Wash Post Needs History Lesson

The Washington Post needs a little educational hisory lesson. In an editorial from Friday called Needs Improvement the Post takes on the issue of teacher preparation. In what I thought would be a contribution to the idea that Jenny D, Ms. Frizzle, and I have expounded on regarding figuring out what teachers need to learn in school to be effective teachers,

a plethora of think tanks, professional associations and experts of all stripes have recently focused their attention on teachers: who they are, what they studied and how much more effective they could be...The Education Trust, which has studied the extraordinarily weak content of teacher training curriculums, advocates rigorous quality standards that will make the entire teaching "market" more effective by identifying better teachers and allowing them to command higher salaries.

The Post then drops the ball, focusing on things like incentive pay and Teach for America. While there is little doubt that these initiatives have their successes, it does not address the fact that over time, we as a society have done little to discover why some teachers are more effective than others outside of issues of outside incentives, like increased pay or other incentives.

Not bypassing an opportunity to take a little dig at the Bush Administration, the Post drops this little gem into the mix:

Since the president's No Child Left Behind Act -- which mandated the new accountability -- broke the taboo on federal involvement in education.

Here are a few facts:

In 1965 the landmark Elementary and Secondary Education Act drastically increased the role of the federal govenrment in education. Since that time, the federal government has, according to some conservative estimates, spent nearly $2 trillion dollars on education. But since the ESEA was a cornerstone of Democratic President Lyndon Johnson, the Post implies that ESEA is not federal involvement in education.

In 1994, President Clinton and a Democratic Congress passed Goals 2000: Educat America Act, which in addtion to billions of dollars in spending, established a series of bureaucratic offices including National Educaiton Goals Panel, National Education Standards and Improvement Counci,l and National Skill Standards Board among dozens of other agencies designed to increase the federal involvement in education. Of course that was President Clinton, supported by the Post, thus not really federal government involvment.

In fact, the federal government involvement in education, predicated upon the supply of billions of dollars of grants and aid, has a long history predating NCLB. While we can decry and the Post is free to decry, the excessive involvment of the federal govenrment in what is traditionally a state and local concern, let us not mince facts, the federal government is involved and has been for over 40 years.

Hat Tip: Eduwonk