Prepare to Come About

Tacking! the helmsman on a racing yacht shouts to inform the crew that he has begun to change course. As the bow passes through the wind, the sails must be reset on the opposite side of the boat. It is one of the more complex and sensitive operations undertaken during a race. It must be done smoothly and quickly to avoid losing precious momentum. The nautical term for bringing a sailboat onto a new tack is to come about.

I haven't heard the warning cry from the White House, but I'm pretty sure the Obama ship is preparing to come about. Many pundits referred to Bill Clinton's 1994 course change as "tacking to the center." It appears as if the Obama team has finally sensed the true direction of the political wind and is responding in similar fashion. There is not now (nor I suggest, never was) a vast majority who wanted the radical left course change Obama proposed. The hope and change mantra that swept Obama into office was heard by many as the answer to their frustration with the Washington establishment.

The early "successes"of the Obama agenda, economic stimulus and health care, were rammed down the throats of former supporters and opponents alike. The tide of "throw the bums out" which floated unprecedented one-party control for the Democrats turned to such a dramatic ebb that nearly all support has drained from under their keel. To keep his ship from running hard aground, the captain has discovered he must alter course; it's time to come about.

The thing that is most cloying about Obama's recent statements is how narcissistic and self-serving they are. He claims that he was so concerned about principle that he failed to pay attention to the political consequences of his policies. He apparently was not counting on the violent backlash his arrogance elicited. Many Washington watchers declare him to be more of an ideologue than any President in recent memory. Perhaps he does have such narrow vision that he can only imagine a future his fulfilled plans would presage. Perhaps his ecstatic arrival in the White House caused him to forget he is President of all the people, not just those (few) who agree with his radical agenda for change.

Whatever the reason for Obama's decision to tack, I cannot say I am disappointed. I wrote some time ago that I was praying for a tsunami of voter backlash; all signs appear to point to just that this November. The question now becomes whether the President and his progressive fellows can maintain enough clout to do any damage in his last two years. And I do mean his last two years. It seems unlikely that he will have any chance at a second term. Unless he executes such a stunning tack to the center politically that he rivals the political savvy of Bill Clinton, I think his ship will sail unceremoniously out of port (Washington) in 2012.

Reform School

If you have any interest in the US education system, whether as a parent, student, teacher, policymaker or innocent bystander, Valerie Strauss' September 27, 2010 blog article in the Washington Post is a must read. She correctly identifies student economic status as a significant factor in student achievement. Poverty has physical, sociological and psychological consequences in the classroom; to disregard this irrefutably documented fact is to ignore the elephant in the room, says Strauss. Sadly, this is precisely what most current education policy does.

This head-in-the-sand attitude was evident in the Bush era "No Child Left Behind" (NCLB) legislation perpetrated on schools. NCLB was a creation of Ted Kennedy and the Democrats, pursuant to George W. Bush's effort to share the power, though it is generally credited to Bush. The centerpiece of NCLB was so-called "high stakes testing," a concept which sounds good on the surface. Testing student progress to determine achievement is a valid concept, however, the one-size-fits-all nature of the NCLB mandate falls prey to the popular habit of ignoring how elemental poverty is in elementary schools.

In Michigan, we use the Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP) to measure student achievement. The state standards and procedures are very strict, almost draconian. This year, for example, each school is allowed to exempt from taking the MEAP only a very small percentage of its population as special education students. The problem here is that in a high poverty area, such as many of our inner cities, a majority of students often qualify for the designation, although they may or may not be in special education programs. (In some schools, the word "majority" is an understatement.)

The result of this failure to exempt students who are not capable of performing anywhere near grade level is obvious. Schools in these areas chronically fail to meet Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP.) The additional ramifications of this situation are serious. State funding can be jeopardized. Federal programs tied to AYP will be withdrawn. New initiatives like "Race to the Top" use test scores or AYP measures. Some pay-for-performance programs also use the scores from these standardized tests. As Strauss implies in her blog, the best teachers in the world can not always work miracles if large numbers of their students have learning difficulties which are endemic to their neighborhood.

We must devise a more sensible, caring approach to school reform. The Bible, both Old and New Testaments, says more about our responsibility to the poor among us than just about any other subject. Education is a key element in the effort to reduce poverty; better educated people tend to make better money than those less well trained. The Chinese proverb says, "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime." The "War on Poverty" has given away a ton of fish. It's about time we started focusing on more effective ways to train fisherman.