Follow the MoneyBush wants failed schools to lose federal funding. As reforms go,
good; but it's still just a baby stepBy MATT MILLER/LOS ANGELES
September 13, 1999
Web posted at: 3:42 p.m. EDT (1942 GMT)
To listen to the hyperventilating that followed George W. Bush's
maiden campaign speech on education the other day in Los Angeles,
you'd think the Texas Governor had proposed something radical.
"Dangerous," declared Education Secretary Richard Riley. "Risky,"
cried Sandra Feldman, president of the American Federation of
Teachers. Al Gore seemed downright mad: "Bush wants to slam the
door" on public schools, the Veep said, with a "back-door voucher
plan."
Jeepers. All Bush said was that in a program that amounts to 2%
of overall K-12 spending, some schools serving poor kids might,
if three years of state tests show they really stink and aren't
improving, see their federal (and some state) cash given instead
to parents in $1,500 chunks to use as they see fit. Forget
whether the idea is sound or not: the one sure thing is, it's so
modest that it won't accomplish much of anything.
That such small beer can set off a furor proves how ideologically
hamstrung our schools debate has become. Still, if Bush's plan is
largely symbolic, it's also sensible, offering coherent baby
steps to lift the skills of America's neediest kids. Take his
plan for Head Start, the popular preschool program that serves
850,000 disadvantaged children. While the 35-year-old program was
meant to close the achievement gap between poor and middle-class
toddlers, researchers agree it has brought no lasting gains. Most
say that's because Head Start has become more of a day-care
service stressing health and nutrition, not literacy, as well as
a jobs program for local mothers. It is true that kids can't
learn unless they're healthy and well fed; but with no curriculum
and loads of shoddy teachers, Head Start isn't living up to its
potential.
Last year Congress nudged the program in the right direction, but
the steps were meek: four-year-olds who know 10 letters of the
alphabet, for example, are felt to be on track. Bush would
require lessons that stress prereading and math, teachers who can
teach this and evaluations to make sure it is done well. If
existing centers don't deliver, Bush would sensibly make them
compete with others for their federal contract.
Bush's more controversial plan involves "Title I," which sends $8
billion yearly to schools with poor kids. These grants can amount
to $150,000 for a typical 500-child school; they've usually been
used for teacher's aides or special remedial classes, without
great results. Reformers in both parties say the idea of holding
schools accountable for progress is overdue. The prospect of
being penalized by having the federal money rerouted directly to
parents "gets the attention of educators and the bureaucracy,"
says Ray Cortines, a Democrat and former schools chief in New
York City and San Francisco. If states feel pressured to avoid
such embarrassment, Bush's plan could jump-start reforms at
troubled schools. And while the left loathes the idea of
vouchers, some experts think Bush's notion that dollars should
follow poor kids could be the first step toward better targeting
Title I cash, which now gets unfairly diverted via political
horse trading to schools in more affluent districts.
Still, on the first day of school at Coliseum Street Elementary
in central Los Angeles last week, Bush's insistence that "no
child should be left behind" seems to miss a larger point. Like
many other poor urban schools, Coliseum is chronically short of
textbooks, computers and supplies, not to mention experienced
teachers. Many such schools spend less per pupil than schools in
surrounding suburbs despite having more high-need kids. Bush
knows this is wrong: he waged a worthy but losing fight in Texas
to rejigger school funding in 1997. Thus far he's been mum about
such injustice on the stump. Nor does he say that as Head Start
improves, it will need cash to reach beyond the 40% of eligible
preschoolers it now serves, most in part-day, part-year programs
that don't fit the needs of working mothers. Even Bush's plan to
make Title I funds "portable" after three years is too cheap:
$1,500 barely covers tuition at some parochial schools and is not
enough to test the voucher idea. Little wonder that with all the
burdens facing poor schools, word that the g.o.p. front runner
wants to take away Title I money feels like another slap. "It
irritates us," says Coliseum principal Zoe Jefferson of the pols.
"They come up with solutions that sound easy to sell in
one-liners."
BUSH ON HOW TO JUMP-START EDUCATION:
--Give $1,500 to low-income parents to use for the school of
their choice, if their public school doesn't improve within three
years
--Focus Head Start on math and reading readiness, not just day
care, nutrition and health
--Replace federal programs that don't show results
MORE TIME STORIES:
Cover Date: September 20, 1999
|