It’s been awhile since I outright fawned over President Obama, so I’m going to let this one fly without any restraint or reserve: His speech to the NAACP last week kicked butt. It was transcendent. It was inspirational. It was honest, direct, bold, and, I hope, important, maybe a turning point.
Don’t just read it; watch it or listen to it. (I was driving home from the Delaware shore last night and caught it on public radio; I’m glad I did.) Because it was the interaction between the president and his audience that was so powerful. Here’s a sample:
The state of our schools is not an African American problem; it is an American problem. (Applause.) Because if black and brown children cannot compete, then America cannot compete. (Applause.) And let me say this, if Al Sharpton, Mike Bloomberg, and Newt Gingrich can agree that we need to solve the education problem, then that’s something all of America can agree we can solve. (Applause.) Those guys came into my office. (Laughter.) Just sitting in the Oval Office — I kept on doing a double-take. (Laughter and applause.) So that’s a sign of progress and it is a sign of the urgency of the education problem. (Applause.) All of us can agree that we need to offer every child in this country — every child –
AUDIENCE: Amen!
THE PRESIDENT: Got an “Amen corner” back there — (applause) — every child — every child in this country the best education the world has to offer from cradle through a career.
And then this, which got most of the press coverage:
But all these innovative programs and expanded opportunities will not, in and of themselves, make a difference if each of us, as parents and as community leaders, fail to do our part by encouraging excellence in our children. (Applause.) Government programs alone won’t get our children to the Promised Land. We need a new mind set, a new set of attitudes — because one of the most durable and destructive legacies of discrimination is the way we’ve internalized a sense of limitation; how so many in our community have come to expect so little from the world and from themselves.
We’ve got to say to our children, yes, if you’re African American, the odds of growing up amid crime and gangs are higher. Yes, if you live in a poor neighborhood, you will face challenges that somebody in a wealthy suburb does not have to face. But that’s not a reason to get bad grades — (applause) — that’s not a reason to cut class — (applause) — that’s not a reason to give up on your education and drop out of school. (Applause.) No one has written your destiny for you. Your destiny is in your hands — you cannot forget that. That’s what we have to teach all of our children. No excuses. (Applause.) No excuses.
You get that education, all those hardships will just make you stronger, better able to compete. Yes we can. (Applause.)
Of course, not everyone is happy with this line of argument. The socialists, for example, detest it. More reason to sing its praises!
It’s true that there wasn’t any policy substance in the speech that was particularly new or different. But we policy wonks tend to overrate policy substance anyway. Here’s an African-American president, speaking to the NAACP, and arguing for reform in our schools and responsibility in our homes and community. This is worth celebrating.
So I’m bringing back the Obama Administration Reform-o-Meter for a special appearance (take that, AFT!), and happily giving the Red Hot label to this speech. Do you agree? Cast your vote below.
It is too bad that this message was only delivered to the NAACP. It needs to be delivered to “white folks too!” He should deliver the same message to the AFT, to CNN, Fox News, all the nation’s Governors (especially Ohio’s) and the nation at large!
But that’s not a reason to get bad grades — (applause) — that’s not a reason to cut class — (applause) — that’s not a reason to give up on your education and drop out of school.
Telling parents to “do their part” has nothing to do with reform. In fact, it is the opposite of reform.
Here, drawn from a four-part series published in the LA Times, is the reality of public education:
Each morning, when Gabriela Ocampo looked up at the chalkboard in her ninth-grade algebra class, her spirits sank.
There she saw a mysterious language of polynomials and slope intercepts that looked about as familiar as hieroglyphics.
She knew she would face another day of confusion, another day of pretending to follow along. She could hardly do long division, let alone solve for x.
“I felt like, ‘Oh, my God, what am I going to do?’ ” she recalled.
Gabriela failed that first semester of freshman algebra. She failed again and again — six times in six semesters. [emphasis added] And because students in Los Angeles Unified schools must pass algebra to graduate, her hopes for a diploma grew dimmer with each F.
Midway through 12th grade, Gabriela gathered her textbooks, dropped them at the campus book room and, without telling a soul, vanished from Birmingham High School.
Her story might be just a footnote to the Class of 2005 except that hundreds of her classmates, along with thousands of others across the district, also failed algebra.
Of all the obstacles to graduation, algebra was the most daunting.
A Formula for Failure in LA Schools
By Duke Helfand, Times Staff Writer
January 30, 2006
Los Angeles Times
Admonishing Gabriela’s parents to “value excellence” will not solve Gabriela’s problem, because Gabriela’s problem has nothing to do with her parents or even with her.
Gabriela’s problem is that the school has failed to teach her arithmetic (she can “barely do” long division) and she is not remotely prepared to learn algebra. If the school were responsible for student learning, it would back Gabriela up to the point where she ‘fell off the math track’ and teach her the prerequisite skills before enrolling her in algebra. But public schools are not responsible for student learning, and no amount of persistence in the face of obstacles will change Gabriela’s fate. She could take algebra another 6 times; the outcome would be the same.
Many thousands of middle and upper middle class students also enter high school unprepared to do high school work. The difference is that middle and upper middle class students have parents who can reteach content at home (this is called “helping with homework”) or hire tutors to do so.
I speak from experience; I spent 3 years reteaching math to my middle school son. My sister is, just this week, reviewing the factorization of polynomials so she can reteach the subject to her son, who must pass a test in his remedial algebra course in community college. He graduated high school only after his parents spent many thousands of dollars on one of the big tutoring companies (Sylvan or Huntington), which taught him enough algebra to pass the state test. Now he needs tutoring to pass the college test.
There is nothing out of the ordinary about this. A friend told me she had so many tutors coming and going last school year that she couldn’t keep track of them all. Another close friend is spending $160/week on a tutor whose job it is to keep her son from failing. That is nearly $7000 a year to get just one child through public school.
Here at home, one of my son’s favorite ads is the “I hate school” commercial for Huntington Learning Center.
“If the student hasn’t learned, the teacher hasn’t taught.”
Siegfried Engelmann
Here’s an African-American president, speaking to the NAACP, and arguing for reform in our schools and responsibility in our homes and community.
Notice the lack of any responsibility for schools. If school staff, the paid professionals, aren’t responsible for learning, why pay them?
And if parents are going to be responsible, then they should have the money, which they can then use to hire teachers if they think it’s worthwhile.
If this was a speech by another person I would rate it red hot. Given this president’s history of saying one thing while doing another, I tend to think of his ‘speeches’ as aggravated assault on the language.
How can someone espouse responsibility who has simultaneously allowed congress to write his policies for three major programs paid for by borrowing trillions of dollars that we don’t have and can’t pay for.
Red hot? Not! His own kids aren’t being subjected to the public schooling he fails to critique.
Tracy –hooray!! Your comment takes us right back to the way education was done before compulsory schooling based on the prussian model designed solely to raise “good citizens” who are trained to be “loyal” solely to the state. The parents paid the teacher. The teacher was loyal to the parents and taught what the parents wanted. Students learned!! Literacy was incredibly high…
Tracy — thank you!! I agree completely!!
Tracy – wow.
Your comment has to be one of the most succinct rebuttals of an argument I’ve ever read.
Putting it on the parents is the view that has prevailed in education for the past few decades. The following “view of education” taken from the website of a math teacher in California echoes it as well:
“My view of education (by Mr. Rydberg, retired math teacher; adopted by Mr. Pearson.) :
Since only about 3% of a child’s first 18 years of life is spent in school, I believe a child’s education is the primary responsibility of the parent(s); my role is to support and assist in that endeavor. Although I am committed to work hard, your student cannot do well without your help. You are crucial and indispensable. With these commitments in place, the success of your child will be a delight to us all. But, you are the key, without you, (checking homework and helping prepare for tests; providing a quiet place and time to study; being accountable for results; making time to discuss school work; and helping with organization), their success will be limited. ”
(Emphasis added)
Tracy W,
That’s weird.
After Obama EXPLICITLY puts SOME of the responsibility on teachers — “We’re creating incentives for states to promote excellent teachers and replace bad ones because the job of a teacher is too important for us to accept anything less than the best” — you pretend that he didn’t say that.”
I strongly disagree with Mike’s assessment:
http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/07/21/more-undeserved-praise-for-obamas-naacp-speech/
Adam,
The Cato Institute article does an excellent job of illustrating the most glaring defect in President Obama’s and the public voice of the Education Industry’s argument over parent involvement. That being that the highest level of parental involvement is school choice, curriculum involvement/veto and teacher choice. You can’s say that uninvolved parents are the main reason for education’s failings and then do everything in your power to limit parent involvement when it doesn’t fit your template.