« Miami Herald has Villalobos's back | Main | Detroit Teaches Another Lesson in Special Interest Politics (Dan Lips) »
September 01, 2006
NCLB needs no changes?
With No Child Left Behind reauthorization hearings on the way, USDOE secretary Margaret Spellings said this about the law:
"I like to talk about No Child Left Behind as Ivory soap. It's 99.9 percent pure," Spellings told reporters over coffee. "There's not much needed in the way of changes. . . . As much grist as there was for the mill five years ago on various fronts . . . we've come a long way in a short time in a big system affecting 50 million kids."
I certainly understand that Spellings, being the chief architect of the law, is pretty much compelled to cheerlead for it. And we're unabashed fans of the transfer provisions of the law, even as we're waiting on some, er, true enforcement thereof.
But I don't think even the staunchest NCLB advocate can say the law is fine as it is; even Jeb Bush has advocated reforms to the law (I linked to that article earlier, and Eduwonk was rather critical of the suggestions). Put bluntly: not only does nobody else believe NCLB needs no changes, I doubt Spellings herself believes it. She knows changes are in the offing, and this is merely posturing to prevent a major overhaul. And while there are some who might give nearly anything to see NCLB scrapped entirely, I don't think anybody really believes that is likely to happen, even if Republicans do lose a majority in the House and/or Senate in November. (A lot of people seem to forget that it passed with substantial bipartisan support.)
Obviously, a single blog post is hardly fit for discussing NCLB reforms, but maybe two quick points could serve as a springboard. First, it's important to point out, as NYC chancellor Joel Klein did back in May, that NCLB has forced schools to take responsibility for the racial achievement gap, formerly the elephant in the living room. That's a very good thing, and any NCLB reform should at least preserve that aspect of the law, if not enhance it.
Is there anything missing from NCLB? I'd add some form of merit pay.
Overall, I say the question is where NCLB goes from here, not whether it goes out the window. So in advance of reauthorization hearings, let's play policy wonk. If you have suggestions for NCLB changes, drop 'em in the comment thread.
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.edspresso.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-t.cgi/642
