Education muddle

Published March 3, 2015

Editorial by Greensboro News-Record, March 3, 2015.

The Student Success Act replaces No Child Left Behind with “conservative reforms to restore local control and stop top-down education mandates,” House Speaker John Boehner’s office says. Yet, many conservatives, including Republican 6th District Rep. Mark Walker, don’t like it – because it’s a top-down education mandate. Walker introduced an amendment that would let states take federal money but opt out of the program.

Boehner canceled a vote on the bill Friday because its prospects looked poor without support from conservatives. Meanwhile, the legislation has raised alarms in some local school districts, such as Guilford County Schools, because high-poverty schools could lose federal funding.

The Washington landscape has changed since Republican President George W. Bush made No Child Left Behind one of his signature accomplishments. What was touted then as an effort to establish uniform accountability standards is viewed now by most members of Bush’s party as an unwarranted federal intrusion into education. The Student Success Act is a 600-page rewrite that cuts federal spending, prohibits the Department of Education from imposing standards and gives states more freedom to spend U.S. dollars as they see fit.

Never mind that uneven school standards from one state to another prompted No Child Left Behind and the National Governors Association’s Common Core Standards. Never mind, also, that the federal government has never dictated how states educate their children. Instead, it has tried to help with funding and set accountability measures.

No Child Left Behind is due for refreshing. For one thing, its goal that every child would be proficient in core subjects by 2014 has passed its expiration date. That never was realistic.

Some of the new proposals, however, raise alarms. Allowing students in Title I schools — those with high numbers of children who live in poverty — to take federal funding with them if they choose to attend other schools is misguided. It seems intended to benefit charter schools, but the money is needed to strengthen high-poverty schools. A Title I school can hire extra reading tutors, for example. It would have fewer resources to do that if funding flowed to schools that don’t need extra help.

House Republicans are split on the Student Success Act. Some are listening to conservative groups that see it as an overreach by Washington into education decisions that should be left to parents. Some want tax money to pay for those choices. Walker’s proposal aims to allow states to take the money with no strings attached. Yet, state governments don’t pass money to local school boards without conditions.

The proper role of the federal government in education is always worth a debate. Most Americans have accepted two premises: There should be some uniformity in what children are taught, and Washington should provide some financial assistance. Otherwise, poorer states will never achieve parity.

The Senate is working on bipartisan plans to update No Child Left Behind and may come up with a better alternative.

http://www.news-record.com/opinion/n_and_r_editorials/education-muddle/article_ca7b12c0-c126-11e4-ae08-a7309b3a6777.html

March 3, 2015 at 8:49 am
Richard Bunce says:

GNR once again shows their priority is the traditional government school bureaucracy and not the students and their parents. All funding should follow the student.

http://reason.com/reasontv/2015/01/06/backpack-funding