No Child left behind, Hopefully

Obama recently attended a town hall meeting in front of a largely latino crowd in a multicultural high school in washington D.C. His main message was that too much testing makes education boring and ultimately hurts education. The president has been pushing his education agenda all month, and is asking congress to rewrite the current no child left behind act that President Bush championed. I agree with his intent, but disagree with his implementation.

I do believe that excessive testing hurts education if the teachers are spending too much time preparing for the tests. Too much emphasis has been placed on test scores and schools have been spending too much instructional time. I disagree with the president and believe that students should be tested every year to check their progress, but the tests should not require advanced preparation. The tests, like the president states, should be used to diagnose their strengths, weaknesses, and to help identify students that are struggling.

The President has asked congress to submit a rewrite of the 2001 law by the start of the 2011-2012 school year. This is very strange considering the many issues that they are currently debating including the budget, healthcare, the economy, and the recent surge of middle eastern violence. It is unclear of wether the president truly wants to reform education or is trying to set up a smoke screen to divert attention from difficult issues.

I believe that the presidents proposal is contrary to the democratic agenda. What he is asking from congress is for less stringent standards. I usually picture the Democratic party as those who want more stringent regulation and higher standards. When I first read this, the first thought that came to mind is that his main goal is to undo what President Bush and the Republicans worked so hard for. My question is how the Democrats intend on improving education by lowering standards and testing only every few years.

What I also found interesting is that in his speech, he made a plug for Apple by stating that he too has an iPad while emphasizing the use of technology in classrooms. I found this to be very ironic considering he recently had a meeting with top executives from technology companies. How lucrative would a government program be to fund the purchase of iPad's and other high tech gadgets for schools across the country. I wonder if these executives are planning on being campaign contributors?