I was at the White House on Thursday when President Bush announced his new education initiative. This initiative marked a turning point in American education: Never before has a president of the United States said that the federal government has a major, ongoing responsibility for improving the quality of elementary and secondary education.
Yes, the federal government has been involved in elementary and secondary education before, but it's been for special reasons and for what was seen as a limited time. It was considered appropriate for the federal government to try to undo some of the damage that slavery and racism had done to the education of African-American children, first because of our Constitution and later, after slavery was abolished, because of separate-but-equal laws. The federal government also agreed to take on some of the burden of educating handicapped youngsters. This, too, was viewed as a civil or human rights issue because many of these children had previously been excluded from the education system. And from time to time, there have been special initiatives like trying to improve mathematics, science and foreign language education during the time of Sputnik. But all these were matters of national defense and constitutional rights rather than the ongoing and daily issue of a quality elementary and secondary education for all children. And it is this that is the focus of the President's program.
The initiative probably would not have taken this form without Lamar Alexander, and both he and President Bush deserve a great deal of praise. But announcing a program is different from making it succeed. And as I sat there listening to the President and reading the program, a number of questions came into my mind.
The first is about a national system of examinations. I have supported and I continue to support such a system. I think we need information, nationally, about what our kids know and are able to do. And we need to be able to find out whether or not their achievement levels are rising, partly so we can identify places using methods that work. I also think that national examinations with clear standards will act as an incentive to youngsters, especially if doing well on them is linked to getting into college or getting a good job.
So this national examination system could be a major turning point -- but it could also be a disaster. Will there be a mad rush to get exams in place whether they're good or not? And will they just be more of these standardized, multiple-choice, machine-scorable examinations? If so, we'll give a federal imprimatur to what is a very bad practice.
Or will we encourage the creation of performance-based and essay examinations? If we do, how will we pay for them? A multiple-choice test is about a penny to machine score; an essay costs a dollar to mark. Another major part of the President's initiative is getting businesses involved in a number of schools across the country where they will cooperate with teachers, administrators and school boards to create schools that are as different from ours as 1990 cars are from a horse and buggy. This is an excellent idea, and it's good news to hear that American business is so committed to school improvement that it is willing to donate over $150 million. But is trying to collect this money the best way for the government to use the talents and experience of a person like David Kearns? Wouldn't it be better for him to spend his time working on trying to change schools? And should we be relying on private contributions for this project, anyway? We didn't try to fund the Stealth Bomber or Operation Desert Storm with contributions. When we decide something is really important, we also decide it's important enough for the government to pay for. I think that's true here.
I'm also troubled by part of the choice initiative. In a democratic society, people shouldn't be forced to do anything unless there's overriding public interest. And if we no longer believe in forcing people to fight for their country, it's hard to justify forcing a kid to go to one public school rather than another. But this choice initiative involves private and religious schools as well as public ones. The President said he supports extending choice because it will create healthy competition. But will public and private schools really be competing under the same rules? Won't public schools still have to keep violent students in school while, private schools can expel them or not admit them? Won't public schools have to keep students who don't do their homework while private schools can refuse to let them in? Will students and parents really be allowed to choose schools or will private schools choose the kids they want?
Finally, as we think about new initiatives, it's important not to forget a couple of old programs that have worked very well and need to be made available for all kids who need them. I'm talking about Head Start and Chapter 1. Full funding for these programs must be part of any education package.
President Bush's new program deserves our support. It also deserves funding -- the President is right about doing a lot with great ideas, but we shouldn't shortchange kids by saying ideas are enough. And the program deserves all the time, energy and talent we'll need to make it work.