Former Vice President Joe Biden released his education plan yesterday.
He pledges a dramatic increase in federal funding for education.
The plan is notable for what it does not say.
It does not say anything about the failed strategies of Race to the Top.
It does not say anything about charter schools, which was a major focus for the Obama-Duncan program. Will he repeal the failed federal Charter Schools Program or will he give his approval to continue funding corporate charter chains like KIPP, IDEA, and Success Academy?
It does not say anything about testing, nor does it say anything about revising the federal “Every Student Succeeds Act,” which mandates annual testing. Will Biden support the continuation of the ESSA law?
It does not say anything about evaluating teachers by the test scores of their students, which was a favorite Duncan policy. States bidding for Race to the Top billions changed their laws to adopt this punitive and wrong-headed policy. Will he oppose this practice or let it slide?
It makes no reference to the Common Core, which had the enthusiastic support of the Obama administration, which was legally prohibited from funding it, but which supplied $360 million to create two Common Core testing programs, PARCC and Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium. Is Biden for or against it.
In sum, I like everything he said. But I wonder about what he didn’t say. He ducked all the tough issues, most of which are the legacy of the Bush-Obama era, of which he was a part.
Biden clearly prefers to duck the contentious issues. I hope that they will be posed to him in town halls.
We need to know where he stands on all the issues that matter to students, parents, teachers, and schools.
“I like everything he said.”
Yes, I like puppies and rainbows too. It’s easy to be liked when you don’t talk about anything substantive.
Hi dienne77 :
Hahaha. c’ est la vie and que sera, sera.
Please ask yourself whether you are just the same or a bit inexperienced in veteran politician’s strategy like ex vice -president Biden?
There is two ultimate matters in life: you do you die or you don’t you die. But the only difference is that within you, you are content or regret.
To make it clear, in my case for example, in 1978 and 1979, I escaped VN by flimsy wooden boat, twice in shipwrecks in ocean. But I would be very contented to die rather than to live with or to suffer injustice under any dictatorial leadership.
I love so much the wisdom of Dr. Kaul: -“Whenever we choose the right path, and we can always tell, life becomes suddenly uncomplicated and quite simple”.
In short, I would use two powerful quotes from Horace Mann, the father of American Public Education as my conclusion, as follows:
“Be ashamed to die until you have won some victory for humanity” and “Education is our only political safety. Outside of this ark, all is deluge.”
Please note that I have learned a lot from Dr. Diane Ravitch and participants who are lawyers, educators, and politicians…in her website. Back2basic
Your commentary reminded me of two quotes by Martin Luther King, Jr.: “There comes a time when silence is betrayal.” and “In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.”
The old bromide of “more funding” is not convincing anymore.
Many politicians still consider charter schools, public schools. When they talk about increasing funding, they may be talking about more money in charters, not real public schools. Florida has chosen to call any school that receives public money a public school, for example. As Diane has said, we need Biden to elaborate and define terms.
“any school that receives public money a public school” = the DeVos Doctrine
The “zip code” statement in Biden’s platform sounds like something out of DFER’s playbook.
“The “zip code” statement in Biden’s platform sounds like something out of DFER’s playbook.”
Yes!! But I was astonished that David Sirota would accuse Biden of plagiarizing from Bernie Sanders because they both used that “zip code” statement.
If anything, they both took it from DFER and the edu reformers. There is plenty to criticize Biden about, but Bernie supporters like David Sirota are repeating exactly the same mistakes as 2016 when they try to undermine the character of other Democrats instead of making this about issues.
We need to debate issues and when someone like David Sirota tries to destroy a candidate who isn’t their favorite not on issues but by using the same tired character attacks, they should be publicly criticized so they don’t keep helping the far right do their dirty work.
“The old bromide of “more funding” is not convincing anymore.”
Especially federal funds, eh!
One wonders just how cynical one (Biden) has to be to keep on selling the same snake oil.
I’m witcha. I think it’s less a case of Biden being cynical than he doesn’t realize the rules and expectations have changed. His frame of reference is still the late 80s/early 90s, when bipartisan deal making behind the scenes were standard operating procedure.
Today I had a conversation with a friend and it occurred to me that Bernie has been consistent his entire public life, but realizes how the ground beneath has shifted. Biden, on the other hand, tries to adapt his old ideas to the new ground, but doesn’t understand the inconsistencies between the two.
“The old bromide of “more funding” is not convincing anymore.”
To whom– knee-jerk rwnjs? Let’s not march into 2020 in fear of displeasing Trumpistas and Tea-Partiers.
The annual PDK poll showed that 78% of the general public finds lack of funds the major issue plaguing schools.
It doesn’t really matter what they say- it matters who they hire. Obama was committed to lock step ed reform the moment he hired Duncan.
I hope Biden would commit to not hiring any of the people Duncan hired. They were bad for public school students. From the teacher rankings to the obsessive reliance on standardized test scores to the public school bashing to the mindless charter cheerleading, they added absolutely no value for students in public schools.
It’s not surprising they all took jobs within the ed reform echo chamber after Obama. Hopefully they’ll remain there.
Agreed on all points…but I’d also want him to commit to not hiring Duncan! (A repudiation would be preferable.)
I feel no satisfaction from his talk yesterday. Nothing an Ed Reformer couldn’t live with beyond maybe the support for labor.
I didnt see your comment until after I posted mine.
I wonder if it means sonething that we are thinking along the same lines
Don’t forget we don’t want John King or anyone CAP & DFER endorse.
Hell, maybe Biden will hire Duncan again — so he can finish off the public schools.
Wouldn’t that be fun?
I feel good when I’m thinking like you, SDP!
Another Duncan is the stuff that keeps me up at night. I prefer DeVos, for crying out loud. Biden is funded by investment bankers. Even if he says he opposes testing or charters, as Obama did while campaigning in 2008, we can’t trust Biden to keep his word because, well, follow the money.
No, SomeDAM, Joe will be more original.
He will hire Paul Vallas!
(Paul is looking for a gig & he keeps popping up like a bad penny.
Last on his resume: failed run for Chicago mayor.)
Presidential candidates can promise “more funding”. Only Congress can spend. When a government program like public education is failing, the answer is always to throw more money at it.
“The song remains the same”- Led Zeppelin
When a person is hungry, be sure not to feed him. —Charles’ philosophy
I never said that. I have been on food stamps. I have received food from a non-profit food pantry. (And volunteered to work there, to distribute food). What does feeding the hungry, have to do with education policy?
I am still astounded that presidential candidates are making any discussions about K-12 education. There is no constitutional authority for the feds to get involved in education at all. Education can and must be a state/municipal responsibility.
Every time that the feds poke their noses into education, they seem to muck it up, with programs like ESSA, and Common core, etc. One disaster after another.
I would love for a presidential candidate to just come out, and say, that My plan is to abolish the federal dept of education, and the federal government is getting out of K-12 education, and “devolving” the authority to educate children back to the states/municipalities.
There was a time when the federal government did something to help public education. It was 1965, the Great Society, the War on Poverty, the ESEA.
There is a federal role in ed, & it long existed in as an office w/n other cabinet depts w/the mission to gather stats comparing schools across the nation. The national importance of education was recognized when it became part of the Dept of Health Ed & Welfare in 1953. Personally I felt that was the best place for it, as the structure of the dept recognized those needs were intertwined. On its own since 1979, it took as primary mission the civil rights goal of equal access for all, & did some good along those lines early on. However, divorcing it from the missions of health & welfare may have contributed to the mistaken idea that schools alone can cure the ills of inequality– & perhaps led to the overweening power-grabbing & micromanagement we’ve seen since 2001, disingenuously disguised as a civil rights mission.
Big swing and a miss. If you knew anything about “The Song Remains the Same” you would know that it’s not about complacency, but hope. The song that remains the same is the hope that people around the world want to feel about the future. Check the lyrics, here’s a sample:
I had a dream
Oh, yeah
Crazy dream, uh-huh
Anything I wanted to know
Any place I needed to go
Hear my song
Yeah, people don’t you listen now?
Sing along
Oh
You don’t know what you’re missing, now
Any little song that you know
Everything that’s small has to grow
And it’s gonna grow, push push, yeah
Robert Plant and Jimmy Page would not approve of how you try to mischaracterize their song.
If you can’t rock to this, you really are an old fart! 😇
And I realize civic education is not your strong suit, so let me try to educate you. When you write “Only Congress can spend”, that’s actually quite wrong. Congress can authorize spending by passing 13 appropriations bills, but in order for them to become law, the president must approve. He (or hopefully she one day) can also veto the bills and send them back to Congress. Officially, this process begins with the House, but the symbolic starting gun is when the president submits his (or hopefully her) proposed budget after delivering the State of the Union address. This process is an example of shared powers under the concept of checks and balances, something right wing nuts like you only care about when your side is in power.
@GregB: You need to go back and read the US Constitution. See
https://history.house.gov/institution/origins-development/power-of-the-purse/
Q Congress—and in particular, the House of Representatives—is invested with the “power of the purse,” the ability to tax and spend public money for the national government. Massachusetts’ Elbridge Gerry said at the Federal Constitutional Convention that the House “was more immediately the representatives of the people, and it was a maxim that the people ought to hold the purse-strings.”
END Q
“No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.”
— U.S. Constitution, Article I, section 9, clause 7
The president may propose a budget, sure. The president may ask congress for an appropriation, sure. But the “buck” stops with the Congress.
Of course, spending is accomplished by law, and of course the president can veto a spending bill, just like any other proposed legislation. But the spending of the public’s money is in the hands of congress.
I don’t support the prek plans. I’m afraid that funding is going to come out of K-12 schools, one way or another.
They don’t value public schools. They didn’t attend public schools and their children and grandchildren don’t attend public schools. I bet a lot of these people don’t even know anyone who uses a public school, personally.
Because they don’t value public schools I don’t think they can be trusted to properly fund or support a new program- they’ll rob Peter to pay Paul and it’ll come right out of the hide of public school students.
Both the Democrats & Republicans who promote PreK don’t reveal to the public that funding to the federal PreK grants are tied to Social Impact Bonds or Pay for Success. The bankers get paid by public school money if the children in PreK do NOT receive special education. Got that? Deny services for disabilities & pay the banks more per lost services. SIBs are Wall Street’s way of giving back.
Here’s more:
https://preaprez.wordpress.com/2015/10/12/social-impact-bonds-are-just-another-form-of-privatization-bad-news-for-special-needs-students/
If Democrats really wanted universal preK they would expand Early Head Start (EHS) & Head Start (HS). Currently HS is means tested by income but the infrastructure & direct funding stream is already in place. All it needs is the political will to expand funding to provide HS & EHS in every community in the country. No SIBs necessary.
Good points (Social Impact Bonds & Pay for Success), & ones not to forget, jgrim.
I think the fed govt has to make moves to support not just PreK, but infant & toddler childcare, regardless of how individual states react. Facts are, mid-lowermid, wkg & wkg poor classes have to work to make ends meet—both parents, & probably more than one gig per parent. This is aside from all the high-flown talk of how PreK will raise up the ed potential of lower classes. Affordable child care is desperately needed—infant to K– & govt-funded childcare should obviously require an age-appropriate ed component. Fed funding can get this kicked off & in place. And if they don’t, for sure the corp vultures will descend w/their soc impact bonds tied to sleazy goals like denying SpEd services—they already are. There’s a vacuum there created by social need unmet by govt expenditure.
Oh, gag me.
Biden loves Duncan’s book, How Schools Work. DUH…politics and $$$$$$.
Biden’s plan is NO PLAN.
Biden’s campaign stop in Houston was co-sponsored by the AFT.https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/articles/news/2019/05/28/334736/joe-biden-makes-first-campaign-stop-in-houston/
Hmmm…does that mean an early endorsement at the summer AFT convention-?!
Not an official endorsement, but clearly the AFT is making a statement.
well said: Biden’s Plan Is No Plan.
So agree, ciedie! &, retired teacher, I know that AFT blurb isn’t an official endorsement…yet.
But I fear it’s leading to one (at the summer AFT Convention, which is coming up soon).
“The plan is notable for what it does not say.” What most of the candidates do not wish to wrap their heads around is the fact that as this decade passes, an increasing number of teachers, parents, kids, neighborhood leaders and civil rights organizations KNOW exactly what they are trying to hide simply by not saying it.
I would like to see Biden get asked how his policy would be the same or different from Obama’s.
great question!
current facebook posts showing that Biden is in many ways an Arne Duncan fan
Peter Greene weighs in…skeptically:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/petergreene/2019/05/29/joe-biden-struggles-to-lift-heavy-education-baggage/#2c48eabe6525
I’m not so concerned that Biden doesn’t come out of the gate with a list of bad moves that need undoing. Glad to see first where he would like to spend, which gives a broad-brush of his vision. Huge boosts to Title I & IDEA would resuscitate old-timey Democrat goals I’ve always supported. Delighted to see promoting community schools/ hubs for health-welfare services, which fits in—so does fed support for childcare, home visits, PreK w/extended hours, counselors/ social workers et al school support personnel. (Community schools are something that can only be done locally/ state-level, but fed can find successful models, incentivize.) Highlighting a move back to vo-tech at K12 level shows awareness that ship needs to be nudged away from “college for all”—it’s a crying need & could use federal funding to get it going.
All these goals show sensitivity to who’s been hurt worst by decades of trickle-down/ neolib voodoo/ Great Recession. They strike me as community-based, geared to public collaboration/ cooperation— the sort of plan that requires thinking in terms of holistic public school systems, as opposed to the fractured isolationism of maximized school choice. So I think he’s off on the right foot.
Oy…politicians will politicize. Where was Biden when Arne & Obama were ruining America’s public school systems & gave us NCLB on steroids (RT3)? Actions (or, in this case, non actions) speak louder than words.
This is not the VP’s bailiwick, so I take nothing in particular from that. VP’s have a very limited role. Cheney was highly influential but he was an outlier in that regard, & his strong behind-the-scenes role made GWB look weak & inexperienced in need of a mentor. Historically running mate is chosen to bring in additional votes– once in office expected to stay in his own lane.
Let’s also remember that bipartisan pols were all on neolib autopilot re: ed, 1998-2012 or so, when (a)newly-implemented stds/ aligned assessments accountability systems started smelling like bad fish, & (b) 20 yrs’ data on charters started pouring in.