The Failures of No Child Left Behind

On the front page of the New York Times today, there was an article about how the controversial No Child Left Behind Act is not closing the achievement gap between white students and minority students. I was glad to see such an article on the front page of the newspaper, as it touches upon an issue that the public normally would not be exposed to. Media today does not cover stories such as these, mainly because the public craves entertaining stories (short attention spans anyone?), and stories about education, human rights, and other similar topics are branded as too "boring" for most people. I'm sure that a story about the No Child Left Behind Act would never be seen on the local news stations, and rarely on CNN, Fox News, and the like.

This was a great article that highlighted some of the problems with No Child Left Behind, which was passed into law in 2002. One of the main goals of NCLB was to try and level the wide achievement gap that exists between minorities and whites. The law made schools focus on their minority populations by defining racial groups and keeping track of their achievement. Before the law, most schools only kept track of average student performance, which did not recognize the disparities between whites and minorities. Studies show, however, that No Child Left Behind has not closed the education gap, as test scores for minority groups are still are not up to par with what the law set out to achieve.

With all this debate behind NCLB, the Obama administration will have to rethink the law and make fundamental changes for it to be successful in the long term. Adjustments such as distributing quality teachers evenly to schools in affluent and poor neighborhoods, and to raise national academic standards will hopefully help solve our nation's education gap. As I have stated before, it is important for the U.S. to have quality schools and educated students if we are to compete in an ever changing world. While former President Bush may have had good intentions in creating NCLB, there was not enough thought and proper funding put into it. This is not all entirely his fault, as the events of 9/11 had an effect on the priority level of NCLB. Hopefully once the economic crisis is subdued somewhat, President Obama can reform the education system and reverse some of the policies made by No Child Left Behind.

For anyone that is interested...a short interview with President Obama about his thoughts on No Child Left Behind.

Us Poor Schools Need Funding Too!

I agree with Steve and his post that there needs to be greater accountability in schools when it comes to how money is spent. It is wonderful that the stimulus package sets aside 13 billion dollars to go towards disadvantaged children. It is important to our economy that every child receives a quality education. This will lead to a more skilled and educated workforce, and help our economy in the long haul. Unfortunately, many states and municipalities often take federal money that is desperately needed to fund these high need schools and use it for other purposes. They are performing a grave injustice by handing over much of this money to more affluent, higher performing schools. Why should these schools receive more funding than schools with a higher percentage of disadvantaged children?

There needs to be a device put in place to monitor how states and localities are dividing up monies for school districts. Like the auto or banking industry, maybe there should be a "watch-dog" to ensure each school is receiving the proper amount of funding. While I am sure that there will be loop-holes in the reporting requirement, it will hopefully curb some of the inequalities in school funding. Like Steve stated in his post, better bookkeeping practices need to be put in place so the differences in salary between teachers in high poverty versus low poverty schools can be seen. Maybe then, the salaries of teachers in these low income schools will be increased, attracting quality teachers.

I urge you to contact Governor Corzine and tell him that New Jersey's high need communities should be receiving equal, if not a greater amount, of educational funding. Let him know that there also needs to be supervision by the state on the municipalities to ensure the money is going to the proper place. Call his office and speak to one of his staff members at 609-292-6000 or email him through his website.

Mickey Mouse Teaching English?

The Wall Street Journal published an article a few days ago about Disney's new business in China. It seems Mickey Mouse and friends are teaching children how to speak English. This is a smart move on Disney's part, since the foreign language business in China is worth over two billion dollars, with over 300 million Chinese studying English annually. And with the English language teaching market expected to grow in the coming years, it seems like Disney will be profiting from this new endeavour for awhile. They already have a Disneyland set up in Hong Kong, stores all over the country, and have made a few movies in China, however, government regulations prohibit them from starting a television channel or from distributing their entire movie collection in the country. There is already the possibility of a new Disneyland site in Shanghai, and if all goes well, Disney plans on opening more English language schools in the main cities.

But is this just a marketing push, or is Disney really genuine about teaching kids English? Disney says that their intentions are of the latter, even though kids are exposed to everything Disney in the classroom and in their homework. Kids can earn various Disney merchandise as rewards for good work. Flashcards, CD's, and books all feature Disney characters. Since I will be going to China this summer to teach English, I applaud what Disney is doing, but at the same time am critical about it because it is without a doubt a huge marketing ploy. Disney just wants to brainwash kids into buying their products in a market which is not very exposed to Disney as of present. Why does China need Disney English schools? There are already tons of these schools in China right now. I just hope Disney doesn't corrupt Chinese society like it did to the US.

More Than Meets the Eye

The movie Good Night and Good Luck may seem like a movie about CBS reporter Edward Murrow and how he successfully was able to bring down Senator Joseph McCarthy and his Communist "witch hunt", but in fact it does so much more than that. It makes the viewer question what news should be all about, and what they should cover. Do we want our news to be all about "entertainment", or do we want reporters to actually keep us informed about world events and politics and actually make us think (omg the horror, the horror!). It also brings up issues of censorship in the media. How much should media be censored? Is it for our own protection, or should we have a right to know everything that is going on? These are some of the issues the movie brings up through its hour and a half run time.

We need more reporters like Edward Murrow nowadays. Despite pressure from his superiors to not pursue the story on McCarthy and Communist accusations from the government, Mr. Murrow stood his ground and did what he knew was right. He wasn't some "crazy liberal" as some people deemed him for calling Senator McCarthy out...he saw injustice occurring in our government and did what the duties of a reporter should be. If it was not for him, how long would it have taken for someone to take down Senator McCarthy? Who would have had the courage to stand up to him? What is annoying is that many people knew that what McCarthy was doing was downright insane...many compared it to the Salem Witch Trials of the late 1600's. I feel that most news we see today is very light, containing little substance. Investigative reporting is rare today, partly because it is seen as "boring" to most of the population. Sorry that investigating the genocide in Darfur isn't as entertaining as The Biggest Loser or American Idol.

I hope that this movie makes you think about the changes in our news media today, and what effect it may have on the quality of news reporting.

Fox News...Fair and Balanced? Sean Hannity Doesn't See It That Way

Sean Hannity. Conservatives love him, liberals despise him. No matter how you view Mr. Hannity, there is no denying the fact that he has a popular show that reaches millions of people everyday. With fellow Fox News anchor Bill O'Reilly, they are seen as two of the main right wing voices in America today. While Fox News states that they are "fair and balanced" when covering issues, shows like Hannity's totally contradicts this claim. Hannity is proud to be a conservative and does not hide the fact that he disapproves of the Obama Administration and their policies. He brings guests onto the show that reinforce his views...that liberalism is destroying the country and its values, larger government and taxing will make our economy worse, and that voting in Obama and the Democrats into power was a horrendous choice. While I do not agree with his opinions, people like Sean Hannity do have a purpose in network news. His show can work as a opposing view to shows like MSNBC's Countdown with more liberal-leaning host Keith Olbermann. A description to what I viewed in last night's episode of Hannity is posted below.

In last night's show, Mr. Hannity began with interviewing Dr. James Dobson, who had just recently resigned from Focus on the Family. Mr. Dobson went on to rant about how America is losing the culture war for a good ten-to-fifteen minutes. With the shift in power from the Republicans to the Democrats in our houses of government, morality is being sacrificed in issues like marriage, the unborn, and others. He went on to describe that Obama, although he calls himself a Christian, knows nothing about Christian values. At the end of his segment, Dobson triumphantly acknowledges that the Republicans will regain power and bring back a sense of morality to the country. During the interview, Hannity, of course, has to butt in with some negative comments about Obama (mentioning his ties to Rev. Wright and Bill Ayers-why is he still bringing up things mentioned in the campaign?).

After the Dobson interview, Hannity moves on to criticize the Obama administration some more. He targets Obama's recent nominee for Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius. There has been some controversy over the campaign contributions she received while governor from a doctor who provides late term abortions. He is one of the only doctors in the country who provides such abortions. Hannity called it dispicable that Ms. Sebelius, someone who opposes late term abortions, could accept money from a doctor who performs such acts. Finally, before I turned off Hannity due to boredom, he went on to totally bash Al Franken, the Democratic nominee for Senator in Minnesota, who has been in a recount battle for the Senate seat with the incumbent, Republican Norm Coleman. The courts have decided that Franken, after the recount, is ahead by over 300 votes and is officially the winner. Hannity starts this segment titled "liberal translation," where he takes quotes by Franken and translates them into their actual "liberal" context. Then, Hannity goes on to explain how Homeland Security is targeting "right wing" extremists as potential trouble, and that their description of "right wing" extremist is about the same as a regular conservative. Oh Sean Hannity...maybe instead of criticizing the Obama administration and so called "liberals," you should make points about how to improve the Republican party.

NPR on Same Sex Marriages-Tell Me More Segment

This week, Vermont passed a bill removing the ban on same sex marriages in the state. This was seen as a huge victory for the gay community. Many see this decision in Vermont as the gateway for other states to follow suit and allow same sex marriages. Now everybody knows how controversial this issue is in our society today. Many people see it as a moral and religious issue, stating that the sanctity of marriage is between a man and a woman. Gay individuals see it as their right to be able to marry the one that they love. NPR covered a story about the decision, and the possible impacts it may have on the issue of gay marriage in the United States.

The Vermont decision was the first time that the legislature approved a bill on same sex marriage and not the courts. The legislature also overturned the governor's veto of the bill. NPR had NYU Law School Professor Kenji Yoshino speak about the Vermont decision and the impact it may have on gay marriage in America. He saw the passing as extraordinary, as the bill passed through both houses of the legislature with 2/3rd's of the vote. This decision showed that there are some states with a political majority supporting gay marriage. It was also important because it went beyond allowing civil unions between gay couples, but legalizing the right to marriage. Probably the most significant impact the decision will have, according to the professor, is for other states to reevaluate their laws against gay marriage. Currently, 29 states have constitutional bans on gay marriage. If more states consider gay rights and pass similar laws to that of Vermont, it may put pressure on the states that are reluctant to make changes. President Obama, however, is not in favor of legalizing gay marriage nationally, but is in support of civil unions. A heated debate indeed...only time will tell whether or not we will see marriage rights for the gay community in the near future.

21 Ways to Serve America

I had to post this article just put out by Time Magazine about 21 different ways to volunteer your time to make the United States a better place and to help those that are less fortunate. This article came out in light of the recently passed Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act, which will create more opportunities and incentives for all Americans to serve and do their part. The bill largely targets the youth to participate in more volunteer activities, by helping fund service learning programs in many colleges and universities across the nation. Grants will also be given to states and various non-profit organizations to fund national service in low income areas. Issues that will be addressed with this money include education inequality, access to health care, clean energy, and economic opportunity. The bill even is looking for individuals aged 50 or over to volunteer their time and skills.

I encourage you all to get involved and give some of you time to helping others. We all have the power to make an impact and bring about positive change in our country. Even if it is just one weekend a month, you are making a difference.

Check out the Corporation for National and Community Service website to discover ways in which you can help!

The Empire State Building Goes Green

The Clinton Climate Initiative, part of the William J. Clinton Foundation, announced today that they will be working with the city of New York in making the famous skyscraper greener and more efficient. Buildings contribute up to 80% of greenhouse gas emissions in some cities. With Mayor Michael Bloomberg by his side, President Clinton said that the Empire State Building will undergo an energy-saving retrofit to improve building efficiency, reduce its carbon footprint, and save on utility costs. This will be accomplished by replacing the windows with high efficiency glass, redesigning the heating and cooling systems, and improving lighting efficiency. With these changes, it should reduce energy use by 38 percent.

The William J. Clinton Foundation, where I am currently interning, was created by former President Clinton after he left the White House. The foundation works with a variety of different issues, from making HIV and AIDS medications affordable for people in Africa, battling climate change, eliminating childhood obesity, and creating sustainable growth in Latin America. What he has done for people all over the world is amazing and I can stress enough the respect I have for President Clinton and his dedication to helping others.

This video gives a good overview of how the Empire State Building is going green.

Life After Newspapers

The Washingotn Post today had an op-ed piece about what newspapers will be like in the future if they even survive at all. Michael Kinsley argues that the newspaper industries missed out on a lot of opportunities over the years, such as creating a social networking space. This struggle the newspapers are in now can be blamed partly on the newspapers themselves, along with technical advances like the internet where people all over the world can access the newspaper for free. Nevermind the fact that newspapers on the internet saves millions of trees from being cut down. Unfortunately, for those who love reading your print version of the paper every morning with coffee before work, soon this practice may become a thing of the past.

Kinsley presents a few ideas that could help sustain newspapers and keep them printing for years to come. One of the suggestions presented is that newspapers should become nonprofit organizations. This is much different than the way the newspapers are controlled now-by large corporations that own many different media outlets and/or other industries and are out to make PROFIT. In the future, the newspapers could start charging a fee for people to view the paper over the internet. These are some of the solutions people are bouncing around in efforts to save newspapers from the internet giant. Do we "bail out" the newspapers too? While I think newspapers in print form are important and do help in keeping the public informed, this does not mean that we should be giving billions of more taxpayer money towards saving them. Companies come and go every day, and the same goes for newspapers. The ones that are the most competitive and innovative will survive through this transition from print to the internet...others will not. This is capitalism!

Even if the newspapers go under, there will still be news, and people will want to know the news. I welcome this change from print to online media, as it will bring about innovation in the way we get our news.

Rethinking Water

There are many things that we all take for granted...like water. In many countries all over the world, access to clean water is very limited and can have detrimental health effects to the people drinking it. The list of diseases that stem from dirty water is enormous. A large amount of countries struggle everyday with the fact that they may not even have access to water at all. for those in the developing world, gathering water for cleaning and cooking may be a day long process of walking for miles to the nearest water source. Many people in the US do not take this into consideration when taking 30 minute showers, or not repairing a leaking faucet. And why do we need to drink bottled water? Our tap water is perfectly fine! We are way too spolied.

In honor of World Water Day, which just passed a few days ago, I encourage you to watch this video, and maybe it will make you appreciate your water just a little bit more and think before wasting it.

Oh What a Time to be in London!

Riots! Arrests! Chaos! Sounds like a prison break or something, doesn't it? Fortunately, all the prisoners are still locked up, but sadly, these words are being used to describe the scene in London over the past few days leading up to the Group of 20 (or G-20 for short) summit. It brings together leaders from twenty countries with the largest and strongest economies in the world. The topic of discussion?...How to solve the global financial crisis. Many of the protestors there decided not to get out of hand and express their beliefs in a peaceful manner (I guess these people would rather not receive a truncheon blow to the face). I can only imagine the crazyness that is going to ensue tomorrow, when the G-20 summit officially starts up.

President Obama today held a press conference with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown in attempts to gain support from the international community for his plan to stimulate the economy. He stated that the United States may no longer be able to support the world economy, and called upon other nations to revive growth in their home markets to compensate for US losses. While this was going on, the French and the Germans held a press conference of their own, with French President Nicholas Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angela Merkel calling for stronger global economic regulations that could reach inside the United States. While they did not blame the United States directly for the global financial crisis, both eluded to the fact that "the crisis didn't actually spontaneously erupt in Europe."

Meeting Queen Elizabeth and giving her an Ipod (what was he thinking?) may be all fine and dandy, but President Obama needs to think long and hard about how he is going to convince the international community that his stimulus package will work. If he doesn't come up with some answers soon, expect more criticism and snide remarks coming from the French side.