President Obama's Education Speech

 “Because this is a speech class, and because we entertain a range of viewpoints here, and because the President is speaking Tuesday on education, we are going to watch his address.”  After some groaning, eye rolling and even some quiet booing, I continued.  “I know. I know some of you ‘hate Obama’.  I get it. However, I have been told to tell you that you do not have to watch.  Talk to me if you would like (or if your parents would like you) to go to the Media Center and do some research for your speeches instead.”  I usually get groans like that when I announce a test or a five-page paper. I have never been booed in class before. I totally understand my responsibility to inform students of any subject matter that may go against their personal standards and to provide alternatives for them, but announcing such accommodations for a Presidential address? Well, there’s a first time for everything.

In advance of the President's speech to students, districts all over the country are instituting ad hoc policies regarding students (or parents on their behalf) opting out of watching it.  Such a directive is the first of its kind that I can ever remember receiving in 20 years of high school teaching. There is an assumption or at least a concern that the President will use this platform to defend his policies.  Nothing I have seen indicates this is the case.  This speech will likely be the most uncontroversial, even innocuous of his career.  In fact, the greatest danger for him and us is that he might come of as a lecturing bore if he’s not careful.

Even if turns out that he can’t resist, and tip-toes over the partisan line-- even hurdles over it--it would still be worth watching and discussing in class as political speech. In the past I have shown various speeches of all the previous Presidents back to President Bush Sr., not to mention historical speeches such as those of Roosevelt, Reagan and Kennedy. I have always a curricular rationale for including presidential addresses. After all, in my roles as a history and Language Arts teacher, as well as a debate coach, I work with words written and spoken—even political ones.  I consider myself and am considered to be an honest broker of concepts related to rhetoric as well as policy. On those occasions where my bias may be more apparent, I provide my own disclaimer.  For example, each January of the last several, I have used the State of the Union to look at the given president's agenda as a means to develop research topics of national concern.  Moreover, each debate season my students argue various controversial topics and find themselves analyzing policy and values.  My role is not to tell students my opinion on this or that issue, but to help them find their own and show them ways to justify it.  When an issue is educational in nature I might on occasion disclose my view to students, to demonstrate what a person who advocates for public education looks like—but I tell them that’s what I am doing too.

Additionally, its difficult--if not impossible—to teach history, literature or debate without encountering ideas counter to one's own.  For example, we started The Crucible today—a play dramatizing the 1692 Salem witch hunt.  Our discussion leading up to and during our study is necessarily political, because the text was written in response to the abuses Arthur Miller experienced during the McCarthy Era. To set the stage, we view clips from popular films such as The Majestic  and Good Night and Good Luck to provide a lens through which we could see the effects of a modern “witch hunt” as the United States plunged deeper into the Cold War.  We discuss what steps societies under threat--real and perceived—take and where some writers say they lead.  That's just one example: Throughout our survey of American literature we will read other controversial texts.  Often, we read the works of liberals and libertarians of their time.  We also examine conservative and moderate positions as well.  The best writers frequently challenge the status quo.  The classes I teach (and I hope all classes do) prepare future critical thinking citizens who possess the skills necessary for deliberation within a democratic society.


Maybe this “opt out” impulse is isolated to the politically polarized times in which we live.  (Yet, I hold in reserve the capacity to believe something more cynical motivates calls for teachers to make these disclaimers and offer accommodations for a perfectly benign, perhaps beneficial event.) Of course, parents have every right to supervise their child’s education; it’s a right I hold in reserve as well, with reserve as the operative word. Students too, with their unalienable rights can choose not to participate.    It should be everyone’ right to associate with discussion--especially regarding public policy--with which they agree. I just happen to believe such an attitude is not wise in a democratic republic.

 But the President's speech isn't intended to be about this or that policy; in fact, it couldn't be regarding anything more germane--education. So, I can't help but wonder if a policy directing me to make such a disclaimer regarding this event will serve prelude to future accommodations about what I may professionally determine appropriate regarding social or political content within my classroom.  Maybe I had better just stick to diagramming sentences, correcting grammar, covering trivia, and reading bland articles and stories to prepare kids for raising their scores on the next standardized test.  Yeah, that’s why I got into education 20 years ago.

Per Pupil Spending: We're #1...Well at being the opposite of # 1

http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_12926657

As the above article explains, Utah is last in per student spending --again.  And again, the excuses employ the same old memes: We do a lot with a little, Utah's big families, high tax burden etc.   And while there is some truth there,  there isn't nearly $4,000 worth of it--the difference between Utah and the national average.  Imagine what we could do for an investment per student of a little more--maybe even 1/2 that gap.  Or would it be all wasted on more "opulent" new schools.   Yeah, world class schools: Who needs those?