The Politics of
Education Reform
by Seth Sandronsky*, January 7, 2003
President Bush recently announced that he wants
to expand federal funding for school services to help low-income
children. Yet the $1 billion of his proposed new funds for these
kids amounts to less than a single day of military spending. Regardless,
the Los Angeles Times reported that such "education reform"
is a "signature issue" backed by Democrats and Republicans.
Political differences do exist, however. Some Democrats
have responded that the president's proposed funding increase
for poor students falls far short of what's needed. This qualifies
as the understatement of the young new year.
Both parties supported the No Child Left Behind
Act that Bush signed on Jan. 8, 2002. The NCLBA partly allocates
funds to low-income families to move their children from inferior
to superior schools. The funding is also available to pay tutors
for after-school instruction.
Yet if educational opportunity was more than a
word used to dupe the public, Congress and the president could
have transferred tens of billions of taxpayer dollars from the
Pentagon for Star Wars to public schools for smaller class sizes.
But that was not to be. So goes the politics of education reform
in the U.S.
Puzzling? The nation's political circles of power
have their priorities. High on the list is fully funding the Pentagon,
not public schools.
The absence of evidence that military spending
is more socially useful than education spending is evidence of
the absence of critical journalism on these two subjects. To be
sure, exceptions to this sorry state of affairs do exist. Regrettably,
they are too few to shape public opinion much.
Concerning the NCLBA, the LA Times article noted
that, "Some critics have said that approach emphasizes standardized
testing at the expense of instructional time and imposes unfair
penalties on problem schools." Bush disagreed, shifting the
criticism to unchanging schools where teachers fail students.
"Instead of getting excuses, parents will now get choices,"
he said.
Particularly, market choices are what await these
parents. The Republican White House and Congress firmly back the
competition of the marketplace as the path to social improvement.
Presumably, the GOP's mission to level the educational playing
field by removing market fetters will unleash the untapped learning
potential of poor students.
Positive education results, we can be sure, will
follow the mandatory math and reading tests, given annually by
states, to needy students in the third through eighth grades under
the NCLBA. This testing requirement begins in fall 2005. Then,
states will be able to determine which students are (not) learning
their lessons.
Such testing is "the only way" to make
accurate educational evaluations, according to the president.
One standardized test fits all. More marketization of education
means more standardization in public schools.
The LA Times article also reported that the Bush
administration has boosted total federal expenditures on public
education to $22 billion, a 40 percent increase, for the current
instructional year. Crucially, this overall amount of public school
spending pales in comparison to the current Pentagon budget of
about $400 billion. Here are two public programs that receive
disproportionate amounts of tax dollars, but aren't generally
reported in relation to each other.
The contrast between the two programs is stark.
Accordingly, the political priorities are self-evident once people
are informed. To this end, they need journalists with independent
news media to buck the conventional wisdom and give the business
of war more than a wink and a nod.
Meanwhile, low-income households are being used
as pawns by political power interested in scoring points around
reform of the nation's underfunded public schools. But the marketization
of education is no more a solution to the substandard schools
that poor U.S. kids attend than "smart bombs" are the
tools to liberate the Iraq people from the tyranny of Saddam Hussein.
Many in the U.S. would no doubt vote to transfer their taxes from
the Pentagon to public schools if the politics of education reform
was made clearer.
*Seth Sandronsky is
an editor with Because People Matter, Sacramento's progressive
newspaper.
|