Quality Public Education From Preschool Through Technical School Or College

As a former member of the Gloucester School Committee and a graduate of the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, I am committed to quality public education from preschool through technical school or college. As a matter of public policy, every American deserves an opportunity for the education needed to earn a decent living and to be an active, responsible citizen.

Head Start: Fund It Fully

Head Start provides educational, health, nutritional, social, and other services to help children succeed in school. Continual budget cuts, however, are imperiling the quality of Head Start programs. A February 2007 National Head Start Association survey across the country showed recent budget cuts have left programs strapped and threaten their ability to function — “Special Report: Quality of Head Start Programs Imperiled By Steady Erosion of Funding”

Head Start budget cuts are penny wise and pound foolish. Every dollar spent today on high-quality early learning programs saves an estimated $7 later that would have to be spent for special education, welfare dependence, and juvenile delinquency. (W.S. Barnett, “Lives in the Balance: Age 0 - 27 benefit-cost analysis of the High/Scope Perry Preschool Program,” Monographs of the High/Scope Educational Research Foundation, 11, Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Press, 1996.)

Every American child and family deserves a high-quality early education. I enthusiastically support full funding for Head Start.

No Child Left Behind: Too Little Funding; Too Many Subjects Left Behind

The “No Child Left Behind Act of 2001” made sweeping changes to American public education. I wholeheartedly support high academic and vocational education standards for the public schools and for teacher development, but I believe “No Child Left Behind” endangers fundamental aspects of a proper education for a free and democratic society.

Paradoxically, under “No Child Left Behind,” our children are less prepared for the world in which they are growing up and in which they will work.

A major flaw in “No Child Left Behind” is its mandated use of high-stakes, single test scores to make important decisions about students (International Reading Association, “High-Stakes Assessments in Reading”. Standardized tests are especially problematic for children who have differing learning styles, or are learning English as a second language.

The punitive aspects of “No Child Left Behind” are deeply problematic. They discourage creative teaching and encourage teachers to “teach to the test.” They produce a narrow focus on elements of reading and mathematics, to the exclusion of science, social studies, history, music, art, foreign languages, critical thinking, physical education, and other valuable subjects, as well as any aspects of reading and mathematics not included on the mandated tests. (“Gambling with the Children”) This impoverishes our children’s education.

The punitive aspects of the Act encourage states and localities to manipulate their reported test results in an effort to avoid penalties or even to receive bonuses under the Act (“What You See Is NOT What You Get”). This serves neither children nor taxpayers.

Unfunded mandates in “No Child Left Behind” cost states and localities a lot of money. Congress has never fully funded the Act (W. James Antle III, “States charged with implementing Bush’s national education plan balk at the cost of compliance,” The American Conservative Magazine, August 2005). Many of our education tax dollars detour through Washington and return at seriously inadequate levels. We do not need or want unfunded federal mandates.

“No Child Left behind” undercuts students’ privacy rights. Unless a parent affirmatively opts out, the Act requires public schools to provide each student’s name and other personal information to U.S. military recruiters, who can then approach the children directly. Many parents do not know that the Act mandates this military access to their sons and daughters. I believe parental rights to the privacy of their children’s school records should be protected from the outset.

On balance, the further educational planning and policy are removed from classroom teachers, the more negative is the impact on students. I believe that experienced public school teachers ought to be at the forefront of formulating public school curricula, educational standards, and testing methods. I believe that our schools should take into account children’s cognitive and social development needs and their various learning styles.

The “No Child Left Behind” Act is up for renewal. Whether we change the Act or scrap it, we must ensure that each child receives excellent public education from pre-school through college or technical training. Each child deserves — and America needs every one of its children to have — an education that prepares a foundation to earn a decent living, to be a contributing community member, and to be a responsible citizen.

Education is directly related to the preservation of freedom and democracy. The GI Bill of the 20th century was built on that premise: our veterans, who had fought for freedom and democracy, were supported in gaining their education to live as free citizens. American educational policy for the 21st century must be at least as forward-looking.