The U.S. Department of Education is not supposed to control U.S. education.
It was created to serve schools, protect the rights of the neediest children, and coordinate funding programs, not to tell schools what to do.
One prong of the corporate reform movement seeks to strip local school boards of their responsibility, because they don’t like privatization.
The National School Boards Association listened to Secretary Duncan and a leading Republican member of Congress yesterday, then released this statement:
NSBA contact: Linda Embrey, Communications Office
703-838-6737; lembrey@nsba.org
School Board Leaders Advocate for Less Intrusive Role of the U.S. Department of Education
Alexandria, Va. (Jan. 29, 2013) – More than 700 school board members and state school boards association leaders will be meeting with their members of Congress and urging them to co-sponsor legislation, developed by the National School Boards Association (NSBA), to protect local school district governance from unnecessary and counter-productive federal intrusion from the U.S. Department of Education.
School board leaders are in Washington D.C. to take part in NSBA’s 40th annual Federal Relations Network Conference, being held Jan. 27-29, 2013.
The proposed legislation would ensure that the Department of Education’s actions are consistent with the specific intent of federal law and are educationally, operationally, and financially supportable at the local level. This would also establish several procedural steps that the Department of Education would need to take prior to initiating regulations, rules, grant requirements, guidance documents, and other regulatory materials.
“In recent years, the U.S. Department of Education has engaged in a variety of activities to reshape the educational delivery system,” said Thomas J. Gentzel, NSBA’s Executive Director. “All too often these activities have impacted local school district policy and programs in ways that have been beyond the specific legislative intent. School board leaders are simply asking that local flexibility and decision-making not be eroded through regulatory actions.”
Additionally, this legislation is intended to provide the House of Representatives and Senate committees that oversee education with better information regarding the local impact of Department of Education’s activities. The legislation is also designed to more broadly underscore the role of Congress as the federal policy-maker in education and through its representative function.
“We must ensure that the decisions made at the federal level will best support the needs and goals of local school systems and the communities they serve,” said Gentzel. “Local school boards must have the ability to make on-the-ground decisions that serve the best interests of our school districts.”
###
“One prong of the corporate reform movement seeks to strip local school boards of their responsibility, because they don’t like privatization.”
Was that a brain-o, or am I misunderstanding you? I think all prongs of the corporate reform movement love privatization.
Blaming this intrusiveness on “corporations” idealogical nonsense. It has been going on since the DOE was created. Focus on getting the government(s) out of local education. Let them provide studies and knowledge but no regulations. The messages from the 700 co-signers should be circulated and advertised. I believe a 90+% participation of all school boards in America is achievable. The 700 number would grow to 70,000 in no time.
They-meaning local school boards don’t like privatization is the way I read it.
Ah, got it. I was referring “they” back to corporations. Makes a lot more sense your way. Thanks!
does the proposed legislation have a name? (want to write to my representatives and urge support)
Contact NSBA and ask them for name of proposed legislation. Contact info is on the press release.
After 30+ years of DEFORMS starting with Reagan, we now have a HUGE divide between the HAVES and the HAVE NOTS. With each POTUS since Reagan, educational policies have become more and more repressive. This is a control for the minds and souls of our young PLUS MAKING tons of $$$$$ for the few, too. Fear and punishment have been used to whip teachers into place to raise test scores by using materials purchased from those who only care to make $$$$$ off the back of our students and teachers. At the same, those same money grubbers and control freaks who know little, slam teachers for their own profits. It’s totally sick.
Like in that old commercial about pollution, something similar could be said to Arne Duncan and friends, people start bad policy, people can stop it.
So I’m curious. Is what ED doing know an example of over-reach and mission creep. If so, why hasn’t anyone called ED or Arne out for what I would consider the illegal NCLB/RttT waivers. CAn any Secretary just waive (NCLB and FERPA), nullify or legislate? What if other Secretary’s did the same. Just wondering….
This is a corporate-backed, big-money-driven “reform” movement. One of their ploys at all levels is to push through that which is legally challengeable and do what they like, with the knowledge that tying up the courts both buys time for them and erodes the resources of those fighting back. This tactic comes straight from the ALEC playbook.
Maybe someone else has other information. In my own experience and knowledge, I know of no other secretary of education in the 32 years of the department’s existence who decided to waive or nullify the law because he didn’t like it or it wasn’t working. NCLB is a rotten failed law. It should be repealed, not waived.
The Obama Administration tried very hard to work with Congress on reforms of NCLB. As in many other areas like immigration reform, the Dream Act, increased taxation on the most wealthy people, etc. etc. Congress refused to go along. So the President and Secretary have skillfully found ways to go around Congress.
“Skillfully found ways to go around Congress” – That, my friend, ought to be
grounds for impeachment. However, we are stuck with a spineless @SpeakerBoehner and a Senate, run by Reid, that will just accept anything Obama does and question nothing (the Senate is >50% Dem’s who support Obama without question).
SUMMARY:
America is screwed, big time.
@Joe Nathan I believe Professor Ravitch said repealed, not reformed. In fact, I’m certain she did, and I can’t agree more.
Further, the utterly unqualified Secretary of ED has skillfully found ways to inflict the most pernicious and reactionary portions of NCLB on states seeking relief from that abject piece of anti-public education legislation. No sense to try and paint this as partisan, in the end Duncan is further to the right than the AEI.
Duncan is skillful when it comes to trickery, sleaziness and deceit. He snuck in the FERPA changes which most are not even aware of to this date.
We pay our federal taxes and then we have to compete to get our money back.
With Duncan in charge we don’t need a USDOE; it is really run by Gates anyway…he is Bill’s water boy.
The fact that you combine Arne and the word “skillful” tells me all I need to know about you.
I can’t resist. It is not your money.
Then they don’t need my taxes.
I always tell my studients to proofread and check their work. I should have done the same. This is how it should have appeared.
So I’m curious. Is what ED doing know an example of over-reach and mission creep? If so, why hasn’t anyone called ED or Arne out for what I would consider the illegal NCLB/RttT waivers? Can any Secretary just waive (NCLB and FERPA), nullify or legislate? What if other Secretary’s did the same? Just wondering….
I tell my studients to always proofread and check their work. I should have done the same. This is how it should have appeared.
So I’m curious. Is what ED doing know an example of over-reach and mission creep? If so, why hasn’t anyone called ED or Arne out for what I would consider the illegal NCLB/RttT waivers? Can any Secretary just waive (NCLB and FERPA), nullify or legislate? What if other Secretary’s did the same? Just wondering….
I should just return home. ms: students
It would be wonderful to have no federal interference… but State governments and local school boards have no one but themselves to blame. If states and local boards provided all children with an equal opportunity, Brown v. Board of Education would never have been heard… If States provided sufficient funds for districts serving children born into poverty, the federal government never would have needed to introduce Title 1… If states and local boards provided a free and appropriate education to children with handicaps we never would have passed 94-142… and given the prevailing attitudes in some states, if the federal money and mandates went away we’d be back where we started from in the “good old days” when blacks attended “separate but equal” schools, kids born into districts with no tax base attended ramshackle schools with unqualified teachers, and handicapped kids were warehoused in Dickensian facilities… I am opposed to the testing regimen imposed by RttT and NCLB, but districts who paid no attention to their drop out rates and student performance brought this on for all of us. In my judgment, we need to work with the hand we’ve been dealt and provide those in power with a better way to measure school performance.
You are right to a point. The powers in DC decided when they created NCLB that schools should meet impossible goals. Now schools are being closed and people are being fired for not meeting impossible goals. Show me a state with 100% proficiency and I’ll look for cheating and fraud. Also, it would help if DC stopped exaggerating the dropout rate, which is now at its lowest point in history.
We’re puzzled, Diane. You say wgersen is “right to a point.” At which point is wgersen not right? Too often the story in American school districts is one of inept local administrators hired and backed by equally inept school boards teaming up to Not do their jobs. This is a tough, tough issue. The federal government gets into the act and comes up with NCLB, which we agree is a horrible piece of legislation. But this all traces back to what we believe is the most vexing problem in our education system: incompentent (or lazy, or corrupt) administrators who are hired and supported by local school boards who also can’t or won’t provide the oversight and accountability they are supposed to be providing.
Find a perfect system and let me know where it is.
This seems about right to me.
Without federal “interference, we would not have Title 9, we would not have civil rights, we would not have opportunities in many places for These are great points that Wgerson is making. I strongly want to see broader ways to assess student achievement beyond standardized multiple choice tests).
The late US Paul Wellstone from Minnesota strongly challenged NCLB provisions. President Bush and his advisors ridiculed Wellstone. The late Senator Kennedy would not listen to Senator Wellstone. But Wellstone was right. The idea of 100% proficiency is absurd.
However, do those attacking Duncan want a return to local control that produced deeply inferior schools for low income kids, far fewer & lower quality facilities for young women, little attention to students with special needs, etc? Should everything but up to a local community?
I want a return to federalism, where states, localities, and the federal government each has its role. I don’t want Arne Duncan to impose the failed Chicago model on the nation. He is not our national superintendent of schools.
Diane, we agree that states, localities and the federal government each have a role. So let’s specific:
Do you want the federal government to eliminate targeted funding of low income schools? Do you want the federal government to back off of its insistence that young women should have equal access to athletic facilities? Do you want local communities to have the power to impose literacy tests on prospective voters?
Joe,
Why do your experiences become facts for all of us nationwide?
When did local control produce little attention to students with special needs?
You make statements and apply them to all schools in all towns/cities in all 50 states.
We now have less services for sped than we had 20, 10 years ago. Students with disabilities are now floundering in the mainstream with ALL services dumped on reg. Ed. Teachers. There are less direct sped. Services than ever before, specialized instruction designed to specifically remediate the disability is vanishing.
You have the right to your opinions, but they are just that…opinions.
Duncan is taking this country in the wrong direction. He is busy catering to the eduvultures, the wealthy, the 1%…they are his priority.
The kids are props. The teachers are his convenient whipping boys.
He is a disgrace.
I am not sure you are the authority on ALL education matters in our country. Sometimes, Joe, it is just your opinion.
Linda,
Perhaps you are correct: separate was equal.
Government is best that governs the lease.
Federal government involvement has been required in the 20th and 21st Centuries.
I will not disagree with that. However, saying I can’t discriminate against xyz and writing 10000’s of regulations are two entirely different things.
Federal interference was most prevalent in the 19th century, at least in terms of casualties.
Sometimes forcing local government to recognize the humanity of all the citizens requires thousands of regulations. Sometimes it just requires that we not put the local government in control.
Someone should remind Mr. Duncan about the old African proverb, “It takes a village to raise a child.” It does not take the U.S. Department of Education.
Linda, you and I agree that I am not the authority on all education matters.
But I do know the history of parents with students of special needs. Parents from all over the country went to Congress because they were deeply frustrated by states and school boards around the nation that were ignoring students with special needs. Result was “Education for All Handicapped.” Do you disagree with this?
I do disagree with this assertion “There are less direct sped. Services than ever before, specialized instruction designed to specifically remediate the disability is vanishing.” While we can do better, it is not true that “there are less direct sped services than ever before.”
Here’s a little from a 2007 USDE report on history of this law.
“Before IDEA, many children were denied access to education and opportunities to learn. For example, in 1970, U.S. schools educated only one in five children with disabilities, and many states had laws excluding certain students, including children who were deaf, blind, emotionally disturbed, or mentally retarded.
Today, early intervention programs and services are provided to almost 200,000 eligible infants and toddlers and their families, while nearly 6 million children and youth receive special education and related services to meet their individual needs. Other accomplishments directly attributable to IDEA include educating more children in their neighborhood schools, rather than in separate schools and institutions, and contributing to improvements in the rate of high school graduation, post-secondary school enrollment, and post-school employment for youth with disabilities who have benefited from IDEA. (See side bar: Examples of IDEA Accomplishments.) ”
http://www2.ed.gov/policy/speced/leg/idea/history.html
“The U.S. Department of Education is not supposed to control U.S. education.”
But it does!
NCLB, RTT, …
Return 90% of DOE budget to states.
Remaining 10% does “studies” and publishes them to all of America.
Education (i.e. KIDS!) win.
Cut and paste what you want…it is not the reality. Students with severe deficits sit in regular Ed. Classes well above their functioning level so their IEP reflects time with non disabled peers. Their inclusion is not meaningful. The continuum of services is flimsy. Educational progress cannot be ensured. The hours page may look great while they sit in a pre algebra class and working 1:1 with an aide on a separate activity. The full inclusion mode was not designed for all students. There are less services designed to remediate the deficits for the most severe students. There is huge difference between what’s posted in a government “study”and what actually happens daily.
Full inclusion model..typo…for some kids the least restrictive environment, a typical regular education classroom, can be the most restrictive. A PPT team is supposed to make that determination for each child.
Dear Linda,
I am a volunteer in one. (I have 1 challenged person and 1 “regular”). I cannot argue left or right on this.
The challenged person I deal with along with her non-challenged partner seem to be 100% functional people. I cannot tell you how much I like both of them. Neither (nor non of the other students I have volunteered to help) seem out of the ordinary to me.
Her “challenge” as reported to me by teachers and management
is elementary arithmetic; addition, subtraction, …
She thinks well and just needs a calculator to deal with
2+2. She high-hands me, and her partner helps her. What am I missing.
School is a bit more than just education. It is about getting along and loving each other. The teachers and principal in my school seem like geniuses to me on how to deal with “social issues”. Local control of schools is best, in my opinion.
Previously I asked:
Should gender segregation be OK? I got no intelligent answer, but I very much would like to learn for others. My principal and school district has addressed this problem successfully, in my opinion.
What are other’s experiences?
Recall, I am only a retired person who volunteers in 8th grade class rooms. I am no expert.
Regarding gender issues – I’ve seen some terrific district schools (and some charters) that were actively selected by families, that separated young women and young men in academic classes. The young women (especially) like this. Guys often missed being with girls but acknowledged that they paid more attention to studies when girls were not around.
There also are some public schools of choice that serve only young women or young men. Controversial but I think it should be an option.
Finally there are some schools that bring all kids together. Works well for some, not others.
Many of the most prominent female leaders in this country went to women’s colleges or universities. Some women feel strongly that adolescent girls do better when they are not in classes with adolescent boys. I think this should be an option. Reactions welcome.
Special ed is not perfect. Completely agree that “full inclusion mode” was not designed for all students.”
We are better than in 1970 but there is work to do. Sometimes arrangements made with kids with special needs don’t work out well.
Some district & charters are doing a fabulous job with these kids. We try to help folks learn from these successes.
I believe the point is that a government official needs to recognize a failed policy and put an end to it. Instead, he is using oppresive tactics that are overreaching. No one denies that the federal gov’t has helped in many ways. The idea that RTTT is somehow guaranteeing equal education for all is a complete crock. If anything, it is promoting an inferior model. Who wants to go to a high school without the fine arts, no extra-curriular programs, underpaid staff, incredible turnover, few supplies, etc.? Just what are you arguing for? The right for people to make a profit and then pretend they are at the forefront of civil rights in this country. That is just plain laughable. Charters are NOT providing an equal education. Diane has presented over and over again that schools are becoming more segregated due to privatization.
Actually, charters like district public schools vary widely. As to civil rights, Rosa Parks tried to set up charters. Kenneth Clark (author of the “doll test” used in the Brown v Board of Education was so fed up with local school boards by 1968 that he called for creation of new separate public schools outside the control of local boards. Rosa Parks and Kenneth Clark have pretty good civil rights credentials.
All African Americans don’t agree with eachother, any more than white do. But a number of African American leaders see a huge difference between being told where they must send their children, with no choice, and being given a choice between a district and some charter public schools. Some go with the district school, some go with the charter.
You might want to remember that Dr King was a Morehouse Graduate – and that the single largest producer of AFrican primary care doctors in the US is Meharry. Lots of folks haven’t heard of Meharry – but lots of African Americans have. People like Marian Wright Edelman, who has spoken out in favor of charters, also are graduate of predominantly African American colleges or universities.
The continued effort to equate having no choice, and being assigned to an inferior school, with having a choice, and exercising it (by calling both “segregation) is right out of Orwell.