More children left behind

When President Bush signed into law his “No Child Left Behind” legislation Jan. 8, 2002, the White House and the Department of Education assured the American people it would cure what ails our public education system. Trouble is, what “ails” our system can’t be fixed with this legislation.

Bush and Education Secretary Rod Paige say the legislation focuses on four basic principles: stronger accountability for results, increased flexibility and local control, expanded options for parents, and an emphasis on teaching methods that have been proven to work.

Lofty goals these, but remember we’re talking about reforming one of the most begrudgingly entrenched, politically motivated institutions in America. Only reforming and simplifying the nation’s Byzantine tax code would be harder.

With that in mind, do you remember the old “Sesame Street” teaching song, “One of these things doesn’t belong?” Let’s play that game again, using the Education Department’s own stated goals:

Accountability: According to federal education czars, the “No Child Left Behind” legislation allows states to create their own education standards. They are supposedly free to develop their own criteria for the major subjects – mathematics, reading, science, et al. Then, students must be tested to see whether or not they are achieving these goals. “Schools will be responsible for improving the academic performance of all students, and there will be real consequences for districts and schools that fail to make progress,” says the government – whatever that means.

Flexibility: Under the new law, schools and states have greater say in how they use federal education dollars. “That means local people will have more say about which programs they think will help their students the most,” the government says. The law also “combines and simplifies programs, so that schools don’t have to cut through as much red tape to get and use federal funding.” Sounds good; avoiding duplication and waste is good for taxpayers.

Proven Education Methods: The law funnels “education dollars to research-based programs that have been proven to help most children learn,” says the government. “Schools and teachers will get a boost from the more than $4 billion in 2002 that allows schools to promote teacher quality through training and recruitment.”

Parental Choice: The law allows parents to transfer their kids out of chronically poor-performing public schools into better ones or better charter schools. “For the first time, parents with children in a school identified as in need of improvement will be able to use federal education funds for what are called ‘supplemental education services.’ Those services include tutoring, after school services, and summer school programs,” says the government.

So, which one of these things doesn’t belong? Each of these goals seems worthy. Each seems necessary. Each brings with it the possibility of greatly improving our education system.

So what’s out of place? Perhaps it is our expectations.

Years of left-wing anti-academic influence by the nation’s teachers’ unions have left more than a generation of kids unprepared for adulthood. Thousands of kids a year graduate without being able to reliably spell “graduate,” let alone understand much of what is being said by speakers praising them for their “accomplishment.”

This is not the kids’ fault. This is the fault of American voters who continually put the same political charlatans in power, and it is the fault of those politicians who have bent over for years for education union cash (Democrats, are you listening?) – the same unions that have opposed any changes to the demonstrably unsuccessful public education system (and still do).

Yet the kids are the ones who suffer for being poorly taught. Under this new law, kids who can’t pass tests can’t graduate high school until they do. It’s the ultimate in cruelty – give them a poor education, then give them a test based on the education they should have received. How can the same system allow you to be sub-standard for 12 years then expect you to perform above that standard when your education is finished?

It can’t. But that’s the reality of our current system.

Lawmakers years ago justified federally managing education because they said it was in the country’s best interests to ensure its citizens were well-taught. Just the opposite has happened – the more federal interference, the worse our kids have performed.

When it comes to education, we left our children behind a long time ago.