.”
At the time of Johnson’s confession, more than 90 percent of the 58,178 American troops who would ultimately die in Vietnam were still alive. Many would be killed in the ensuing three years. Most were younger than twenty. It took another nine years and two presidents before the United States extracted itself from Vietnam. By the time the last American grunts left Saigon at the end of April 1975, Johnson was two years dead.
We continue down ragged and wrong paths, whether they’re in flawed international relations or in public-education policy, because we are, for better or worse, creatures of habit and creatures of fear. We don’t want to rock the boat if there’s a chance the turbulence might send us overboard. We do things in our classroom or our school or our district because that’s the way they’ve been done before. We know they’re not perfect — some are even ludicrous or dead wrong — but we feel we can’t get out.
It is time, however, to think in terms of radical restructuring. In the next few months, as we plunge into the final weeks of the presidential contest, you’re going to hear a lot about education on a national-policy level. Specifically, a lot of talk will focus on the controversial No Child Left Behind (NCLB), which President George W. Bush signed into law six years ago. NCLB is the current version of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), the fundamental federal law governing K-12 education. It’s up for further review and reauthorization this year.
The law has a noble intent — to raise student learning, close achievement gaps, and ensure that every child is taught by a highly qualified teacher. But, simply put, the law is not working. At last count there are more than 130 bills in Congress designed to revise NCLB.
About 70 percent of the National Education Association’s 3.2 million members disapproved of NCLB, according to a poll; 57 percent wanted major reforms. In addition, more than a hundred disparate national civil rights, disability-advocacy, education, and religious groups have called for major changes to NCLB. Among the suggestions: Replace overemphasis on standardized tests with the use of multiple achievement measures, supplant what they feel are arbitrary proficiency targets with achievement goals based on rates of success actually achieved by the most effective public schools, better training for teachers and administrators, and increased funding to cover the costs to carry out NCLB’s goals.
But let us use this season to debate not only the mechanics of NCLB but also the great expansive questions of education. And I suggest we open up the questions of our educational environment even further. What if grades were organized by students’ learning style (visual, verbal, kinetic, and so on) instead of by age? What if schools had staggered start times — 8 o’clock for some, 10 o’clock for others? What can be done about the emotional dark passage of middle school? Should middle school even exist?
We can’t afford the aftermath of myopia. In the late 1930s, as Britain refused to understand and prepare for the war clouds gathering over Europe, Winston Churchill observed, “The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close. In its place we are entering a period of consequences.” Our education system is entering such an era — a time of rapid change and momentous choices. Many of the decisions are hard, and some may cause fear. We know there are better ways of doing things. But we continue to do things the same old way with the same style in the same place — even when we know we oughtn’t to be there.
By Kerry at 10:08 PM ON 09/03/08
I have posted a very funny perspective on NCLB. Please have a look, I think you will enjoy. I actually wrote this in 2004, but am just now getting into the blog thing.
http://www.nogripes.com/ng/?p=96
By Kat at 1:48 PM ON 09/04/08
Very Dr. Seuss (Kerry, not article). I admit I don't know much on the specifics of the NCLB outside of the basics on the news. However, I do know it freaked out my school and forced them to pay more attention to the WASAL (my states testing). And that out of the 400 students in my year only three of us passed it (all the required section) the first time and two of us were recently from out of state. I know that the school made it a requirement to graduate (which was ok, cause most of them got it the second time).
I don not know if the NCLB works or doesn't, I hear a lot from both sides, but I do know that it isn't enough.
By ALS at 9:29 PM ON 09/04/08
If you look in the New York Times Archives, you will find the answers to these statements that exactly have everything to do with Lyndon B. Johnson & friends, and their efforts:
October 8th, 1960:
"The same kind of wooly thinking led to the disaster in Korea. These two islands are in an area of Freedom, and to give them up would only encourage the communists".
January 4th, 1960:
"This calculated action on the part of the castro government is only the latest of a long series of harrassments, baseless accusations and vilification".
June 1st, 1961:
"American forces will remain in Europe as long as they are required, ready to meet any threat with whatever response is needed".
Does any of this resemble any part of right now in American politics. Because if it does, you know that you nned to pay attention to these dates and the date in this column concerning Lyndon B. Johnson and his quote of, "He hoped to tone down McCarthy’s criticism of America’s escalating military involvement in Vietnam", and then the reality that, "By the time the last American grunts left Saigon at the end of April 1975, Johnson was two years dead".
...at 10 billion dollars a month, I think you know where I'm going with this conversation!
By Jared at 8:15 AM ON 09/06/08
I agree, and if anyone is interested, my on-line column is located at:
http://www.triadblogs.com/curmilus under "The 57th Delegate by Jared Masters".
Ousty...
By Archie at 12:03 PM ON 09/06/08
Problem > Time to Solve Problem = Partial Solution
Problem < Time to Test Solution = Better Solution
If NCLB could've been tested prior to implementation chances are it wouldn't have been implemented.
No child without an apprentice would've been a better course to follow.
By TM at 11:41 PM ON 09/06/08
As a recently retired high school teacher, I have some experience with NCLB, which is seriously flawed because student progress is measured using a standardized test. For most schools, this encourages/necessitates teaching to the test, which is producing a generation of students who can answer multiple-choice questions but do not think critically. The fix won't be easy, as a public school education is just a part of our larger CableTV/Videogame/lack-of-jobs society. If you don't think we have a problem, see how many recent high school graduates can cook a healthy meal.
By Tony Roy at 11:27 PM ON 09/12/08
NCLB is not a even a realistic goal. This is a fine example of non-educators “getting involved” for the sake of saying “look me…… I care about children and their future”. By the way, this was a very well written post. ( http://www.nogripes.com/ng/?p=96 ) funny, but somewhat accurate also.
By misunderstoodasshole at 1:02 AM ON 09/26/08
545 PEOPLE
By Charlie Reese
Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.
Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, why do we have deficits?
Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, why do we have inflation and high taxes?
You and I don't propose a federal budget. The president does.
You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations.
The House of Representatives does.
You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.
You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.
You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.
One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president, and nine Supreme Court justices 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.
I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.
I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a president to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.
Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.
What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits. The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.
The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House? She is the leader of the majority party. She and fellow House members, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.
It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million can not replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.
If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.
If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red.
If the Marines are in IRAQ , it's because they want them in IRAQ .
If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way.
There are no insoluble government problems.
Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power. Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like 'the economy,' 'inflation,' or 'politics' that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.
Those 545 people and they alone, are responsible.
They and they alone, have the power.
They and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees.
We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!
By Vanna at 5:02 AM ON 11/07/08
Well said.
By Desana at 2:29 PM ON 11/09/08
Well written article.