BFP Has it Right

The Burlington Free Press has it right on this issue.

*** COMMENTARY ***

A SCHOOL CONSPIRACY...
Burlington Free Press Editorial February 16, 2004

Some Vermont educators apparently believe that Sen. Edward Kennedy, most of his
fellow congressional Democrats and President Bush are engaged in a conspiracy to
destroy public education through the No Child Left Behind Act.

"It's a weapon of mass destruction aimed at the well-being of our nation's
public schools and the public's confidence in our public schools," said Angelo
Dorta, president of the Vermont-NEA, during a conference earlier this month.

Hold on. No Child Left Behind was largely drafted by Bush and Kennedy and more
House Democrats voted for it than their Republican counterparts. The measure was
also supported by Democratic presidential contenders Sens. John Kerry and John
Edwards.

It's absurd to think that all those people seek the demise of public education.

No Child Left Behind means just that. For the first time, the federal government
is holding schools accountable for ensuring that each American youngster --
whether poor child, handicapped child, immigrant child, rural child or
inner-city child --receives a quality education.

According to the 2003 scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress,
the "nation's report card," roughly 70 percent of the country's fourth and
eighth graders have reading and math skills below their grade level. Those
falling below standards are disproportionately low-income and minority
youngsters whose scholastic failings have long been tolerated by the public
education system.

The primary criticisms of No Child Left Behind center on cost and accountability
provisions. Those complaints are either premature or off-base.

As for academics, No Child Left Behind lets Vermont and other states define for
themselves what constitutes a solid education. Vermont has done that with its
Framework of Standards and Learning Opportunities. In effect, the federal
government is merely holding Vermont responsible for meeting its own educational
expectations.

Likewise, No Child Left Behind permits each state to select its own test to
measure academic performance. Vermont has done that, already mandating state
assessments in grades two, four, eight and 10. The only significant federal
change is that Vermont must also test grades three, five, six and seven.

It doesn't seem too much to ask young people to take one exam a year to help
gauge how well schools are doing.

The other major gripe is funding. Some educators claim No Child Left Behind
means approximately $130 billion in new costs annually.

That figure is disputed in a study released last week. James Peyser, chairman of
the Massachusetts Board of Education, and Robert Costrell, a professor of
economics at the University of Massachusetts, say that federal funds earmarked
for testing are "more than adequate."

They also note that between 2000 and 2004, federal educational spending
increased from $23 billion to $37 billion. At most, Peyser and Costrell say, No
Child Left Behind is underfunded by $8 billion nationwide, with the gap
primarily concentrated in a few large states.

In truth, no one really knows how much it will cost to reach the No Child Left
Behind goal that every American child is proficient in math and reading by 2014.
Indeed, the goal may be impossible.

But the law deserves a chance to work. The federal government is right to expect
that Vermont and other states fulfill their educational obligations to each
child.

If that's a conspiracy, it's one most Americans would support.