No Parent Left Behind...

I was reading this morning about speculation on the future of the "No Child Left Behind" act -- part of G.W. Bush's plans to improve eduction. Since the NEA is such a big Democratic supporter, the assumption is being made that the new congress will find a way to blunt, or even scrap NCLB in favor of some other hare-brained scheme to improve the education standards in this country. As you may have guessed by my tone, I'm sceptical of any plan these people have, or will have in the future. But first, some background...

My wife is a teacher, has been for over 20 years, long enough to have taught second generation students; her parents were teachers (and school administrators); her aunt and uncle were teachers (and school administrators), her cousin is a college professor; and lastly my aunt is a school teacher, with about the same experience as my wife.

So does that make me an expert in education -- heck no! I don't even pretend to know how to teach (and I really don't have the patience to anyway). I do know how to listen though, and I've heard enough talking for the past 20 years to have a pretty good idea of what the people on the front lines think the problem is...

Brace yourselves...

THE PARENTS!!! Teachers have only so much time each day to try to give out so much information to 20 some odd kids -- it's up to the parents at home to make it stick. Unfortunately parents don't have the time to work with the kids, or the ability, or the interest, or even the desire. You can pass laws that say teachers have to take continuing education classes (non-reimbursed of course), have to meet cartain standards, pass certain test scores, or face funding reductions (like that helps) -- but it doesn't do any good until you start holding parents responsible for thier childrens education.

A popular plan offered every other election year is school vouchers -- take tax money originally aimed at public schools and offer it to parents to use to send their children to private schools where the children have better scores and better results. The politicians believe these better results are because the schools are so much better than the public schools, but they never stop to think why. Here's what they overlook: Poor children who do manage to go to a private school do so because a) they have an acedemic scholarship that pays for it, so you bet someone is making sure they're doing the homework and studying to keep the grades up, or b) mom's working extra jobs to pay the tuition, so again, someone's making sure the kids are keeping up. And while I'm sure the discipline in your average church school (which make up most private schools) is not nearly as physical as it used to be in the pre-70's, I'm sure it is far more structured than your average public school (which has had any discipline nuetered after years of court intrusions). Take away financial incentives to ensure your children's success, litigate all discipline out of the school system -- and the best private school will become no better than PS 130 down the street.

You want to educate the kids? Motivate the parents. The law holds schools responsible for the failings of a student -- but why not the parents? Try this, a child fails a grade in school, the parents have to pay cash money for the child to try again.

I bet that would help...