I concur with the general consensus that reforms to our school systems are urgently needed, if for no other reason than to equip as many people as possible with the tools to participate in tomorrow’s economy. However, while reforms without comparative measures of performance (or, ‘accountability’) are meaningless, so are reforms that function as ultimatums and/or presume their standards to be sound and just. This explains in part why NCLB is bad law, including its conspicuous lack of uniform and realistic achievement metrics.

Unfortunately, while I agree that NCLB could be heralded for its accountability, the reality is that it has been so watered down that accountability does not exist. I have yet to see an administrator replaced.

Which gets us to the ultimate issue: the federal government has no role whatsoever in education. If it would step aside as it should, states might find the flexibility they need to enact change.

What is there to be careful of? None of the foundational documents of this nation mention education as a right. Education is a privilege. What folks want to “perceive” is on them. As far as teachers unions go, while they are not the sole culprit behind poor school systems, these unions have consistently shown that the financial comfort of their members comes before the quality of education they are supposed to give–especially in lower-income areas. Also I think that it is also fair to mention here that these selfish demands originate more from the union system itself than the teachers (in most school districts, teachers are not given the option to opt out of membership or paying dues).

Politicians, Democrat and Republican, mostly use education today as a wedge issue.

I can agree with this to a measure. While I do have some issues with NCLB, the one thing that I do like about it is that it forces schools to meet certain objectives or lose funding. No need to continue to fund a school if the average GPA is below college entry requirements. Democrats have fought against ANY notion of real accountability on public schools and school choice for parents who are locked in a underperforming school district.

One of the unfortunate things that has happened as a result of NCLB is that in many instances, schools have either lowered standards in order to give the appearance that students are “excelling” in certain subjects. Only when these kids apply for college do they realize the extent of the damage. I would not be surprised that in the next 20 years of so that college will be blended in with primary education in order to cover this growing problem.

I’d be careful if I were you to avoid minimizing a perceived ‘right’ to education or scapegoating teachers’ unions. Both positions are inherently anti-(small ‘d’) democratic and contrary to American real politik.

Politicians, Democrat and Republican, mostly use education today as a wedge issue. The issue is rarely discussed in terms of a social investment necessary to a highly commercialized economy. So I think it’s a mistake to analyze the conditions in terms of absolute $$$ spent in a given system, especially when the objectives set forth are so ill-defined. There’s also a disagreement in our society over what constitutes ‘education’ (in the abstract) and what level of achievement represents basic competency. That’s why ‘school system X spent $Y/student’ doesn’t have much value in a debate on improving education.