New ‘Edujobs’ Bill Threatens Long-term Reform

I spent most of last Thursday night glued to CSPAN and Twitter as I followed the "edujobs" saga. This post is a result:

Late last night, the U.S. House of Representatives passed Rep. David Obey’s (D-Wisconsin) amendment to the “edujobs” provision in the House version of the 2010 Supplemental Appropriations Act, which focuses mostly on defense. To pay for the $10 billion edujobs provision, Obey’s amendment proposes to siphon $800 million from the Race to the Top fund and other education initiatives—charter school grants and the Teacher Initiative Fund—championed by the Obama administration. In response to the amendment, the White House announced, “If the final bill presented to the President includes cuts to education reforms, the president’s senior advisors would recommend a veto.”


The bill will move on to the Senate, to be voted on when session resumes the week of July 12th. A key education expert in the Senate shared with me this morning that it is “highly unlikely that the House version of the defense supplemental will become law” and that the Senate version will likely succeed instead. The Senate’s passed version of the defense bill contains no education provisions. And, this afternoon, 13 senators signed a letter to Senator Daniel Inouye, chairman of the Senate’s appropriations committee, asking him not to cut $800 million from education reform efforts.

We once again find rhetorical battles over “it’s for the kids.” American Federation of Teachers president Randi Weingarten spoke out against the Department of Education and President Obama’s opposition, accusing the Department of Education of trading teacher jobs for its pet programs. She said failing to save these jobs will cause “well-documented harm to children.” The National Education Association’s “Speak Up For Education and Kids” initiative urged their Facebook fans last night to call their members of Congress and urge them to vote for the Obey amendment.

On the opposing side, Democrats for Ed Reform and 25 other education reform organizations released a statement decrying the amendment for cutting funds to programs that “show promise in improving the quality in education for ALL our nation’s schoolchildren.” Eric Hanushek of the Hoover Institution wrote, “When push comes to shove, it is appears that it is not about the kids—it is about the adults.”

So which is it? Are America’s schoolchildren most at risk with understaffed classrooms or with underfunded initiatives seeking to spur educational entrepreneurship? A case could certainly be made for both. Saving teaching jobs is a noble aim, but one that shouldn’t be pursued at the cost of reforms which are working to improve both the teaching profession and the quality of American education.

Teaching Citizenship

Happy 4th of July! Here's a post I recently published on The Enterprise blog:

Recent education reforms such as the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) and the Common Core standards movement have kept the spotlight on mathematics and reading, overshadowing other vital subjects such as history and civics. A 2006 study by the Center for Education Policy found that 71 percent of the surveyed districts reported they have reduced instructional time in at least one other subject to make more time for reading and math due to NCLB. The Center for Civic Education, the National Conference of State Legislatures, and many others have launched impressive campaigns to attract attention back to civic education. However, the lack of useful data on both expectations for civic education and teachers’ attitudes towards civic education makes thoughtful policy discussion difficult.


Students’ civics knowledge has remained rudimentary and stagnant over the years. The most recent 2006 NAEP civics test reports that only 27 percent of twelfth graders scored at or above the proficient level. Students in grades 4, 8, and 12 who took the NAEP civics test in 1998 scored at the same level as students in 2006, with improvement only in grade 4.

However, there’s little clarity as to what is meant by “citizenship” in schooling today. In 1996, 86 percent of respondents to the annual Phi Delta Kappan/Gallup poll said “prepar[ing] students to become responsible citizens” was a “very important” goal for public education. However, the 2000 poll found that training “responsible citizens” wasn’t nearly as important as “enhance[ing] people’s happiness and enrich[ing] their lives” and “dispel[ing] inequities in education among certain schools and certain groups.” The PDK/Gallup poll has not asked questions regarding citizenship and schooling since 2000.

Most essential to assessing our civics education is a better understanding of teachers’ attitudes and actions in regards to citizenship and the classroom. Before suggesting reforms to current policies that may stunt civic education, we must understand what teachers are being expected teach, what teachers are teaching, and what civic ideals teachers esteem in their classrooms. It’s very possible that our idea of civic education has evolved over the years and that current policies, curricula, or even school structures are not supporting our goals.
AEI’s new Program on American Citizenship has partnered with AEI’s education policy department to take a closer look at precisely that. The forthcoming fall 2010 report, “Schools, Civics and Citizenship: What Teachers Think and Do,” asks teachers what civic values or facts they believe to be most important for their students to learn, what the current system expects to be taught and what is realistically happening in their classroom.

A preliminary read of the survey data suggests that almost half of the teachers surveyed have seen social studies de-emphasized as a result of NCLB and that teaching “facts” is considered amongst the least important objectives for social studies teachers. Stay tuned for the AEI report this fall. It promises to be a helpful addition to the discussion, and will offer guidance on what to do next to ensure our children are getting the best education.