…and i’ll find me a soapbox where i can shout it

No one can deny the influential power of those who have the ability to manipulate words.  For example, No Child Left Behind makes those who come out against it look as if they are, well, leaving children behind.  In fact, rhetoric is something that seems to be a very large part of NCLB.  This could have something to do with the fact that no one has time to actually read every last detail of the act, so we are subjected to countless opinionated summaries of what NCLB is all about.  Sadly, many of us fall for the rhetoric… it could have something to do with being lazy. 

I found an entry on a School Reform Blog by Whitney Tilson that brings up an e-mail that had been circulating that compared NCLB to football.  The e-mail read:

No Child Left Behind: The Football Version

1.   All teams must make the state playoffs, and all will win the championship.  If a team does not win the championship, they will be on probation until they are the champions, and coaches will be held accountable.

2.    All kids will be expected to have the same football skills at the same time and in the same conditions.  No exceptions will be made for interest in football, a desire to perform athletically, or genetic abilities or disabilities.  ALL KIDS WILL PLAY FOOTBALL AT A PROFICIENT LEVEL.

3.    Talented players will be asked to work out on their own without instruction.  This is because the coaches will be using all their instructional time with the athletes who aren’t interested in football, have limited athletic ability or whose parents don’t like football.

4.    Games will be played year round, but statistics will only be kept in the 4th, 8th and 11th games.

5.    This will create a New Age of sports where every school is expected to have the same level of talent and all teams will reach the same minimal goals. If no child gets ahead, then no child will be left behind.

It is not hard to figure out where the original author of this e-mail stood on the issue.  I could not help but read this and laugh at a few parts despite knowing how much it stretched the truth.  Whether you agree or disagree with NCLB, you have to admit that this is a clever attempt to influence readers against it.  Tilson did not see the humor in this e-mail, however, and decided she was going to make some changes.  She wrote:

No Child Left Behind: The Football Version

1.   All teams must play hard and do their best.  If a team is poorly managed and disorganized, it will be put on probation until it improves, and the coaches will be held accountable.  The children and their parents will not be blamed for the failure of the coaches.

2.    All kids will be expected to play.  Obviously, some kids will play with more skill than others, but all kids will be expected to work hard and perform at a proficient level.  Some kids may need to work extra hours to achieve proficiency.  The coaches will be expected to put in those extra hours with the kids to ensure their success.

3.    Coaches will not focus their resources solely on the handful of players who demonstrate unusual proficiency at an early age.  Coaches will be held accountable for the success of EVERY player.

 4.    Games will be played year round, and statistics will be collected, analyzed and widely disseminated frequently.

5.    This will create a New Age of sports where every kid learns the necessary tools to succeed. Just because some children get ahead, it’s not acceptable that many children get left behind.

Once again, the author’s intentions are pretty obvious.  Is this really the way to fight for your cause though?  Is the only way to counter rhetoric by creating your own?

I wanted to discuss this e-mail and rewrite because I think it illustrates everything that is wrong with how change comes about in our political system.  In an attempt to prove my point, I think in the context of this post it is appropriate to use my own analogy: 

A man and a woman decide they should meet for lunch.  The man often eats lunch at a small bar about a block from his office and wants to meet there.  The woman usually spends her lunch break eating lunch at a coffee shop that is very close to her office and wants to meet there.  Rather than spending their time finding a place perhaps halfway between their offices, the two think of creative ways to put the other down and desperately search for approval from others.   

The facts are out there, but everyday are becoming buried deeper underneath the lies that those in favor or against NCLB are feeding us.  I think the future of our children’s education in America would look a lot brighter if we could replace all of this rhetoric with a little bit of truth.