________________________________________  THE VERMONT EDUCATION REPORT March 08, 2004 Vol. 4, No. 11 ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯  Covering education news in Vermont and beyond... Informative, provocative, unique... Published by Vermonters for Better Education  VBE is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization whose mission is to enlist parents and the public at large in achieving quality educational opportunities for all the children of Vermont by monitoring the state of education in Vermont; promoting the value of educational freedoms for all parents; and giving parents the evaluative tools with which to identify excellence. Libby Sternberg, executive director: VTBetterEd@aol.com NEWS & ANALYSIS... DEPUTY UNDERSECRETARY TO SPEAK IN VERMONT TUESDAY Nina S. Rees, deputy undersecretary for innovation and improvement with the U.S. Department of Education, will speak on Tuesday, March 9 from noon to 1:00 p.m. in Room 10 of the State House. The event is free and open to the public. All across America educators, school boards, entrepreneurs and parents are coming up with fascinating innovations to better serve the educational needs of America's children. The U.S. Department of Education's Office of Innovation and Improvement, headed by Nina Rees, has become a fountain of valuable information on new ideas. The Office manages 25 competitive grant programs for educational improvement. It has a program budget of $2 billion and a full-time staff of approximately 100. Prior to joining the U.S. Department of Education, Nina Rees was one of four aides to Vice President Cheney, advising him on education, crime, home ownership, race, welfare and other issues affecting families and children. Earlier she was the chief education analyst at the Heritage Foundation and spent two years on the staff of Representative Porter Goss, R-Fla., while earning her master's degree in International Transactions from George Mason University. She received her bachelor's degree in psychology from Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in 1989. Over the years Rees has been a frequent media commentator on education issues. Her articles have appeared in various national newspapers and magazines, including Business Week, The Los Angeles Times, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post and The Weekly Standard. A native of Iran, which she left at age 14, Rees is fluent in French and Persian. Rees comes to Vermont at the invitation of Gov. Jim Douglas.  NEA HELPS FILL VERMONT DEMOCRAT COFFERS Not surprisingly, the National Education Association's political action committee is one of the out-of-state PACS making donations to the Vermont Democrat Party. According to a Vermont Press Bureau article by Claude Marx, all the PACs contributing to the state's Democrat party are from out of state, the NEA among them. NEA PAC representatives apparently told Marx that there were issues pending before the state legislature "in which they were interested."  SPEAKING OF COFFERS Dear Readers, Last year, Vermonters for Better Education, the publisher of this newsletter, solicited funds for a radio ad campaign that will explain the benefits of school choice programs to Vermonters. With your help, I'm pleased to report we raised over $8,000 in a short amount of time. We'd like to double that amount, however, in the coming months as we start planning the radio campaign. If you've ever considered making a donation to Vermonters for Better Education, now's the time. Your contribution will help us reach more people and spread the good news about school choice. This advertising effort is more important than ever because it's never been clearer how intransigent the opposition to choice is and how powerful opponents are. To make a donation, send checks to: VBE, 170 Church Street, Rutland, VT 05701. And thanks for your continued support! Libby Sternberg Executive Director Vermonters for Better Education  IT'S OFFICIAL: HOUSE ED CHAIR WON'T RUN For several years, rumors have swirled that House Education Chairman Howard Crawford (R-Burke) would not seek re-election. Now it's official. Crawford says after serving in the legislature for 14 years, he wants to "refocus" on his job at the St. Johnsbury Academy and spend more time with his wife.  *   *   * ELSEWHERE  FROM THE TEACHER QUALITY BULLETIN (http://www.nctq.org) FEDERAL STUDY TO LOOK AT TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAMS " Hidden within the gloomy depths of a fiscal 2004 appropriations bill lies a $1.5 million allocation for the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) to study our nation's much-maligned teacher education programs. The study, the first of its kind since FDR's first year in the Oval Office, will look at what is being taught, how it's being taught, and the degree to which research is being used as a guide. "It is intended to be an advisory report on the quality of preparation," commented Grover J. "Russ" Whitehurst the director of the IES. While news of the report was welcomed by most, some expressed concern about the role being played by outspoken critic of traditional teacher preparation programs G. Reid Lyons, the chief of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. Mr. Lyons dismissed accusations of research bias saying, "This should be a productive process done by very objective, well-meaning bodies." "Congress Orders Thorough Study of Teacher Education Programs" Education Week, March 3, 2003 http://www.edweek.org/ew/ewstory.cfm?slug=25Flexner.h23 FROM THE NEW YORK TIMES: AN EDITORIAL RESCUING EDUCATION REFORM March 2, 2004 " Democratic presidential candidates have discovered that there's no more surefire applause line than an attack on the No Child Left Behind Act. The law was meant to deliver on President Bush's promise to improve public school education. But many teachers and school districts resent being forced to meet the law's tough standards. Some of the strongest resistance has come from Republican states like Utah, which are considering laws that would limit their compliance. The Bush administration has the high ground here. Although the program needs more funds and better administration, No Child Left Behind is tackling one of the nation's most critical problems: the substandard educational opportunities offered to poor and minority children. Fifty years have sped by since the Supreme Court ruled in Brown v. Board of Education that the practice of confining black children to segregated and often inferior schools violated the Constitution and generally consigned African-Americans to second-class citizenship. Nevertheless, all around the country, poor children are still trapped in failing schools, which poison their futures from the very start. The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 was intended to fix this problem. It requires the states to adopt high standards for all children and to place a qualified teacher in every classroom by 2006 in exchange for federal dollars. The new law will need tinkering here and there. But its goal and its general road map for getting there are the right ones. For the effort to truly equalize education to succeed, Congress will need to fight off destructive schemes by lobbyists and bureaucrats of both parties who are working hard to undermine the new initiative and to preserve the bad old status quo.... One of the most serious complaints about the law is that the federal government is asking states for big improvements in local schools but is not providing the money to pay for such changes. The Bush administration is correct when it says that school financing went up sharply under the new law. The money for Title I, which is aimed at the poorest students, went up by nearly a third - with proportionately more of the money going to the poorest districts. But the Title I allotment is also $6 billion short of what Congress authorized when it passed the law, and the amount states are getting is certainly not adequate to meet the tough standards the law sets. A retrograde faction of Democrats wants to use the financing gap as an excuse for backing away from the law. Last year, for example, Senator Richard Durbin of Illinois floated an amendment that would have exempted the states from complying at all until the federal government had paid out all of the money it had promised. The bill was morally indefensible and deserved to fail... Democratic legislators are also fearful of the National Education Association, the country's largest and most powerful teachers' union. The union has a history of vigorously resisting standards-based change and is dead set against making teachers subject to federally dictated qualification and performance standards. While Mr. Paige made an egregious error in referring to the union as a "terrorist organization," the N.E.A. has not served the cause of quality education well in this fight, particularly when it attempts to turn suburban parents against the new law. Instead of pandering to the law's opponents, whoever wins the Democratic nomination needs to seize what may be the country's last opportunity to achieve basic fairness in public education. That means standing up to wavering Democrats who are eager for a chance to jump ship. For the full editorial, go to.... http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/02/opinion/02TUE1.html?ex=1079235093&ei=1&en=c26440b2aeb8d1dc From The Education Intelligence Agency Communique (http://www.eiaonline.com) EDUCATION RHETORIC: THE INTEMPERATE POT, AND THE HYPOCRITICAL KETTLE by David W. Kirkpatrick, Senior Education Fellow. U.S. Freedom Foundation U.S. Secretary of Education Rod Paige, while recently addressing some of the nation's governors, referred to the National Education Association (NEA) as "a terrorist organization." Even Democratic governors present said he was attempting a joke and he promptly apologized. Nonetheless the NEA called upon him to be fired or resign, which virtually guarantees his tenure since no president is going to let someone go because the opposition calls for it. Paige's comment is also unfortunate because it has sidetracked much discussion of education. One estimate is that at least 1,000 items in the media have dealt with this story in just the first few weeks. The NEA is being hypocritical because its own rhetoric leaves much to be desired. It is also too often guilty of resorting to name-calling. For example, the NEA has reportedly described those who disagree with it as "congenital reactionaries, dangerous witch hunters, energized super patriots, ... and vitriolic race-haters." Then NEA-president Keith Geiger described school choice advocates as "voucher pushers," while a president of the Pennsylvania State Education Association called them "voucher vultures." American of Federation Teachers (AFT) President Sandra Feldman has been quoted as saying school choice supporters are "barbarians." Others supporting NEA's positions are no better. U.S. Senator Ted Kennedy said Republicans in Congress supporting a voucher program for the District of Columbia "should stop acting like plantation masters and start treating the people of D.C. with the respect they deserve." He didn't mention Congressional Democrats who support vouchers. The Senator has it backward. Plantation masters treat people like slaves who must do as they are told. Those favoring vouchers are for people making choices for themselves. It is Senator Kennedy who insists that those unable to afford an alternative must remain in the public school to which they are assigned, however bad it may be. Of course he, and members of his family, haven't had to attend even a good public school, none of which are apparently quite good enough for them. Then there is columnist Molly Ivins, often the source of colorful expressions. She has written that vouchers supporters are "fruitcakes unlimited, flat-earthers, creationists, all manner of remarkable specimens." In Massachusetts, a parent of a charter school student was called a "charter whore." NEA officials have demonstrated remarkable tolerance for such language, apparently never rebuking anyone for such rhetoric, or apologizing for it when one of their own was the source for them. It goes beyond just words. While Paige overstated the case, there is some justification for his remarks. Some time ago a northeastern Pennsylvania teacher union activist, discussing with a colleague difficult negotiations with their school board, said maybe porches should be blown off the homes of school board members to teach them a lesson. Unknown to him the conversation was recorded and later played on an area radio station for all to hear. The state association president, the same one who used the "voucher vultures" expression, was asked for a reaction. She said recording the conversation was illegal and offered no criticism of her member's comments. When he later retired, the association paid tribute to him as a dedicated teacher and union member. In western Pennsylvania a school board member had a part of her house set on fire during a strike. While the perpetrator is unknown and possibly was not a teacher, the local union expressed no sympathy for the board member or condemnation of whoever did it. In Wisconsin, State Rep. Annette "Polly" Williams, who sponsored the school choice bill for the Milwaukee program, received death threats when she said she would introduce a bill mandating that teachers send their own children to the schools in which they taught. In California a parent who was also a PTA member was ordered removed from school premises when he sought to circulate a petition to start a charter school. Worse, his car was vandalized and he and his family were so harassed at their home that they had to move. At least Secretary Paige confined himself to one ill-considered remark. David Kirkpatrick is a Bennington Vermont native and a former public school teacher and PA-NEA officer. FROM COLUMNIST CLARENCE PAGE IN THIS INSTANCE, LIFE SHOULD IMITATE ART by Clarence Page Halfway through last week's episode of NBC's "West Wing," I was jerked alert by a scene that, as network promos say, was ripped from the headlines. It was a scene that illustrated how much easier it is for a fictitious president like Jed Bartlet, played by Martin Sheen, to behave like a statesman than it is for a real one. The issue was school vouchers. The District of Columbia's Democratic mayor and the president of its school board had broken party ranks to ally with congressional Republicans behind an experimental program to help low-income D.C. pupils attend private schools at taxpayer expense. Hard to imagine? Not at all. Up to that point, the TV program matched real life. Amid heated controversy, the Republican Congress in January approved a $14 million voucher program to enable hundreds of D.C. schoolchildren to attend private schools at taxpayer expense this coming fall. The bill, supported by President Bush, also was supported by Mayor Anthony Williams and School Board President Peggy Cooper Cafritz. Both are black Democrats but also fiercely independent enough to shrug off the disapproval of national Democrats when they see a chance to get something - anything! - out of Congress to help D.C. pupils. Now President Bartlet is a Democrat and, like most Washington Democrats, he would rather fall facedown on hot knives than give up his opposition to school vouchers. But the mayor is resolute. He's ready to accept help for his city's students anywhere he can, even from Republicans. So President Bartlet plays what he thinks will be an ace in the hole. He invites his college-aged personal aide, Charlie Young, played by Dule Hill, into the room and asks what high school he went to. Charlie responds with "Roosevelt," a D.C. public high school. Bartlet smirks, satisfied that such a fine young man came out of a public school. The mayor, unmoved, asks Charlie what high school he would have gone to if he had his wishes. Charley responds, "Gonzaga," naming a well-respected Catholic high school. Why? "Never a shooting," he says. "No metal detectors. Everybody there goes to college. ..."  Asked what he thinks of the proposed voucher program, he says, "I wish they had one when I was in school." Bartlet looks into Charlie's eyes, then he turns to the mayor. "Your honor," he says, "I'm going to need your help putting out some fires within the party on this one." The mayor is delighted. The president has changed his mind and is willing to spend serious political capital for vouchers. The vignette made me wonder: Will we ever see a real-life Democratic president willing to go up against his party's base, particularly the teachers union, to show the sort of statesmanlike independence that Bartlet did? I called Lawrence O'Donnell, a "West Wing" consulting producer and former aide to the late Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-N.Y.) It turned out that he scripted the voucher episode. He was inspired by his Washington experiences. He was in the room, for example, when President Bill Clinton put out fires with the unions and House Democratic leader Dick Gephardt over the North American Free Trade Agreement bill. But O'Donnell, who also helps hold up the liberal end of "The McLaughlin Group," told me he also was inspired by his earlier experiences as a substitute school teacher in the Boston area. Experience in really run-down schools, where even the teachers had lost hope, changed O'Donnell's mind about vouchers. "I saw kids academically dying before my eyes," he said. "I found it too painful to actually look in their eyes and say, "No," even if there is a better school around the corner, there are policy reasons why I cannot tell you to go there. Or help you to go there." Polls show most black Americans, statistically the Democratic Party's most loyal constituency, support vouchers like D.C.'s mayor and school board president do. For example, 57 percent of blacks and 60 percent of Hispanic-Americans supported vouchers, compared to only 52 percent of whites, in a 2002 poll by the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, a Washington-based think tank on black-oriented issues. "Black parents are more likely to be seeking a change for the better for their kids," said David Bositis, senior political analyst at the center. "A larger percentage of white parents are satisfied with their schools." That's why it is fun to imagine party leaders who, on an issue like this one, are willing to open the door, at least wide enough for some experimentation. When old ideas have played out, it makes sense to try some news ones, even if they come from your political opponents. Otherwise, as John F. Kennedy once said, sometimes party loyalty asks too much.  *   *   * The VERMONT EDUCATION REPORT is published by Vermonters for Better Education 170 Church Street, Rutland, VT 05701, 802.773.5240 Contact VTBetterEd@aol.com for more information.   Subscribe Here SubscribeRemove

---

Return to Education Report Index | Return to VBE Index | Vermonters for Better Education Homepage 

---

........