Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity


Posted at 6:30 AM ET, 08/11/2010

The problem with ‘Race to the Top’ is the race

By Valerie Strauss

My guest is Diana Senechal, who taught for four years in the New York City public schools and is writing a book about the loss of solitude in schools and culture. Her education writing has appeared in numerous places, including Education Week, the Core Knowledge Blog, GothamSchools, and American Educator.

By Diana Senechal
In his recent address to the National Urban League Centennial Conference, President Obama praised the rapid changes in education reform that were under way, thanks to Race to the Top.

“In an effort to compete for this extra money,” he said, “32 states reformed their education laws before we even spent a dime.” He went on to say that the reforms in Race to the Top should not be controversial: “There should be a fuss if we weren’t doing these things. There should be a fuss if Arne Duncan wasn’t trying to shake things up.”

Indeed, we should be willing to shake things up to improve the schools. All depends on what we shake and how. We may well be shaking up the wrong things, or the right things in the wrong way. There is great danger in the rush of Race to the Top. To compete for funds, states must embrace reforms that haven’t been fully tested, reforms rife with problems, reforms in which they may not even believe. In other words, thoughtfulness and integrity are pushed aside. This is deadly for education.

President Obama said that part of the resistance to Race to the Top “reflects a general resistance to change. We get comfortable with the status quo even when the status quo isn’t good. We make excuses for why things have to be the way they are. And when you try to shake things up, some people aren’t happy.”

He did not, apparently, consider the possibility that many critics of Race to the Top passionately support good change. To improve schools, critics argue, we need to think through our philosophies and practices. If a reform hasn’t been considered carefully, if it hasn’t been tested in the mind and in practice, it may result in wasted efforts and damaged lives.

To be eligible for Race to the Top, states must agree to undo laws prohibiting the use of students’ test scores in teacher evaluations. The problem lies not in the close analysis of test results, but in their use to evaluate teachers through “value-added” algorithms. These highly complex formulas have not proven reliable, as numerous scholars have pointed out.

Professor Helen F. Ladd writes, “Even the most sophisticated approaches typically cannot distinguish the contribution of teachers from the classroom context, and they generate estimates of a teacher’s quality that jump around from one year to the next, largely because of the small sample sizes for individual teachers.”

Moreover, such models depend on the existence of worthy and reliable tests, which may not exist. We have seen some of the weaknesses of the New York State tests, and more details will come to light in the future. We need a circumspect approach to test scores; they are not royalty or sages.

Another case of Race to the Top folly is the requirement that states agree to adopt the Common Core standards. This impedes a thoughtful approach to the standards; it may obscure the strengths of the standards themselves.

I was proud to contribute to the development of the Common Core standards as a member of the English Language Arts Work Team. I see much thoughtful language in them and much potential for good.

Nonetheless, states should not be required or pressed to adopt them in order to receive funds. The standards could probably still benefit from revision over time, and they must be accompanied by a strong curriculum. What will happen if states rush to adopt the standards, mainly for economic reasons? In all likelihood, they will look to “align” them as much as possible with their existing programs and curricula.

Publishers and test companies will churn out books and assessments that comply with the standards but do not excel or inspire. The curricula themselves—which could use improvement—will budge very little.

We need excellent curricula as sorely as we need anything in the schools—but we cannot rush to make it. Such curricula take years to develop, and they often build on older ones.

A good curriculum requires both philosophical and practical insight.

One must be willing to define what “content” actually is and what is important for students to learn. One must be willing to provide the necessary supports, including teacher preparation in the education schools. One needs to build an education culture that honors the subjects themselves: the works of literature, the study of history, the mathematical proofs, the scientific concepts, the works of art. There should be teacher institutes devoted to the study of literature and other subjects. There should be professional development sessions on poems, theorems, and philosophical problems.

What can we do to get things underway, if true education reform must be slow? How can we create momentum?

The momentum will come not from economic stimulus but from intellectual stimulus. Slowness and sluggishness are not the same, when slowness reflects good thinking.

If we honor the substance of learning, if we delve into ideas and works, we will encourage the very minds that come alive under such conditions—minds of teachers, students, parents, policymakers, and public.

The schools need our best thought. They need hopeful skeptics who strive for excellence and beauty. As Ishmael tells us in Moby Dick, “Doubts of all things earthly, and intuitions of some things heavenly; this combination makes neither believer nor infidel, but makes a man who regards them both with equal eye.”

-0-

Follow my blog all day, every day by bookmarking washingtonpost.com/answersheet. And for admissions advice, college news and links to campus papers, please check out our Higher Education page at washingtonpost.com/higher-ed Bookmark it!

By Valerie Strauss  | August 11, 2010; 6:30 AM ET
Categories:  Guest Bloggers, National Standards, Race to the Top  | Tags:  common core standards, diana senechal, obama and race to the top, obama and school reform, race to the top  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The truth behind the get-tough success stories in school reform
Next: Dogs: An unusual guide to school reform

Comments

Another very worthwhile article from a guest for me to share with my friends, Valerie. Obviously you are taking a "working" vacation. Thank you very much for your work.

Posted by: lacy41 | August 11, 2010 7:59 AM | Report abuse

It's nice to see that someone else is pointing out that those who are implementing school reform are implementing plans that they hope will work. There is no evidence that the things the reformers are implementing will actually work. Of course this isn't the only problem that reformers face.

It seems like all those who are in charge of school reform understand little about how students learn. They're still under the assumption that students will respond as behaviorists expect them to and they fail to see the role choice plays in intrinsic motivation.

As well, those who are in charge of school reform don't seem to agree as to what the purpose of school is. How can we reform a system if we do not agree on what the goals of that system should be? Is education merely college training? job training? citizenship training? Is it something to bring out the best in everyone? to create individual, independent thinkers? Is it all these things? Is it none of these things?

Posted by: thesilverback | August 11, 2010 8:10 AM | Report abuse

The assumption that changes in education should be based on reason, testing, evaluation and experience with those ideas is basic to the scientific method, but incomprhensible to "education reformers" who ascribe to a cult-like belief sytem that is either unproven or proven to be ineffective and damaging. But since the "reformers" base their agenda on faith, rather than evidence and investigation, evidence through research, investigation and experience will not sway them. This is why Linda Darling-Hammond was not appointed Sec. of Education. Like Galileo, her science challenged the beliefs of the new education religion, as founded by Wendy Kopp.

Posted by: mcstowy | August 11, 2010 2:12 PM | Report abuse

"President Obama said that part of the resistance to Race to the Top “reflects a general resistance to change. We get comfortable with the status quo even when the status quo isn’t good."

This was in response to the NAACP and Urban League that want safe public schools.

Apparently wanting safe public schools instead of schools with violence is now the status quo.

Time to recognize that the President is simply using Race To The Top for reelection.

The problem of public education is the inferior Title 1 poverty public schools.

None of the ideas of Race To The Top addresses the problem of these schools such as school violence. Poverty is not even mentioned by the President.

Is the President anything other than a political opportunist as he simply continues the idea of the previous President that the problem is that teachers in classrooms are not doing their jobs by overcoming all of the disadvantages of poverty in their classrooms?

Race To The Top contains no new ideas in regard to problems of the inferior Title 1 poverty public schools and simply is the latest in the idea that teachers are responsible for the inferior Title 1 poverty public schools.

Posted by: bsallamack | August 11, 2010 2:27 PM | Report abuse

This President is a political opportunist.

Apparently 4 billions dollars is all that is needed to address the problems of the poverty Title 1 public schools where national test of D.C. indicates a 56 percent failure rate in 4th grade reading. This failure rate is common to most of the poverty Title 1 public schools in urban areas in the nation.

The answer of Race To The Top to this 56th percent failure rate in 4th grade reading is the need to adopt the Common Core standards.

The United States will spend 28 billion dollars for two years of Afghan policemen, while here in the United States the President pretends that with Race To The Top it is essential to accept a new Common Core standards in a pretense at dealing with 56th percent failure rates in 4th grade reading in the poverty Title 1 public schools in urban areas in the nation.

The Democrats need to select a new Democratic candidate for President in 2012. We have already had eight years of public educational policies based upon a political opportunist, we do not need another eight years of public educational policies based upon a political opportunist.

Posted by: bsallamack | August 11, 2010 2:50 PM | Report abuse

This President pretends that Race To The Top will fix the problems of the poverty Title 1 public schools with 56th percent failure rates in 4th grade reading.

At the same time Race To The Top forces states to expand the number of public charter schools.

If the policies of Race To The Top will supposedly actually fix the problems of the poverty Title 1 public schools there would be no need for more public charter schools.

Race To The Top is simply a combination of politically popular ideas of a President that wants reelection in 2012.

Race To The Top will not fix the problems of the poverty Title 1 public schools with 56th percent failure rates in 4th grade reading.

Race To The Top was only designed to assist this President in reelection in 2012.

Posted by: bsallamack | August 11, 2010 3:08 PM | Report abuse

Real school improvement requires a broader approach. To do that, we must finally recognize the failure of the"reform" cult of TFA, Klien, Rhee, Kopp and Duncan. Here's an outline of what real edcuation improvement should look like: http://www.boldapproach.org/

Posted by: mcstowy | August 11, 2010 3:19 PM | Report abuse

Diane Senechal is a supporter of E.D Hirsch's "Core Knowledge" curriculum, which claims to improve standardized test scores for elementary school students, which should send out a red flag to anyone who thinks that she is an impartial observer.

Readers need to be aware that she and other commentators such as Robert Pondiscio, who wrote the piece "Proficency Should Mean College Ready and An Acceptance Letter" on August 3 here on the Answer Sheet have criticized these very same tests as not being vaild. One could take two aproaches to the problem: Either the tests are good, in which case the Common Core Standards aren't needed and the state curriculums are good or the tests are bad which means that both the Common Core Standards and any curriculum that claims to raise them are bad as well. Senechal attempts to do a circus balancing act by claiming that the tests and the standards she participated in drafting are bad without saying that if that is the case, ANY standards that can align to state tests and raise scores on them are bad as well. She wrote halfway down,"Moreover, such models depend on the existence of worthy and reliable tests, which may not exist." In addition, she writes "The standards could probably still benefit from revision over time, and they must be accompanied by a strong curriculum."

Now why would an individual boast about participating in drafting standards that she herself acknowledges are inadequate unless she and her colleagues are trying to dumb down our kids. Why wasn't the curriculum in the standards in the first place? The answer is that the curriculum committee for the Common Core Standards is composed of people who want to see widespread failure so that the "Core Knowledge" curriculum can be implemented. This is relevant because the Common Core Standards reiterate what many states already have in place and what the "Core Knowledge" program claims to fulfill. Thus, the Common Core Standards are simply a smokescreen to allow the implementation of a curriculum that will raise scores on questionable tests and lead to calls for more of it after its predictable failure.

Posted by: AlexKB | August 11, 2010 3:24 PM | Report abuse

If only Obama would listen to Arne Duncan's critics, but he won't.

He says he is 110% behind teachers, but in fact he isn't. He is only 110% behind Arne Duncan.

Posted by: educationlover54 | August 11, 2010 3:25 PM | Report abuse

It's nice to see that someone else is pointing out that those who are implementing school reform are implementing plans that they hope will work. There is no evidence that the things the reformers are implementing will actually work. Of course this isn't the only problem that reformers face.
Posted by: thesilverback
..............................
Time for educators and Americans to recognize that Race To The Top is no different than No Child Left behind.

These are simply attempts by political opportunists to exploit the problems of the poverty Title 1 public schools for reelection.

The President is totally unconcerned with whether Race To The Top will work in regard to public education. He is only concerned with whether with Race To The Top he will be successful in exploiting the popular discontent with public education in his reelection in 2012.

Posted by: bsallamack | August 11, 2010 3:33 PM | Report abuse

If only Obama would listen to Arne Duncan's critics, but he won't.

He says he is 110% behind teachers, but in fact he isn't. He is only 110% behind Arne Duncan.

Posted by: educationlover54
..................................
President Obama is only 110% behind his reelection in 2010.

He will throw teachers, civil rights groups and anyone else under the bus in order to win reelection in 2010.

The Democrats need to select a new candidate for President in 2012. It should be apparent to Democrats that he is fully willing to throw any or all of them under the bus in order to win reelection in 2012.

Posted by: bsallamack | August 11, 2010 3:40 PM | Report abuse

@bsall. Think about it. Politicians usually try to please the people or anticipate what they want (rather than lead). If President Obama believes improving teacher quality is the key, just as his (dumb) predecessor, that probably means that the vast majority of adult Americans believe that.
Are you ready to dismiss what the vast majority of Americans think is necessary? (Yes, I know "they" have been wrong before.) They must know something that not all educators can appreciate. And vice versa. If you want to go against Obama, you will get a Republican, even perhaps Sarah Palin, known for her depth of educational expertise. Speaking of that, and more locally, we could have a mayor soon who has no education plan that he can discuss without a script.

Posted by: axolotl | August 11, 2010 3:42 PM | Report abuse

Diane Senechal is a supporter of E.D Hirsch's "Core Knowledge" curriculum...
Posted by: AlexKB
................................
That is okay with me and irrelevant as long as she is not an employed by Core Knowledge and expressing views that are serving the purposes of Core Knowledge.

I commented when an employee of Core Knowledge wrote a column that would serve the purposes of his organization.

There should be no guilt by association based on where an individuals blog. That should be left to the National Security Agency which I am in full support of.

Her article is fair and not an article about Core Knowledge.

Posted by: bsallamack | August 11, 2010 3:50 PM | Report abuse

Are you ready to dismiss what the vast majority of Americans think is necessary?
Posted by: axolotl
............................
Yes.

You confuse what American think and what political leaders exploit to win acceptance from American.

Do vast majorities of American really think that brand X is far superior for doing the laundry?

Did American really think that the invasion of Iraq was necessary or was it simply the political leaders who provided false evidence and had Americans shouting for freedom fries?

Apparently most Americans think that our expense in Afghanistan in money and lives are simply a waste, yet I do not see a majority of political leaders calling for the need to change our policy for Afghanistan.

AXOLOTL stop with your childish supposedly reasonable questions in an attempt to win acceptance of your absurd and mediocre ideas.

Starting thinking of the implications of the old Bob Hope joke.
No party can fool all the people all the time.
That is why we have two parties.

Posted by: bsallamack | August 11, 2010 4:11 PM | Report abuse

Reporter: Mr. President how long will it take to judge the effectiveness of your policies of Race To The Top to raise the scores of children with failing rates of 56th percent in 4th grade reading at poverty public schools.

President: This will definitely not be before my election in 2012.

Posted by: bsallamack | August 11, 2010 4:20 PM | Report abuse

If you want to go against Obama, you will get a Republican, even perhaps Sarah Palin, known for her depth of educational expertise.
Posted by: axolotl
................................
A new take on the Emperor's New Clothes. I love the idea of telling the voters our party is ineffective but the Republicans are even more ineffective. It is interesting that AXOLOTL in his obsession to fire teachers never considers that the new teacher hired as a replacement may be worse.

No thought that the Democrats can select a new candidate for President in 2012.

In fact Democrats running for office in 2010 would probably gain votes by campaigning on the promise to work for selecting a new effective candidate for President in 2012.

I do not think that Democrats running for office in 2010 will get much mileage from "the Republican are worse" after one year and a half of an ineffective President with majorities in both Houses of Congress.

Posted by: bsallamack | August 11, 2010 4:31 PM | Report abuse

bsallamack,

On a March 4th posting of the "Core Knowledge" blog titled 'Ravitch: No U-Turn', Senechal admits that she helped Diane Ravitch, who is a member of the board of trustees at the "Core Knowledge" foundation, write the book 'The Life and Death of the Great American School System"

In a December 14th 2008 posting titled 'The Spillage of Muddy Language',
Senechal attacks writer Alfie Kohn because he's a well known critic of the "Core Knowledge" program for the same reasons I am. She says in the fourth bullet point down that Kohn ignores the fact that cash rewards send the message that the child shouldn't do anything for which they aren't paid. Senechal deliberately deceived her readers by not mentioning that Kohn wrote an entire book called 'Punished by Rewards' in which he made that very point!

Posted by: AlexKB | August 11, 2010 4:55 PM | Report abuse

No one should be surprised with Obama's stance on public schools, education, and teacher's. He touted many of these changes and opinions prior to being nominated and elected. I voted for him, but he was not my first choice.

What is wrong with RttT, and it was wrong with NCLB: The expectations are impossible to attain and the entire burden is placed on the classroom teacher. We are being set up for failure...and the children will be going down with us. If it was all about money, I would have gone to law school.

Posted by: ilcn | August 11, 2010 5:20 PM | Report abuse

Test scores are so racist. Who knew that I would be less racist than the first African American president?

Posted by: educationlover54 | August 11, 2010 5:35 PM | Report abuse

bsallamack,

In a December 14th 2008 posting titled 'The Spillage of Muddy Language',
Senechal attacks writer Alfie Kohn because he's a well known critic of the "Core Knowledge" program for the same reasons I am.
Posted by: AlexKB
...............................
Okay and if you read my comments on the Valerie Strauss:
Proficiency should mean college ready—and an acceptance letter,
you would see I might not be considered a supporter of Core Knowledge.

I still think an attack is unfair simply based upon past blogs unless it is relates directly to a point being made today by the writer.

One could easily attack me based upon comments I made in regard to President Obama when I supported him as a candidate.

Total embarrassment!

Posted by: bsallamack | August 11, 2010 6:12 PM | Report abuse

No one should be surprised with Obama's stance on public schools, education, and teacher's. He touted many of these changes and opinions prior to being nominated and elected.
Posted by: ilcn
.......................
All I remember from the campaign was criticism at the emphasis of "filling in the bubble".

Do not see how this could be seen as an indication of future policy based so heavily on standardized testing?

But then with this President he will be certain to point out that the standardized tests that are such a large part of his policies will not use a bubble shape for answers. A square will be used instead for answers.

See, the President has kept his campaign promises once in office.

Posted by: bsallamack | August 11, 2010 6:21 PM | Report abuse

Both Clinton and Obama attack No Child Left Behind Act
Wednesday, April 09, 2008
By Eleanor Chute, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

In his answers to the AFT, Mr. Obama said too much time is spent "preparing students for tests that do not provide any valuable, timely feedback on how to improve a student's learning. Creativity has been drained from classrooms as too many teachers are forced to teach fill-in-the-bubble tests."

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08100/871524-298.stm
..................................
I love the internet.

President:
We do not support standardized tests with fill-in-the-bubble for answers.

The superior standardized tests we support will use fill-in-squares for answers.

Posted by: bsallamack | August 11, 2010 6:34 PM | Report abuse

Time for teachers in this country to tell their unions to provide support to any Democratic candidate running for office in 2010 that promises to work for selecting a new candidate for President in 2012.

If enough unions would do this Americans might actually have a candidate in 2012 they could vote for instead of candidate that simply lied to them in 2008.

Let President Obama seek the Republican nomination since his policies are more suited for the Republicans than the Democrats.

Posted by: bsallamack | August 11, 2010 7:03 PM | Report abuse

bsallamack: He supported merit pay. As a Illinois State Rep, he supported charter schools and other strategies that are now part of Race to the Top.

I attended several of his speeches, and was among the NEA delegates at the NEA Convention when he spoke in 2007(?). While he was generally supportive of teachers, there was no mistake that there would be a price to pay.

However, I don't think anyone could have predicted he would hang his hat on a flawed program like RttT.

While I certainly am not an NEA insider..as a matter of fact, no longer a member... it was obvious to me, (as a politically naiive participant) the NEA was going to suppport Obama, even though Hillary Clinton was the better education candidate.

Posted by: ilcn | August 12, 2010 9:54 AM | Report abuse

There is great danger in the rush of Race to the Top. To compete for funds, states must embrace reforms that haven’t been fully tested, reforms rife with problems, reforms in which they may not even believe. In other words, thoughtfulness and integrity are pushed aside. This is deadly for education.

This does not define reform this defines change. Reform is change for the better not change for the sake of change. RTTT assumes that any change will be better than what we have. RTTT was a sad day for education. Basically, the president said public education is a total failure and any change will make it better.

Posted by: stephennouskhajian | August 12, 2010 9:56 AM | Report abuse

Basically, the president said public education is a total failure and any change will make it better.

Posted by: stephennouskhajian
................................
Cartoon Bubble 1 of the President.
"Public education is issue I can exploit for my reelection."

Cartoon Bubble 2 of the President.
"Bush got Americans into bashing teachers and was reelected, how can I tap into this."

Cartoon Bubble 3 of the President.
"Most Americans hate unions."

Cartoon picture of the President smiling.

Posted by: bsallamack | August 12, 2010 1:02 PM | Report abuse

While I certainly am not an NEA insider..as a matter of fact, no longer a member... it was obvious to me, (as a politically naiive participant) the NEA was going to suppport Obama, even though Hillary Clinton was the better education candidate.

Posted by: ilcn
...................
I had some doubts also when there was a speech about the problems of NAFTA and one of his aides told the Canadians that this was nothing to worry about.

Have you seen the latest where the White House press secretary said liberal critics were the professional left?
Supposedly the President agreed with this.

Nice to see the lessons of Senator McCarthy are still around.
I am sure there were discussion of using the term "card carrying left".

Posted by: bsallamack | August 12, 2010 1:17 PM | Report abuse

Yep...Seems the White House doesn't like being held accountable for issues out of their control...surprise! surprise! But that is exactly what he is doing to teachers.

Posted by: ilcn | August 12, 2010 1:55 PM | Report abuse

"RTTT assumes that any change will be better than what we have." That's absolutely correct. Absolutely!

Lifting the cap on charter schools is better than condemning entire urban district students and their families to no choice. Regardless of the performance of charters, at least they have lent some degree of empowerment to the parents of millions of these students. They've suffered too long in the abyss of despair.

Linking student test scores to teacher evaluations will finally inject some objectivity into the process, a process which has been an embarrassment to the teaching profession. The existing administrative subjective evaluations, by themselves, in too many districts offered nothing in the way of determining which teachers were and which teachers were not getting the job done in the classroom.

Shuttering or realigning chronically under-performing schools can only yield better results as nothing, I mean NOTHING, has been as bad as the lack of performance of so many of these drop out factories. A classic example of "any change" being better than what we have.

Posted by: phoss1 | August 13, 2010 6:54 AM | Report abuse

Lifting the cap on charter schools – charter schools do not perform any better than public schools

Linking student test scores to teacher evaluations – how do you accomplish this? It has been tried and failed so many times that by now you would think a process would be in place but alas, there is no way to do it.

Shuttering or realigning chronically under-performing schools – all this does is move low performing kids into high performing schools and those kids don’t do any better they are just offset by the higher performing kids.

BTW, there are 4 realignment models being proposed. None of them involve getting the parents involved.

Posted by: stephennouskhajian | August 13, 2010 9:27 AM | Report abuse

Parent involvment huh? Becoming a parent does not make you an expert in educating children. I have eyes, but I am not an eye doctor. I leave my eye care in the hands of PROFESSIONALS and I do what they tell me to do. Several parents of my students have only an 8th grade education. When I tell them what they need to do to help their child, they refuse. Also, schools are penalized financially when students are retained. I'm all for accountability. But NO ONE seems to be wanting STUDENT accountability.

Posted by: sharrell2 | August 13, 2010 12:04 PM | Report abuse

So it is the dentists fault if you get cavities?
Parent involvement is paying attention to your child. You don't need an education to participate. You need a desire to support your child, show concern and instill respect for and a need for education in your child. Insure homework is completed. That is parent involvement. Instead, you send your children to school and expect others to do it for you.
Maybe we should measure dentists against how many cavities their patients get, or the doctor by how fat their patients are. Imagine hearing: my doctor told me how to lose weight but because I won’t follow their direction and eat properly or exercise, it must be the doctor’s fault. Or maybe measure hospitals by the number of folks who die. I can see it now; no hospital will take any terminal patients because if you are measured by the number who die, why weave the rope that hangs you and treat them.

Posted by: stephennouskhajian | August 13, 2010 2:54 PM | Report abuse

For PHOSS1
School kids get lesson on education reform

He lectured teachers, students and parents on the need to "step up their games" if the United States wants to compete with India and China in the global economy. It was Obama as scold in chief. page 2.

Obama also brought Education Secretary Arne Duncan to discuss the administration's "Race to the Top" grants, billions of dollars designed to encourage states to adopt reforms such as measuring teacher performance by student achievement. page 1.

The whole article is still available:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/04/AR2009110403864.html
....................................
It should be recognized what PHOSS1 is fighting for.

He is accepting the idea that "teachers students and parents need to "step up their games" if the United States wants to compete with India and China in the global economy.

Apparently to this President and to PHOSS1, children are simply seen to be responsible for our economy.

The entire idea of Race To The Top is an absurdity based upon the false idea that children are responsible for our economy.

Remember Johnnie do well in school today the future of the America economy is dependent upon this.

On this absurd logic our economic collapse in 2008 was simply because a previous generation of American teachers students and parents that did not "step up their games".

Posted by: bsallamack | August 13, 2010 2:57 PM | Report abuse

Stephen,

Your reading comprehension skills leave much to be desired. As well your critical thinking and problem solving are bordering anemic.

BS,

You're simply out to lunch and too narrowly focused on your own ideas, some of which aren't terrible. You do, however, need to consider all sides of a debate, not just yours.

Posted by: phoss1 | August 14, 2010 6:06 AM | Report abuse

phoss1
are you referring to Stephen's
Parent involvement is paying attention to your child. You don't need an education to participate. You need a desire to support your child, show concern and instill respect for and a need for education in your child. Insure homework is completed. That is parent involvement. Instead, you send your children to school and expect others to do it for you
or
bsallamack
either way, they must have hit home for such an arrogant response

Posted by: sn60777 | August 14, 2010 9:32 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company