Bernie Sanders: America must end high-stakes testing, finally invest in public education

[Donkees]

Across the country, teachers, parents and students are pushing back against an ineffective and punitive standardized tests regime. I stand with them.

Bernie Sanders Opinion contributor
Jan. 8, 2020

Excerpt:

Wednesday marks 18 years since the signing into law of No Child Left Behind, one of the worst pieces of legislation in our nation’s history. In December 2001, I voted against NCLB because it was as clear to me then, as it is now, that so-called school choice and high-stakes standardized testing would not improve our schools or enhance our children’s ability to learn. We do not need an education system in which kids are simply taught to take tests. We need a system in which kids learn and grow in a holistic manner.

A path to a better education system

My Thurgood Marshall Plan for Public Education addresses these fundamental problems by increasing teacher pay to start at $60,000 a year, empowering teachers to craft thoughtful assessments that consider all aspects of a student’s academic progress, and putting a moratorium on charter schools and the federal charter school program until they can be made publicly accountable.

My plan triples Title I funding, which provides assistance for schools with high percentages of children from low-income families, and will have the federal government fund the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act at 50%.

My plan also provides year-round, free universal school meals. One of the gross injustices of high-stakes standardized testing is that it does not account for the impact of poverty and wrongly treats all children as if they enter the education system on equal footing. We know that is not the case. In a wealthy nation such as ours, no child should ever go hungry, and we should have the best public schools and teachers in the world.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2020/01/08/bernie-sanders-education-no-child-left-behind-testing-column/2827348001/

[Uncle Joe]

1. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread Donkees.

[Hortensis]

2. Not finally. Our liberal democracy has been "investing" in universal education,

which is to say ourselves, since our very beginning. Universal education is absolutely critical to liberal government of, by and for the people and a huge, huge reason we were able to become a great and prosperous nation.

So the game plan is, FIRST, make liberal values once again dominant in government by removing the power of conservatives to sabotage our educational systems. I.e., vote Democratic. All else can only, but will, follow from that.

I notice that Sanders, who once openly called for eliminating compulsory education, speaks now only of public education. It'd be nice to hear that he's changed his mind because increasingly fascistic Republicans are moving toward eliminating both universal and compulsory education

A huge danger for the future . Lack of universal education is pointed to as the single biggest reason why Argentina, with so many of the same initial advantages we have, never became a great nation. There, the RW colonial leaders, with the common strong-conservative distrust and disrespect for education and fear of the people, prevailed.

Liberalism.

[BeckyDem]

7. We rate the claim False.

Our ruling

A chart on the Internet said that Sanders does not support "requiring all children to have a K-12 education." However, it bases this claim on writings and campaigns from more than 40 years ago, and more recent legislative evidence indicates that Sanders supports a traditional view of K-12 education. We rate the claim False.

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/sep/21/viral-image/web-graphic-says-bernie-sanders-doesnt-support-com/

[Hortensis]

8. They rate it false because he hasn't stated it THESE DAYS.

He's not stupid. Even when whackadoodle movements were far more open and popular, he was careful to only obliquely agree with those who insisted fluoridation was a government plot against the public, but that was enough to indicate he was opposed. And when he stated his belief that sexual repression caused cancer he hedged it enough that he could back off if needed, even as delivered the message. And so on.

My point is that Sanders has spoken against compulsory education in his middle-aged, openly radical days and TODAY he speaks of public education only.

Also that we know that Sanders still holds many political views from those days, just far more cautiously and usually deceptively expressed or carefully not talked about at all. Public schools and paved roads are socialism. Uhuh.

As for education, any state or community could maintain public education while eliminating the laws requiring attendance. Anti-tax, anti-education, and religious right Republicans in many states are trying to do just that.

Sanders is running for president and needs to affirm his commitment to universal compulsory education, thus disavowing his earlier feelings against compulsory education (and the harm it does to children would be desirable also). I searched before posting above and found nothing to indicate he has. It would take inclusion of one, but one critically important, word he once had strong feelings about.

To repeat, even in these dangerous times when increasingly fascistic conservatives are gravely threatening compulsory and funding for universal, education, and even though Sanders has spoken many times on education while running for president on the Democratic ticket, I didn't find that Sanders has stated his support for compulsory education.

[BeckyDem]

9. No. The claim is false & they posted his own words which reflect his ideas gov not restrict choice.

In one, Mother Jones tracked down some of Sanders’ writings from a now-defunct newspaper called the Vermont Freeman. "Some of his rants bordered on libertarian," wrote Mother Jones’ Tim Murphy. In August 1969 in a column titled "Reflections on a Dying Society," Sanders wrote this:

It is obvious that in the name of "public safety" the State is usurping the rights of free choice in many domains of life. To get (a Federal Housing Authority) loan, one MUST build with specified lumber and materials; to drive an automobile, one MUST have insurance and a car which has no rust going through; to run a farm and sell milk one MUST have a bulk tank; to drive a motorcycle one MUST have a helmet, to cite a few examples. The idea that ALL children MUST attend school until 16 years of age, even if some would rather do other things, is now treated as as given a fact of life as the sunrise

[Hortensis]

12. Exactly.

And, in case you weren't around then, don't imagine that that wasn't radical talk for those times also because it was. By far most people rejected those ideas.

And, many far-right conservatives in that era also supported doing away with mandatory education just as they also still do now. The difference is that far-right social/religious and economic conservatives have since grown tremendously in power and taken over the Republican Party in this era.

Becoming a huge danger to universal, compulsory, and public education. Betsy DeVos and badly run, for-profit charter schools replacing public anyone?

[BeckyDem]

13. lol

[Hortensis]

15. Oh, just contact Sanders and ask him to affirm commitment

to compulsory, universal education. Two words related but meaning different things. For instance compulsory doesn't have to apply to everyone's children.

But, if he won't state both words for some reason, including even one of them would calm some of the anxiety education professionals are rightly feeling these days.

[BeckyDem]

16. No need to do that. I left your opinions about Sanders with a link.

What anyone does with it is up to them.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

18. I think you realized you aren't going to get anywhere.

[BeckyDem]

19. I did leave the link.

But I hear ya. lol

[George II]

3. "Across the country" - can someone quantify that for us? A few people in New York....

....and a few people in California could be considered "across the country".

HOW MANY people "across the country"? We don't know (although some are now probably racing to google to pull up a few names), but it sounds catchy.

And then he invokes the name of the first Black Justice of the Supreme Court. What does Thurgood Marshall have to do with education? He was a lawyer, a judge, and an Associate Justice, not a teacher, professor, or educator.

We're down to buzz words and names that catch peoples' attention, not substance. How about calling it the Albert Shanker Plan or Mary McLeod Bethune Plan, at least they were educators (although not household names like Thurgood Marshall)

By the way Senator, No Child Left Behind ended in 2015, five years ago.

Sorry, this isn't going to fly with informed voters.

[dsc]

4. ah Brown v Board does that ring a bell?

[Uncle Joe]

5. What does Thurgood Marshall have to do with education?

Brown v. Board of Education

Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka was a landmark 1954 Supreme Court case in which the justices ruled unanimously that racial segregation of children in public schools was unconstitutional. Brown v. Board of Education was one of the cornerstones of the civil rights movement, and helped establish the precedent that “separate-but-equal” education and other services were not, in fact, equal at all

(snip)

When Brown’s case and four other cases related to school segregation first came before the Supreme Court in 1952, the Court combined them into a single case under the name Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka.

Thurgood Marshall, the head of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, served as chief attorney for the plaintiffs. (Thirteen years later, President Lyndon B. Johnson would appoint Marshall as the first black Supreme Court justice.)

At first, the justices were divided on how to rule on school segregation, with Chief Justice Fred M. Vinson holding the opinion that the Plessy verdict should stand. But in September 1953, before Brown v. Board of Education was to be heard, Vinson died, and President Dwight D. Eisenhower replaced him with Earl Warren, then governor of California.

(snip)

https://www.history.com/topics/black-history/brown-v-board-of-education-of-topeka

[George II]

14. I'm well aware of Brown vs. Board of Education. It was a legal case in which....

....segregated schools were ruled unconstitutional.

There was nothing in that case that dealt with standardized testing or school lunches, which is the subject of his "Thurgood Marshall Plan". But you mentioning that case was a nice diversion from the point of my post.

Using "Thurgood Marshall" borders on pandering. As I said, using either Albert Shanker or Mary McLeod Bethune would have been much more appropriate. Maybe not as well know by the masses but at least relevant to the subject.

Now, about the other things I mentioned:

How widespread is that "across the country", any idea? What does the "Albert Shanker Plan" have to do with now expired (for five years!) No Child Left Behind law, why even bring up that 20-year old vote that is a moot point here in 2020?

Your thoughts?

[bahrbearian]

6. Oh, its you again.

[George II]

11. Yes it's me.....again. Is the DU tent too big for you?

[bahrbearian]

17. I guess,

The party I joined in 1969 was a peace and working mans party.

[George II]

20. The party I joined (late '60s, early '70s) is was, and still is, also a working women's party.

[The Valley Below]

10. Makes a nice word play on the "Marshall Plan" and seems like an attempt

to appeal to a demographic group where he's unpopular.

[George II]

21. It's not going to work.

[The Valley Below]

22. No argument there.