The New (Right) MIndset
Now I’m usually not Miss.Current Events, but when I read this article in the Concord Monitor, I felt that I should start taking an interest. Hillary Clinton delivered a speech to the National Education Association and most were very impressed with what she had to say.
The federal No Child Left Behind law stifles originality and forces teachers to focus on preparing students for tests, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said yesterday. Although Clinton voted for the act in 2001, she criticized the program as underfunded and overly restrictive. “While the children are getting good at filling in all those little bubbles, what exactly are they really learning?” Clinton asked delegates at the National Education Association of New Hampshire’s annual meeting in Concord. “How much creativity are we losing? How much of our children’s passion is being killed?”
She’s preaching to the choir! Since I was introduced to scantrons, way back when, I’ve never done well on them and never understood why this should be the only basis of assessment. (Especially when you get to your fifth scantron in the same class and learn to beat the system without even trying.) And the part I never thought of until now, how do the teachers feel about that? If you’ve promoted creativity in your classroom all year, how do you handle the switch over meta-cognitive questions into multiple choice format?
Nonetheless, while I agree with her stance on this and other things, like higher teacher salaries, I’m a little wary on her idea of universal pre-schools and her attacks on large companies.
“This is Halliburton all over again,” Clinton told reporters, adding that many of the companies likely have “very close ties” to the Republican Party. “We have these contracts going to these cronies who are chosen largely on a political basis, and we have nothing to show for it.” The No Child Left Behind law requires school districts to provide tutoring and other services to schools that don’t meet standards. Clinton said that private companies have reaped $500 million annually from the arrangement but aren’t held accountable for results.
To make this claim/boost in this setting does nothing more than rile up people. Yes, I know that’s kinda the point, and this could just be the way it was reported, but to make claims like that without any suggestions to fix it, really bugs me. To get rid of bureaucracy takes planning. I do like her background though.
Although the speech – Clinton’s first major policy address in the state – was heavy on specifics, it also gave Clinton an opportunity to remind New Hampshire teachers of her own education background. Before her political ascent, Clinton worked in Head Start programs and as a lawyer for the Children’s Defense Fund, and as first lady she wrote about child-rearing in her book, It Takes a Village.
Specifics are necessary for change. With her background, I truly believe that she might have the passion needed to change our education system. Not only are Clinton’s ideas about the government aspect of education right on, but the education part of education as well.
But for all her criticism of current government policy, Clinton also appealed to students to renew their commitment to education.
Clinton’s father “basically was old-fashioned, and he said ‘Look, when you’re a child, your work is school,’ ” she said. “We’ve somehow got to break through all the media clutter that is out there and get that message to our kids.”
Attendants of the National Education Association were mostly all in praise of Clinton’s speech. Her mixture of stories and political suggestions truly gave them hope. Even if she does not end up being the presidential candidate, I believe her ideas will rub off and maybe even take shape someday, which would mean the world to English teachers. Given the freedom to be as creative as possible, and even encouraged to teach not to a test but to what students like is a dream I see becoming reality—if only there were more people with the right mindset.
“Clinton assails ‘No Child’ in NEA speech”
Sarah Liebowitz
Concord Monitor
March 31, 2007
This was a great article you found, Karen. I’ve been a little on the fence about Clinton, mostly because I don’t know much about her stances on certain policies and whatnot. However, this article alone could be the tipping point for me (well, thats a bit much, but you get what i’m saying). To have a president that actually realizes that creativity is necessary in the classroom would be a major leap forward. I LOVE that she brought that into her speech. It’s not just about the fact that NCLB isn’t working, it’s about the fact that there’s no wiggle room for teachers or students. There is no room for personality or even differences to come through. If the laws coming from the top of the political chain understood this need, there would be great rejoicing throughout the educational community. But, I do have to agree with you that I don’t think it’s fair to criticize with such intensity and offer no alternatives, although I do it frequently. If there is truly going to be change we must not only do away with NCLB, we must implement a better program that recognizes not just the needs of quotas but the needs of the people trying to fill it.
Posted 2 years, 8 months agoI love articles like this. They get me all excited about election season even if it is over a year and half away.
Posted 2 years, 7 months agoI was a little nervous earlier that political figures were blind to the realities of national programs like NCLB. Recent criticism (both Republicans and Democrats) has proved otherwise. They see the damage it is doing to the school systems and the students. They seem to see that creativity is missing from the standardized tests. The first step is recognizing that there is a problem.
The second step is the big one, addressing the problem with a possible solution. The article presented really general solutions to the “failing” public school systems. Unfortunately, general solutions do not really tell us much of what would be in store for the nation with Clinton as President. I am almost positive the other candidate with play a very similar tune. “Vague” is a key term during election years. Although Clinton should be praised for accomplishing stage one, she has a few more performances before I can support and understand her hope for the nation’s youth. I think that is an important point to make to students who are quick to just on board; did she really say anything that isn’t an obvious truth?