Entry #3 -- Debate on Education Solutions

Click here for Democratic Education Debate video

Some of this may not make sense if you haven't seen the videos, so if you get lost, just click the link, select the candidate, and then click education to watch that portion of the debate. :-D (This blog focuses on the Democratic candidates b/c that's the only education debate I found so far; I haven't found a Republican education debate to comment on yet -- maybe I'll find one for the next blog.)

First of all, though... wow... a lot of the candidates seemed to just be regurgitating ideas from our Kozol text. Did anyone else notice that? Or maybe those ideas are popular complaints and a few candidates are actually listening... hahaha yeah maybe

I look forward to your feedback/opinions on these b/c these debates are always a matter of interpretation so I may need some different perspectives. Anyway a few of my thoughts on particular points of each candidate:


1.) Biden -- Major focus was on a College Access Program

The program will implement a $3000 Tax Credit -- If I understand this correctly, it's a yet another tax CREDIT, so who is this really going to help? It's not going to benefit those who are in poverty because they don't make enough money to put themselves over the taxable limit which would allow them to claim this credit -- It sounds similar to the hope and lifetime learning credits being offered now, if you don't make over a certain amount, it won't matter if you claim it because it's not adjusting your income since you're below the taxable level already. It may help some middle-class people but primarily it's giving the upper-class yet another tax credit. (Yes, he did mention increasing the pell grant amount, but $4500/year still doesn't make that much of a dent if colleges average $15,000/semester [$30K/yr] for tuition, board, books, etc. The current pell grant amount is $4,050, meaning an increase of only $450, but the people who earn enough to claim the credit can get $3000 off their adjustable gross income -- and he didn't state whether this was in addition to the other learning credits.) Thinking about this program irritates me... College Access for whom? Those who could already afford it? Sounds like he thought this through REALLY well, doesn't it?

He believes in early education programs such as Pre-Head Start and Head-Start as well as competent pre-school programs and starting kids at age 3 instead of age 6 but doesn't mention a universal pre-K program and doesn't talk about how these programs should be funded or if he even thinks funding should be changed.

No Child Left Behind (NCLB) -- He thought it would have been good if funded and implemented correctly, but says it now needs overall improvement. Agrees with having standards but says not to "teach to the test" and says to measure progress against a standard to consider progress made but doesn't mention how he thinks this should be done other than by saying start earlier, smaller classes, "better" teachers, and college.

My thoughts: I got the impression that education wasn't a priority to him and his campaign. Hard to pick out a few pro points in this one other than the smaller classes, etc. but no description was given on how to provide for those features. :o\ After viewing the clip, do you guys agree or disagree? Maybe I missed something...


2.) Clinton -- "Education is an Afterthought"

Education Agenda: Universal PreK, Changing NCLB, Affordable college and training/apprenticeship for non-college bound kids, looking at role of family and society

Is education working in the 21st century? "Other than computers, everything looks the same..." She thinks children need to be better prepared for education in the 21st century. When talking about how to do this, she said each person has opinions but didn't really provide one of her own. "Everyone's an expert because we went to school." Her only comment on it: "The public school system worked so well for us for so long." (WHAT?!?!?!) Sounds like she needs to do a bit more research...

She was asked a question by Kozol about testing created by NCLB producing robotic test-prep factories to which her response was that she believes in accountability and a place for testing but then says children are not walking tests and called for assessments but under a broad, rich curricula. Again, no real answer was provided. I guess they should have called this presidential questions instead of presidential debate... Kind of seems like specifics on improving education are a bit of an afterthought to her as well.

My thoughts: At least she acknowledged funding for apprenticeship and other training programs besides college. (but again didn't provide details on how to make them "affordable")


3.) Dodd -- Perspective regarding parent/teacher dynamic

He said education improves individual opportunities but that our government also depends on well-educated society. 'Education starts with parents.' He said children are not ready to learn in our country today. Sure he agrees with having Pre-K and Head Start programs, but the first educators are parents. I did agree with his point that not enough is being done to assist and support the parents. More needs to be done to allow people to try to be more active in the education of their children. (I know this was a debated topic in class which is why I thought it was interesting that Dodd mentioned it as well.)

Free college program -- He proposed a free community college education in which the federal and state governments would each pay 50% of the tuition for the students. He also proposed an expansion of pell grant and work study programs, incentives for americorps/peacecorps, indexing college tuition to keep tuition from increasing so much, and proposed a sliding scale for payback of loans for careers that don't pay as much. The sliding scale is an interesting concept -- but of course it depends on the implementation.

My thoughts: I liked some of what he said about providing more support to families but again lack of details about how -- it's one thing to say it, it's another to actually plan it. Some of the education incentives seemed like he gave them some thought -- but since his college program is based on community college, I think he should add vo-tech/BOCES, apprenticeship, etc. type programs to this as well.


4.) Edwards -- Another one who didn't answer the question posed to him

A mother's perspective -- A college-educated mother who has been laid off and not able to find employment asked how these situations encourage children to attend college?

His response: College-for-Everyone Program -- For those who are qualified to go to college and agree to work 10 hrs/wk -- covers undergraduate tuition and books at a public university (which cuts down on debt for college students)

He states people need to rethink education -- think of it as a "Birth to Death Experience" by starting children much earlier (than 3-4 yrs) and much more intensely. Provide better health care and nutrition support for those who need it. Raise teacher pay (and bonus pay for those working with at-risk), change NCLB. Supports a national infrastructure (instead of the current non-standardized one) for continuous education in the workforce.

My thoughts: Seemed more optimistic about education reform/improvement in terms of feasibility. I like the "Birth to Death" experience in theory, but I don't necessarily agree with forcing a formal education on infants and toddlers -- they need time to develop their creative thinking and to explore their new worlds. It bothered me that he didn't even acknowledge the question that was asked of him though. Good thoughts on health care and raising teacher pay as
well as continuous education -- but, again, how to implement and find funding for this?


5.) Gravel -- Are we failing our children?

Answer: How could we not, when our focus is on military development. Education needs to be first priority. A lot of focus on "Compete and Succeed"-- to include a year-round school system, competition in education, "super" teachers, and not just throwing money at it "since money goes primarily to administrators not children." He proposes a property tax to fund schools and says poor communities have poor education because they don't have property tax? (Ranting in my head about this one) -- Isn't property tax based on the value of the property? How is that really going to help the "poor communities" in getting a "rich" education? This proposal REALLY irritates me for some reason -- it just seems asinine to the primary funding of the education based on a property tax. It just seems detrimental to inner-city and rural areas on a number of levels. Increasing the tax on farmers who are already just barely getting by, causing them to sell what land they have left and discouraging those in inner-cities from buying properties because they will have to pay a higher tax on it. Surely we can come up with better ideas to fund education than by increasing a tax that will hinder those already being hurt by the system?!? Another point he made: Other countries educate children at no cost but US can't match that? (Is he wanting to use these property taxes to fund a free college program for everyone as well?)

My thoughts: Empowering American people to make laws (but how?); education is not top priority (and it shows) and needs to be. Maybe I misunderstand this property tax thing -- perhaps someone can explain to me how it will benefit the communities who need the most help?

6.) Kucinich -- Universal Pre-K and Improving Early Education

Basically, he calls for the end of NCLB saying testing isn't the end all and be all of education. He recognizes that many students have started out behind and proposes a stronger early education program to include universal PreK. Also believes the country needs to focus more on education -- to make it the top domestic priority and stresses the importance of developing a love of knowledge. Proposed funding to include a 15% cut in pentagon budget to fund universal pre-k and increase funding to elementary and secondary education. He also mentioned a universal college plan but didn't really provide details on it.

My thoughts: Believes in making education a primary focus by attempting to improve it at all levels, from universal pre-k to universal college. Would like more details on implementation and funding since more funding will be needed than just the 15% from pentagon budget. How to address the resources issue that we discussed in class? Sounds like a good general idea but needs more development and specifics.

7.) Obama -- A lot of ideas, a little bit of substance

He was asked to assess the American education system? How well is it doing from K-high school?

He said it is doing very well for some, but not very well for all. States NCLB is false advertising,. Believes a sense of urgency about improving education system needs to be restored to remain competitive in new global economy. Says there are challenges and opportunities in having to recruit a new generation of teachers (since baby boomer generation will be retiring) but doesn't mention what they are. Believes the most important ingredient in the education system is the quality of the teacher in front of classroom -- so they should have more pay, more professional development, and to work with them (instead of against them) to improve standards. Believes in providing bonuses for math and science teachers and bonuses for teachers in "tough" settings (inner city and rural schools) and wants to improve early childhood education (said over half the work force is going to be black and brown -- so need to step up education for these children).

How to make competitive on world scene? Invest more in early childhood education, for those at-risk, start as soon as they're born and support parents. Improve math and science instruction -- find innovative ways to make it interesting.

My thoughts: Seems to recognize some of the issues in education but provides no real feasible solutions on how to begin to tackle them -- unfortunately, a lot of ideas without much substance. He's like the advice columnist who tells you what needs to be done w/out suggesting how to go about doing it or whether it's actually possible considering the current situation.


8.) Richardson -- 15 yr Competition Goal

Feels the high school curricula is not competitive. Wants to emphasize arts, etc. and not just science and math (in contrast to Obama's view). Scrap NCLB. Proposes a minimum wage ($40,000) for teachers, revise high school curricula, start children earlier with pre-school (early childhood for children under 4), full-day Kindergarten, no one-size-fits-all-testing, and to help schools not performing well instead of hurting them by removing funding. 15 yr goal to make America #1 in science and math to increase global competition. Focused on legal immigration to help people remove red-tape to permit skilled workers (such as engineers) into our work force.

My thoughts: If the goal is to produce quality math and science engineers to be competitive, how will they find jobs in the States if visa and immigration laws become more lax? He seems to contradict himself with that thought -- students will not get the training they need if the jobs are not available, and why would they be encouraged to enter those fields if there isn't as high of a demand for jobs in those industries? Most will look at jobs outside of the States so the investment in funding their college won't be returned since they won't be working in our country. Also, a lot of engineering and science jobs are also being moved to other countries like Mexico and India, causing a shortage of those jobs here.

Overall thoughts -- For those proposing free college or loan assistance (sliding-scale) plans, I'd be interested to see how that would affect those already paying for college and those already repaying student loans. I also think they should give more thought to non-traditional students and how to make college/training programs more accessible to them to encourage our current generation to improve their situations with training/education of some sort. Also, what will replace NCLB since most proposed to end it? Should we try to develop national standards and assessments, and, if so, how do we determine what they should be? Some candidates stressed a need for more math and science, others for arts and broader curricula. I wasn't really completely satisfied with the funding proposals either -- I still think more research is needed, and trial programs should be implemented on smaller levels before adopting another national program like NCLB.

Another problem I have is this focus on ONE problem. Some did briefly acknowledge a few other things, but the education system is a problem with education alone. There are other social factors to consider -- health care, poverty, unemployment, etc. We can't just look at education as the end-all solution for all of the social problems. Also, again, I question the responsibility of the various levels of our society -- government, communities, and individuals and their roles and responsibilities that they have to work with each other as well. I also don't agree with a major focus on just science and mathematics. I think we are doing an injustice to our society by not also focusing on moral development to include empathy and cultural competency. Also, we our doing an injustice to our children by not allowing them the opportunity to partake in art, theatre, music, and sports programs. We need to shift our attitudes on having to be the dominant world power in everything. There is danger in power free from moral and ethical standards. Some candidates make it sound like a competition that must be successful at any cost.

As briefly mentioned in class, I think cultural competency should be emphasized more in the public school systems. Make it a requirement for students to learn about different cultures. We allow them to choose which foreign language they study; we could do something similar by providing some courses on different cultures for them to choose. For communities with more limited funding, then provide courses relevant to the diversity in that community or at least on a few of the more prevalent cultures such as African and Hispanic cultures and maybe Native American culture. For communities that can afford it, add to it to allow Asian, Russian, and other cultures. And for schools that still can't afford something like that -- maybe they can at least offer one class that focuses on a different culture each week. Yes, it's still a matter of resources, but at least it's one step that can be taken to help others become more aware of different cultures before (if) they go to college. When it comes to trying to change the attitudes as a society, we have to start somewhere -- no matter how small. I know there are other ways to do this, and I hope you all will provide some of your own suggestions.

I think we can also research other countries and their integration programs. As I mentioned before, I have a friend from the West Indies who said he didn't even know color was a factor in resources (employment, etc.) until he moved here after college. Looking into the programs of other countries may offer insight on how to change policies on a federal level to try to redistribute things a bit more. (Although, the big problem exists in shifting the view point of those in power... or shifting the power to those with a broader view point. Maybe schools should focus more on our political system as well -- to fully educate citizens in policy formation and how to change policies and lobby, etc. I think this might actually be a good classroom discussion for our one of our class sessions -- maybe it will help us to brainstorm or be more familiar with more possible resolutions or ways to make changes?)

ok....I think I'm feeling a bit critical today or something. Which candidates do you think made some valid points? Which ones do you think were blowing smoke out their butts?